Photographing for a photo background

[MikeTrice]

If this has been covered before, then I apologise.

 

I have seen many articles on making a photo backscene (including Andy's article on the subject) nearly all of which start by combining/compositing suitable photographs.

 

I have taken many photos of real life scenery in the past, but I would not say any are really suitable for the task.

 

So given a blank canvas what advice would members give for the photographing of suitable images to start with?

[MikeTrice]

I thought I would qualify my question somewhat.

 

Here is a panorama I created whilst crossing Lake Lucern. This involved stitching together several photos which went quite well. The subject is a long way in the distance to perspective does not interfere. The water could be cropped out leaving the mountains in the background. There is a slight warping to the image which I could correct:

 

The next image was composited from photos taken a Wassen. OK tyhe railway is in the background which I probably would not want, and buildings in the foreground change perspective unrealistically:

 

Now had I thought through things in advance I might have taken the photos differently (hence the reason for this topic). Had I raised the camera more to ignore the foreground and get more background I could have trimmed the resulting image differently. Taking the previous image and trimming it would result in:

 

All these images were composited from photos taken from the same position and rotating my body. Would a better approach (when possible) be keep the camera physically pointing in the same direction, but moving my position left, or right to take the next frame? To avoid perspective issues I think I would need to take more photos than might be expected then I can trim out just the central band and composite those. One idea is to point the camera out of a carriage window whilst travelling and put the setting on repeat shoot. Has anyone tried this?

 

Suggestions welcome.

[Orinoco]

One point to bear in mind is that angle at which people will be viewing the backscene. It is usually from a relatively high position. As a result, photos taken at ground level may look a little odd. Stand on high ground, so that your view is from a higher angle. A friend of mine hired an aircraft, but that is taking things to extremes. Buildings in the foreground are not a good idea, as you have discovered. The shot from the boat does look quite good as the shore is a long way away.

[MikeTrice]

Lake views do seem to work well. Been playing with a composite at St Moritz. Original panorama with image showing distortion to right of image due to varying distance:

 

In the following image I have used editing software to warp the image to try and correct the disOrinoco, yortion and make it more natural:

 

Finally cropped the lake out of the image:

 

Your comment regarding height is a good observation. The Wassen photos earlier were above ground so illustrate the point you were making. The interesting issue is how to do a backscene for a station in a more rural setting.

[MikeTrice]

Just tried a few photos around Thurnen. Here are the original images composited together complete with distortions and foreground objects:

 

After correcting the distortions and cropping back it is looking better. Not perfect but possible:

 

None of the photos were taken with backgrounds in mind, they were just taken as references. I am really going to have to think ahead in the future.

[HLT 0109]

Mike,

 

You need to think anout the transition from the backscene to the model scenery. I think your photography is great and I like those with the lake in the foregroound because they permit, for example, a low wall to be made (say) 10mm in from the edge of the baseboard to give you that transition; it would not, in my view, work as well with the cropped version removing the lake. Also, in your last posting, the wood piles and ground in the foreground seem to me to give a better opportunity to merge into the backscene than the cropped version does. These are personal views of course.

 

Harold.

[MikeTrice]

You need to think anout the transition from the backscene to the model scenery.

Harold.

Thanks. As stated the photos were not originally taken with backscenes in mind however I have a holiday coming up and intend to use the opportunity to try and do better. Some of the most impressive photo backgrounds I have seen, and what set me on this path in the first place, were those on San Vittore (or to give it its correct name "Saluti da San Vittore" featured in the July 2012 Continental Modeller, especially when you realise how narrow some of the baseboards are. Some photos here:http://www.flickr.com/photos/ontraxs2012/6949437335/

and here https://picasaweb.google.com/106742655785428555875/OntraXS2012#5690440153832318754

[MikeTrice]

Have just reread Andy's article and he does go into taking the original photos as well. Taking his advice, and my own observations it will be interesting how my forthcoming attempt goes.

[HLT 0109]

Yes, you should have a very interesting time doing it. Picking up on Orinoco's point about the angle of view, it is not only the vertical positioning of the viewer that can distort the appearance of the backscene but the lateral position too; there is less effect with a general landscape but, if there is a depth to the view (like in the first link of your first post today), it may only look convincing from one position.

[Mallard60022]

Mike, have you studied/seen Albion Yard? That has a very clever, large photshopped backscene fronted by scenics. Extremely clever use of the idea.

Phil @36E

[MikeTrice]

Well, having had a trip to Bavaria I have had the opportunity to experiment with mixed results.

 

One thing I wanted to try out was taking a series of photos movingmy relative position to the side to try and keep the subject front on. Here are some photos taken from a boat on Lake Constance:

 

 

 

 

 

These had to be stitched/blended together manually. I did not follow Andy's advice and keep the exposure on manual and as a result had to adjust the individual levels of each images. Here is the result which I am quite happy with. It would need something to transition the lower edge into the foreground but overall I think it has worked out OK:

 

 

Other than that, I am still experimenting.

