Re: What is also an issue
Author: Severe Duty
Date: 09-05-2010 - 09:33
Of the many problems associated with outdoor/field/action photography as opposed to studio/controlled/staged photography is the conditions are often constantly changing. While digital photography has come a long way since its embarrasingly horrible beginnings, the choice to use the correct filters, lens focal lengths et. al. remains the same as it does when using film, and can be instantly upended by a cloud drifting over the sun, or a street light coming on, or a car's headlights suddenly appearing during a night photo session. This is in total disregard to whether film or digital is used or whatever darkroom/lightroom techniques are used in the post-session work-up.
One factor I see involved in railway photography is that the subject tends to be moving during most opportunites, and that limits the amount of time available to get the shot. This has often caused me to forsake applying the polarizing filter, or the 2A or carefully setting the right shutter speed/aperature combination. I have, on several occasions, lost the perfect shot even after having been in the best position, properly set up, re-checked my set-up, etc. because I didn't have any idea the sun would reflect that way, unexpected lens flare, sudden rain, people getting in the way, etc.
One classic scenario: Paced the subject, hauled ass to get well ahead of it, parked in a safe place, and able to set up within a comfortable period. Then, it slowly comes to a stop, and I'm thinking 'crap...now what?' Along comes an unexpected move on adjacent track, which fouls the view. Light begins to fade, and the subject still doesn't get going again. Then, after a long while, everything starts moving again, but the light has changed, so I try to move/compensate, but it really comes off as second best.
Anymore, just getting enough time, gasoline, and good weather to come into play so I can actually enjoy going out and catching the fish, is greatly appreciated. Getting the shot involves a lot more than just having decent equipment; being happy with it is still another thing. Having the vision to see is a matter of perspective. I like that second shot that some other folks here don't because I like the way the sun and haze are reacting. I think it's far better than a 3/4 wedge view in perfect light. Maybe a polarizing filter would have helped, but maybe that would have caused a slower shutter speed, with the potential for blur. Keep up the good work, I always enjoy looking here on this site for people's work!
You Often Ask, "What Camera Do You Use Steve"?, "What Scanner Do You Use Drew"? Those Are the Wrong Questions.
|
Marty |
09-03-2010 - 16:52 |
Re: You Often Ask, "What Camera Do You Use Steve"?, "What Scanner Do You Use Drew"? Those Are the Wrong Questions.
|
Mikado |
09-03-2010 - 17:33 |
Re: You Often Ask, "What Camera Do You Use Steve"?, "What Scanner Do You Use Drew"? Those Are the Wrong Questions.
|
Sidewinder |
09-04-2010 - 09:24 |
Re: You Often Ask, "What Camera Do You Use Steve"?, "What Scanner Do You Use Drew"? Those Are the Wrong Questions.
|
AP Effect? |
09-03-2010 - 23:28 |
What Steve Sloan didn't tell you . . .
|
Kyle |
09-04-2010 - 10:18 |
Re: What Steve Sloan didn't tell you . . .
|
WTUTE |
09-04-2010 - 10:26 |
Re: What Steve Sloan didn't tell you . . .
|
Carol L. Voss |
09-04-2010 - 11:14 |
Re: What Steve Sloan didn't tell you . . .
|
Dilbert |
09-04-2010 - 15:32 |
Re: What Steve Sloan didn't tell you . . .
|
Ben Weitz |
09-04-2010 - 16:05 |
Re: What Steve Sloan didn't tell you . . .
|
MP 44.7 |
09-04-2010 - 19:38 |
Re: What is also an issue |
Severe Duty |
09-05-2010 - 09:33 |
Unintended consequences
|
Copy19 |
09-06-2010 - 06:54 |
Re: Unintended consequences
|
Copy19 |
09-06-2010 - 06:57 |
Re: Unintended consequences
|
John West |
09-06-2010 - 11:00 |
Re: Unintended consequences
|
Steve Thompson |
09-06-2010 - 15:30 |
Much More Than You Want To Know, Really
|
Steve Sloan |
09-06-2010 - 18:33 |
Re: Much More Than You Want To Know, Really
|
Steve Thompson |
09-06-2010 - 19:15 |
Re: Much More Than You Want To Know, Really
|
Steve Sloan |
09-06-2010 - 20:31 |
Re: Much More Than You Want To Know, Really
|
George Andrews |
09-06-2010 - 19:26 |
Re: Much More Than You Want To Know, Really
|
Steve Sloan |
09-06-2010 - 20:32 |
Re: Much More Than You Want To Know, Really
|
Tom Moungovan |
09-07-2010 - 13:52 |
Re: Much More Than You Want To Know, Really
|
mook |
09-07-2010 - 14:39 |
Re: Much More Than You Want To Know, Really
|
Bruce Kelly |
09-07-2010 - 16:11 |
Re: Much More Than You Want To Know, Really
|
Steve Sloan |
09-07-2010 - 18:58 |
Re: Much More Than You Want To Know, Really
|
Bruce Kelly |
09-07-2010 - 20:57 |
Re: Much More Than You Want To Know, Really
|
Steve Sloan |
09-08-2010 - 11:15 |
My "Book" Is Here
|
Steve Sloan |
09-08-2010 - 11:22 |
Re: My "Book" Is Here
|
Bruce Kelly |
09-08-2010 - 13:24 |
Re: My "Book" Is Here
|
OldPoleBurner |
09-08-2010 - 19:21 |
Re: My "Book" Is Here
|
Captain Underpants |
09-08-2010 - 19:47 |
Re: My "Book" Is Here
|
George Andrews |
09-08-2010 - 20:15 |
Re: My "Book" Is Here
|
Tom Moungovan |
09-09-2010 - 06:56 |