Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On 15/04/2021 at 12:09, KNP said:

Here is a loco........

basking (am I allowed to use that?) in the light of a passing UFO.......! - next line of postings!

 

IMG_2917.jpg.340e5b3e18f0286152226f9a641933b3.jpg

 

 

 

Or the Squadron Leader experimenting with an early prototype of the Leigh Light? 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, The White Rabbit said:

 

Or the Squadron Leader experimenting with an early prototype of the Leigh Light? 

Hmm wonder if that's where Barnes Wallis got his idea from?

 

Could have been booked into the Unicorn. You never know.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

If a gang of blokes can't work out how to get a crate off a lorry, then getting this engine off the wagon is really going to perplex them !

  • Agree 4
  • Funny 15
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Stubby47 said:

If a gang of blokes can't work out how to get a crate off a lorry, then getting this engine off the wagon is really going to perplex them !

 

Not forgetting the engine shed door !

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3
  • Funny 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, KNP said:

Now, we looked at these pictures and realised the background was over powering the subject so this turned into an exercise of highlighting the power of using focus stacked pictures where you use only focused pictures of the subject and the background left out of focus thereby making it stand out better....well I think so.

Either you're pulling my leg or I'm missing something. When I take a close-up photo with my camera focused on the subject, I get that effect automatically.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, St Enodoc said:

Either you're pulling my leg or I'm missing something. When I take a close-up photo with my camera focused on the subject, I get that effect automatically.

 

Agreed, also depends on far you can get the camera is away from the subject, however with photo stacking I can choose to a certain degree via an editing program (in my case Serif Affinity) what is and isn't in focus within a depth of field.

 

I notice in many pictures posted on this website people want a close up of a model so the they go close in which decreases the focal depth when the best way is to be actually further way to get a greater depth of field and then crop the picture to get the close up.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 7
  • Informative/Useful 4
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

There are some interesting trade-offs in model photography, and I have yet to get to grips with any of them.

 

Kevin mentions cropping, and the more pixels you have, the better detail you may retain when chopping bits off.

 

DoF is immensely useful in certain circs. The smaller the sensor, the greater the DoF, but it may well have fewer pixels.

 

Smaller sensors suffer from diffraction at larger apertures than bigger ones. A big sensor may work well at f22, smaller ones typically don't. 

 

A bigger sensor will probably have bigger photosites (the individual lens that creates the pixel) and that adds quality.

 

The highest megapixel cameras in 35mm-equivalent format are now 61MP. The one in a typical phone may be 12MP.  61MP allows for an awful lot of cropping. 

 

I offer no advice on how to be a better model photographer, but believe some of the above may help!

  • Like 2
  • Informative/Useful 6
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold

The other aspect to consider is that if all you are going to do with your pictures is put them on instagram, for example, then all those megapixels are over indulgence! Where they are essential is when you want to print your images at A2 or above.

Tony

  • Agree 4
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Tony Teague said:

The other aspect to consider is that if all you are going to do with your pictures is put them on instagram, for example, then all those megapixels are over indulgence! Where they are essential is when you want to print your images at A2 or above.

Tony

Or if you need to crop them, if your lens wasn't the right focal length for your shot. 

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Alister_G said:

I agree with Kevin and Ian, and have now learned that to get a close-up shot, you are better to take a distant shot and crop it, than move the camera too near to the subject. This is not always the case, of course, and not always practicable, either, but as a general rule it holds true.

 

If Kevin will forgive me, here's a shot of Ladmanlow:

 

ladmanlow1552f.jpg.8b464da0d7f1e335303b7afe4ab6d235.jpg

 

Notice how the focus is pretty even across the photo from front to back.

 

This is because it is a crop of this photo:

 

ladmanlow1552bf.jpg.57b858be35230a2fbebb92ae00b4137e.jpg

 

With the same camera, moving it closer to the subject results in this:

 

ladmanlow1552af.jpg.3114cf04ce450ea34d85be92d5522719.jpg

 

OK so not an exact comparison, but gives an idea.

 

Al.

 

Not a problem, Al.

Lovely layout and one of my favourites on the RMWeb.

Nicely demonstrates what I was saying, there are numerous pictures of LM where I haven't bothered with photo stacking but relied on moving the camera away and then cropping in closer.

There are lots of trade offs with taking indoor pictures of a layout one main one, I have found, is the ISO setting the higher the setting the less light you need but the grainer the pictures becomes especially when cropping. I normally use either 400 or 800 as my camera operates around 21mb giving me plenty of pixels to play with.

Then you have the battle between Aperture or Program setting, then you might need the camera on a macro setting for close ups and so on and so on.......

I'm no expert on photography just picked this up or just plain experimented as I've gone along.

Additional lighting gets in on the equation as well, one of my favourites is 'bounce' lighting used on the last wagon picture where I angle a reflective cake base to 'bounce' the layout light into the model to lighten the shadows......

Photography of a model railway is a subject all in it's own right, which is a comment that Andy York made when he came to photograph LM for the BRM.

He gave me many a useful tip at the time which prompted me to delve deeper......

 

 

 

Edited by KNP
  • Like 12
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking from the back, could I speak up about the benefit of a wide angle lens close to the subject : realistic perspective!

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Limpley Stoker said:

Speaking from the back, could I speak up about the benefit of a wide angle lens close to the subject : realistic perspective!

 

Certainly you may, the floor is yours....

  • Funny 2
  • Friendly/supportive 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly: camera on floor (eye) level, wide angle lens close to subject, focus stacking and cropping wonky verticals = Kevin's winning formula ! 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John Besley said:

Demolish and build an IKEA on the site..

We had a cottage on the edge of the village where I live that was far worse than that and it has been brought back to life.  No roof and trees growing inside!

  • Informative/Useful 2
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

A London based friend went through a period where he and his wife talked of little else other than moving to France and building their own dream home there.

The had (still do) a neighbour with a French wife who spent about 30% of the year their property in a remote part of France, so my friend spent all his holidays, for a couple of years, looking for a suitable property to rebuild.

They were shown a number of sites ranging from an abandoned cow shed to residences in similar state to Kevin's well observed model.  All the French properties were described as  "having possibilities"!!  Common sense eventually prevailed.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...