John Crisanti and the Distant Train

In the last year or so I have been enjoying the work of John Crisanti, a Colorado-based photographer with an interesting approach to his area (flickr photography website here, RP images here). While he makes many types of appealing images, I want to focus on a frequent choice, that of the distant train in the bigger scene, often with big land and big sky, a style that I as an easterner (USA) find inherently western. John is particularly adept at capturing scenes with the train at a distance yet not leaving the viewer wishing the train were closer and bigger. [As always, for all images click on the thumbnail for a larger view.]

Before getting to the big vista shots, however, we will start with a different type of "distant" shot, what I will call the local distant shot, one that captures a smaller scene. John sets the train in the background, in this case between two trees, yet its presence is quite strong.

Obviously this shot isn't as "local", the train sneaks into the scene a bit. Notice also the "look" of this shot, sightly more contrast than one might typically apply. John processes many of his less than full daylight shots in this way (Travis Dewitz does this also), and I find the effect quite appealing. With this in mind, go back and take another look at the first shot.

This shot makes good use of the lack of light, or better said, it creates its contrasts in tone despite the lack of light (thanks, snow!) and through the additional depth created by fog in the background contrasting with the clearer foreground.

This image is an in-between image, as the scene is local but clearly the location has a vista and the train is itself at quite a distance. The tight crop, compared to the images below, results in a hint of space - obviously this is a view from well up high but the bigger scene is not present. I like the way the train peeks in between the trees - this semi-hidden or distant view is characteristic of many of John's images.

The next images are those featuring big scenes, taking advantage of John's location in the Rocky Mountains. Here, the train in the background is only a bit more than a row of trees on the horizon, just enough color and detail to show it is instead a tree. The overall scene is quite pleasant and the brown of the road goes nicely with the muted dark greens of the trees and the blue in the sky. A bit of extra contrast and a notch off the brightness gives the scene a different feel than a more conventional processing.

What a scenic beauty! The train no more than a line, even the headlight a barely visible spot. The scene is nicely composed with the dominant diagonal line, the curves of the line to the left, and the clouds up top with the presence of the complementary orange color.

Here again, the train blends in, just another stretch of darker gray within the scene. The scene is composed nicely, with the line defining the slope of the ridge contrasting nicely to the opposing angles of the lines in the valley, including the train. The contrast is boosted a bit, as one often does for B/W images, and the brightness is muted.

Finally, this beauty of Moffat Tunnel is a "three points of light shot" with the train barely evident, visible primarily because of the headlights on the lead engine. The mountains are majestic, but more so the light is beautifully placed, on the train and the valley by the portal, and then again in the sky and mountains upper left. The darkness elsewhere emphasizes, by contrast, the depts and elevations in the area. This shot beautifully shows why tunnels are needed.

So we have gone through a bit of a tour of John's images, from smaller to larger in the scope of the scene. John's extra touch of contrast makes his work yet more appealing. Great stuff!

Welcome to RailPixCritic!

To those who have just seen my piece in the April 2013 issue of Trains magazine, welcome! This blog is a formerly lapsed, now restarting series of commentaries on rail-related images. In its current and rejuvenated manifestation, you will primarily see two types of posts. One will be an appreciation of a particular photographer's work. For an example of that, see the immediately next post, featuring the photography of Travis Dewitz. The other will be a discussion of some aspect of rail imagery. As my interests lean toward composition, I will primarily do comparisons and contrasts of images where a particular compositional issue is of interest. Examples of that are the subsequent two posts.

For a lengthier overview of what I am trying to do here, see my very first post from years ago, here, and my first substantive post here.

Please note that I had anticipated spending a day or two buffing up the content, in particular reestablishing expired links to material. That will happen soon. In other instances, such as the Keith Burgess post a little further below, the thumbnails no longer work for reasons not apparent to me, but you can click on the boxes to see the images in their original location. Alas, that won't be true of all posts, until I track down the photographers and find out where there images are. Incidentally, all images are used here with permission.

New material coming out soon, as I am finishing a half-year intensive work project and am renewing my interest in this blog. If you have any comments, please include them in the comment section, and feel free to email me: jrm underscore rr, my id for yahoo email, with comments or suggested topics, and especially images or web pages worthy of my consideration. I especially seek out images which fall in an "artsy" category; those seem to be hard to find.

