Backlit + Background

Sometimes I notice an image, find it interesting, and then I notice other images in the same style or with the same theme. One such occasion was when I was viewing the 2008 winners of the CRPA contest. I realized the tremendous power of backlit photography with strong/detailed backgrounds.

We all have seen lots and lots of images where the train is strongly backlit or in silhouette. Generally, these images contrast a dramatic dawn/dusk sky with lots of great color against the black of the train. Compositionally they are often somewhat simple: a wedge of a train against a simple background, sky with maybe a treeline or distant mountain ridge, with some interesting clouds.

What has caught my interest is the possibility for a different sort of background, one that is more of a secondary element or even co-main subject, to support the subject. Thus, the subject, being backlit/silhouetted, may have some detail or only provide a shape, but the background provides a secondary element which contrasts not only in light but in having interesting detail.

Consider the shot above by Peter Lerro (captioned version here). It is a classic backlit image. But look at the background, what an interesting hillside! Not only the several structures, but also the line of the valley and the splash of light on the field between the engine and barn. The barn complements the train and itself is a combination of darker and lighter elements. The background livens things up. (As does the presence of detail on the visible dark side of the train.) The shot does not tend toward the abstract nearly as much as silhouette shots do.

I like the shot - very much - but it only pushes part of the way toward the sort of image I am thinking of. So consider this shot by Travis Dewitz (captioned version here). The background is strong with the grain elevator (but gets a bit muddled with what Travis calls a "utility mess"). But the train is small and is not backlit but rather sidelit, and thus does not have the dramatic separation from the background that attracts me to these types of shots (and I find the presence of the shack at the right too strong and also uninteresting).

What I love is this shot, part of the gold medal-winning portfolio submitted by Olaf Haensch for the 2008 CRPA competition. The engine is in full silhouette but has interesting edge detail. The background is well lit for a night shot and has impressive texture and details and just a touch of color. Putting a steaming train in front of it in a daylight shot would be just fine but the contrast offered by the dark train (and dark sky) makes the building leap out. The contrast also increases the sense of depth, as I suspect that a daylight shot would not have the same strong feel of separation between the train in front and the building behind.

Great details pervade the scene: the (lancet?) arches of the windows and doors, the two tones in the plume, the puddle reflections. But those are specifics, combining into an overall effect which conveys a strong sense of fine beauty, of the angel in the details. Click on it, take a look at a larger version, very well done!

Chris Crook: Complexity

Lately I've been doing a lot of blogging on black/white pictures. That is sort of odd as I love color, but life is random sometimes, bad teams have winning streaks, and here we are. So I wanted to inject a bit of color (besides the terrific Troy Paiva shots a few posts previously) and this one (by Chris Crook) caught my eye. But wouldn't you know it, it has only a bit of color.

I like it nonetheless. We all have our biases and I have a soft spot for shots that emphasize complexity. [One of my goals is to take the definitive freight yard hub-bub shot!] This shot has all sort of industrial grid patterns, steam, lights, and tucked away in the middle just a bit of a splash of blue, and a switcher to boot! And it is at Mingo, my visit to which I still fondly remember, with my father reading the paper in the car while I wandered about, too young to drive there myself.

I'm not saying it is a great shot, but it is an interesting shot and I'll tuck it away, with its strengths and weaknesses (the composition is not that strong, I think, despite the grids) and ponder it as I search for that special shot of my own.

PS: Every so often I'm going to show an image that attracts my attention for idiosyncratic reasons, and present it without much text or justification, as here. Just another type of pix-musing to pop out into the world. :)

O. Winston Link: The Presence of the Train

In reexamining some of the iconic images of O. Winston Link, I am struck by a particular issue of rail photo composition that has been interesting me for some time, the relationship between the train and the rest of the image. Is there a relationship at all, are they connected in the composition?

Consider the first image of people playing in a river as a train roars by. Well, that is just it; the train roars by but the people do not notice. That is OK to my senses; the river connects the people and the bridge with the train passing over it. To some extent the scene holds together.


But what of the second scene, also of swimmers? In this case the swimming/ people part of the image occupies its own, fenced space, and the train is outside of it. More than just outside, separated by the fence and some foliage, and no one gives it any heed. Two parts of the scene stuck together, as if by happenstance. The train is not "of" the swimming scene, it is an appendage.


An exagger- ation? Well, how about the third scene, the famous drive-in photo? A cluster of cars watching a movie with an airplane. The train passing - does its chuffing drown out the sound inside the cars? Does anyone notice it go by? At least compositionally its lengthy plume helps bring added attention to it, pulling the eye away from the plane (or away from the engine?).



The fourth image, the gas station shot, I find the most striking of all. Look at the action in the shot! The train is huge, so huge that the shot cannot contain it, showing neither the nose nor the cab, much less the tender or train. And it seems to be feet away from the remainder of the scene. And yet, no one notices it go by. How extraordinary!

The attendant and the couple are both focused (intently?) on the delivery of gasoline to the car. Perhaps this is a greatly foreshadowed metaphor for how our society today perceived cars and trains, the former a vital force to be kept fueled, the latter easily ignored despite its great presence? A massive stretch, and I don't believe that is the intent; too early in history for that, I think, and Link was not know for that sort of social commentary. But the presence, or shall I say absence, of the train in the story of the image is, well, astounding!

The last image is a different sort of discon- nection, one of minor presence. The scene is the interior of a hardware store, and it just happens that there is a sizable steam engine outside the window, so large we can only see the number and parts of two drivers. It is literally outside the scene, peeking in, but actually it isn't, it is merely stopped outside, minding its own business, with no apparent connection to or interest in the people and goods inside. What is the connection between train and scene?

These images seem to combine train and scene by happenstance. With the exception of the first, there are no obvious reasons why a train should be present in any of the scenes, not by geography or transportation need. Their presence is accidental, or perhaps coincidental; they are in the scene but not so much a part of it.

Of course, many or most of Link's images are not composed in this way. But I was struck by the parallels here, particularly noticeable to me because several of these images I think of as being the "most iconic" of his work. The question of connection between train and environment is one I intend to return to with reference to contemporary images.

[NOTE: I have tried twice to reach the copyright holder, Link's son, to receive permission to use these images here. On the basis of those efforts and my reading of the doctrine of fair use (in particular the "for purposes such as criticism, comment" phrase, combined with the non-profit nature of this site) I conclude that my use of these images is lawful and appropriate.]