[MikeTrice]

A few more. The first two were taken conventionally by rotating my body and taking overlapping images:

 

(Shame about the cranes - might have to digitally remove them)

 

 

The next photo is the result of another experiment. The camera was placed up against the train window and a number of consecutive images taken. As with the earlier landau1 image they had to be stitched together by hand:

 

 

One of the problems with taking images like these is that things near the train appear to move faster than things in the distance. A result of this is that the foreground changes but the sky and cloud positions don't! Having realised this early on in my experiments I also took some sky images conventionally with a view of being able to composite them into the previous image. A bit like this:

 

[MikeTrice]

Had a second attempt at the Thurnen composite using different settings and a far more natural result. If only I had stood on the other side of the wood pile.

 

[HLT 0109]

Mike,

 

You are certainly going to great lengths to achieve what you want - and only you know what will satisfy you - but I wonder how big your layout is and what distance the layout represents. If doing a fast main line, you probably need a general backscene of open countryside with perhaps the odd representation of civilisation not in the foreground but, if it is a slower line it may be helped by a backscene with more detail in it. I rather like the woodpiles in your last picture; they would look good if you were modelling the edge of forestry work. If, like me, you have a layout round the edges of a room, you may want to use several different scenes and find a way of merging one into the next. You probably want the backscene to represent a distance of several (many?) miles whilst your track will represent probably less than 1 mile.

 

Harold.

[thepinmaster]

If I may stick my head in here. I am looking to find out how to take the pictures I have of an Edinburgh street and scale it to use as a backboard. Any help would be a help.

[Andy Y]

Hi Pinmaster,

 

It may be worth uploading the images you've got which you wish to use to see how we can best advise you.

 

 

I must say I think this is really well planned and works well Mike; especially as most of the relevant roof lines are horizontal which helps viewing from different angles.

[coachmann]

I have an odd one. My backscene has really got to be a close up of a hillside, as the railway I am modelling is on a ledge cut into said hillside. From platform level it cannot be seen above the retaining walls and road above and a blue sky backdrop would suffice, but from an elevated position, which is what I have of the model railway, that hillside definitely needs to be there in order to place the railway into its environs. No one prints a close up of a hillside though. Ah well, keep taking the pills I always say....

[Andy Y]

My temptation there Larry would be to go for the plain blue but to photoshop in the hills at the correct perspective when you do any photos.

[Waverley West]

If I may stick my head in here. I am looking to find out how to take the pictures I have of an Edinburgh street and scale it to use as a backboard. Any help would be a help.

 

Can I ask which Edinburgh street? And can it be photographed from somewhere up high? The photos for my Edinburgh backscene were mainly of Princes St. and were taken from just below the castle, which is a good vantage point.

 

[coachmann]

My temptation there Larry would be to go for the plain blue but to photoshop in the hills at the correct perspective when you do any photos.

Probably a good idea Andy, although past experience has put me off inkjet printed anything for a layout. I bought some very fine black & white LNWR "finger" station signs some years back and they soon turned orange before dissapearing completely. It does puzzle me why the manufacturers of backscened have never done a close up of a hillside considering the number of railways cut into one.

[Dunmar]

Hi,

I'm not a luvver of photographic backgrounds, to be honest some really nice layouts are ruined by the use of such a background. This said, used carefully and 'scaled' it can work! My own layout was created by using 'tester' pots from B&Q , and the method I used was to photograph the buildings I wanted to use from a chosen area -and, by using an appropiate art programme converted the photo to a 'print' which was more believe-able!

I have the facility of a 'panoramic' setting on my camera and had intended to do the same with the whole of the backscene but didn't have the courage to see it through!

Bill.

[MikeTrice]

Interestng comments.

 

The main issue is whether to have the photographs include perspective or not. This has not been an issue for me as when photographing items that are distant you can get away with things. The montage I did based on front on view from the lake above took longer to do, but did work. My personal view is for the image to appear front on when viewed from an equivalent height on the model. Then when viewing to the side or above, natural perspective would occur of the flats. All theoretical of course.

 

For something like a close up background I would take various buildings etc front on, correct perspective digitally, then composite together. I have taken a number of buildings in a street on that basis just in case I need them.

 

I was asked earlier what background I was trying to achieve. I will be honest and say "I don't know". Opportunities to travel abroad are rare, so I made the most of my recent visit and photographed anything and everything that I thought might be of interest.

 

What I can state is do not be afraid of photographing lots of sky, grass or trees as you never know when you might need to composite them into an image. So for Princes Street I would probably aim for a general panorama from the castle but composite individual buildings over it.

[HLT 0109]

My personal view is for the image to appear front on when viewed from an equivalent height on the model. Then when viewing to the side or above, natural perspective would occur of the flats. All theoretical of course.

I think you might be disappointed. If a flat image looks right from one position it can look extremely odd from a significantly different one. On my layout, my son painted a country backscene on the wall, designed to look right from the operator's standing viewpoint - and it does. However, in my video taken from a small camera mounted on a wagon behind a loco, it is completely wrong because the horizon is in the wrong place. The only way to avoid the problem completely is, I think, to avoid a horizon and similar vertical divisions. That is rather boring so some compromise is necessary.

[MikeTrice]

However, in my video taken from a small camera mounted on a wagon behind a loco, it is completely wrong because the horizon is in the wrong place.

To be honest, I am not surprised! The change of viewing angle in this instance is quite extreme.