As this is a rush intro - I will polish it down the road, or not, maybe I'll put my energies solely into my next post - I show you merely an image of no particular quality, one of my own, just to add some color and life to this particular post. I much prefer to write about images created by others. I critique better than I shoot, at least I hope you come to that conclusion.

Travis Dewitz: Random 25

Some time ago while surfing around the web I had occasion to pop into Travis Dewitz' website (general photography website here, railroad specific website here, alternative railroad view here). I no longer recall why, but I was at the site for a particular image and I decided to poke around and see his other shots. I was impressed! What a series of excellent shots! Consider these samples from the 25 shots numbers 1126-1150 at this link, you may need to click to get to a previous or subsequent section of the sequence.

This shot is a wedgie zoom pan, nicely done, rich purple skies complementing the dark yellows further down. I like the blur in the sky, with the clouds particularly dynamic, and the train sort of zooms out of background. Nice action shot with interesting color.


Here we see a traveler of some sort crossing the tracks. I like how the light appears on both sides of the person, headlights on the right, headlight reflections on the left. The person's gaze is angled a bit some so one can see a bit of his face. Shallow depth of field and black/white treatment complete the work (and the bit of flare does not bother me). An interesting moment in the night time.

I love the idea behind this shot, as I see it, to emphasize the height of the bridge by capturing only part of the legs, and by showing an entire tree comfortably ensconced underneath. The train completes the scene, filling a bit of a hole in the middle, but for me it remains about the bridge and its context, which at this time just happens to include a train.

I am a big fan of town and train scenes, and this night version is a real beauty. The town is present as much in street and window lights as it is in buildings The train provides obvious interest (and its headlights create a nice code line pole silhouette, and reveal roadbed detail) but the structure is equally interesting. A small bar, open late, with one patron? What is that purple light shining out of its window? (The purple nicely contrasts with the overall mustard hue) A tree breaks up the horizon, itself silhouetted by an extra glow in the sky. (I might prefer cropping a bit off the right, but losing some lights in the background reduces the town feel.)


Of course, Travis can capture a traditional scene also, witness this bridge shot, framed in a classic manner with branches, and nicely capturing snow blowing off the bridge as the train passes.


Catching a snow plow snow blast at night had never occurred to me until I saw these two shots. Instead of the scene being too dark to catch the dynamism of the snow movement, it turns out that light sources shining through the snow from the back create a fascinating glow, and the lack of visible detail leads to greater abstraction. In the first show, the glow is great, the grabirons from the engine provide just enough presence (along with the ditch lights) to explain the scene, the car and structure (a sign?) establish the location, and the streaks of light along with the clumps of snow convey the energy and the motion.


The second shot tells its story through more complete abstraction. Capturing the snow being pushed over the grade crossing signal adds bold color; the crossbucks are barely visible above. The engine is essentially not visible, despite the bit of nose, and the white lights contrast with the red. The snow flies, there are few lines if any, everything has a soft feel. A real beauty of abstraction, a study of color and light.



Finally, a shot of the station at Red Wing, MN. A nice compositional choice to put the train in the background to feature the station more. Not ideal, in terms of edge distractions, and I think the placement of the light pole, but an interesting shot.

Now, I suspect that if one were to pick some other 25, one might not get quite the same number of special shots. So one might say I am cherry picking. But, in actuality I am not, I really did stumble into this set at random, and furthermore, while some other set of 25 consecutive shots loaded up by Travis might be a bit lower in quality on average, there will still be plenty of quality shots. Also, the shots I am featuring here do contain a strong share of night or approaching night shots, but other samples will feature other light conditions. Travis certainly has many excellent daytime shots, and I know him first for his "open spaces" shots from the west, including the PRB, with dramatic clouds. At any rate, Travis does outstanding work.

Telling the Story: Tension

[This is a guest blog by Mike H. (RP images here, SmugMug here), taken with permission from a forum thread; I have added a few thoughts at the end. If anyone else wants to take a shot at writing down some thoughts, please let me know.]

The question is when is it OK to make the train the main focus and when is it ok to have more human interest? Well, I would suppose it depends on what sort of story you are trying to tell.

This one (by Ben Sutton, other shots here) fits together as a harmonious whole. The person is in shadow, and is obviously a supporting element. His gaze is directed at the train; so is ours. The train is well-lit, framed by the trees, and is therefore the main subject. This is a very soothing, peaceful photo to view.

In this one (also by Ben Sutton), there is tension between the person, the train, the magazine, the bright yellow fire hydrant, and the leading lines of the street with the many angular overpasses receding into the distance. We look at the train and the person, but the person's attention is not on the train or us, but the magazine, which itself is about trains. This isn't a "relaxing" composition, because the viewer is left wondering what is the "story". It is "strange". I like it anyway because of that tension and "strangeness".

Here, I was trying to show the train as part of the scenery. The kids and coaches are here to play football, not watch trains. The train noise nearly drowns out conversation, but the team ignores the intrusion. The focus is on the people; the train passes through, and the game goes on.

Not mine (by Andre Beverly, other shots here), but I love this shot. The girl stands mere feet away from the onrushing transit train, but is completely oblivious. We can imagine the noise and rush of air as the train enters the station, but she might as well be a statue. The viewer wants to look at the massive object in motion, but instead we are drawn to her handheld device. Who is she texting? What message is so important that she shuts out all her surroundings, including us?

What are you trying to say with your photos? Everything else should follow from that.

PS by Janusz: When I first viewed Ben's second shot above (which started the forum discussion) I felt it looked contrived and so I didn't really like it despite its obvious good qualities. Over time, however, I have come to like it more. Sure it is posed but there are lots of photographs that are and I am not interested so much in realism and the more I look the less it seems artificial. The shot is interesting, is well composed, and has nice color. I am not so negative on the cut off engine, although it would have been interesting to see what the shot looked like with more width. My only issue with the shot is the Railpace - it isn't obviously a train magazine but upon close inspection it is and it is a detail that doesn't really fit for me. (Well, add a second issue: not a fan of the contrast, I would adjust the midtones and shift the peak of the histogram left a bit, get rid of some of the HDR-ish feel.)

The shot definitely has a "story" in that it has tension in the composition, whether true to life or artificial does not matter to me if it fits together. One looks at the shot and wonders, just what is so interesting about that magazine that the train goes by unnoticed? A well-staged work, staged not so much for realism as for interest, and that it captures and rewards.

Blur and Abstraction

Consider this image by Mitch Goldman, heavy on distortion/ blur (you will want to click through to see the blur at full size, it doesn't make sense in the thumbnail view). First, is it photography? Of course, but is it rail photography? It isn't representational photography, for the most part, and it doesn't really try to convey anything in particular about railroading. But as an abstract, and one that abstracts not through cropping or careful composition but through what I will call an artistic effect, it might have merit.

Thus, one might consider this image more in the realm of certain types of painting than in photography. Of course, photography has always pursued such types of abstractions, but in doing so, is this image still a rail image? Is it an interesting abstraction of railroading and of a particular event, or is the abstraction disconnected from the subject, call it a random interpretation?

My first impression of this shot was rather positive. Heat distortion is always attractive, and by presenting overall blur with sufficient definition of subject this image offered a consideration of what is the essence of a rail setting. But ultimately the image shrunk on me (or whatever the antonym of "grew" is). For one, I found the elements unnecessarily muddled. The endless blurred posts are heavy handed. They are bright and take the eye away from

the more important parts of the image. It isn't so evident what they support (signal bridge? pedestrian overpass?), in that the top is cropped too tight for my tastes, I want to see a clear bar across and not something merged into the upper margin. The bright rectangles behind the posts on the left are bad in this regard also.

The image does have an interesting deliniation between top and bottom, the top having all the verticals and the bottom having diagonals, with the action at the line - nicely done! But the bottom is rather dull, especially in color, all brown, and the ballast lacks in interesting contrast, it is a muddle. Perhaps I just find it washed out and ugly.

The point of interest, the train and person, is problematic also. The pilot of the train looks weird, too tall, something going on under the coupler I don't understand, and there is this large black area behind the person that at first I thought might be a dog but then realized was the shadow of the train. And there is this weird orange-y area on the left, below the posts.

The issue for an abstraction, I conjecture, is whether the abstraction offers a good balance between taking one away from the object captured but also maintaining identification of what that object is or was. This image suffers from both, I think, odd as that seems. The individual elements are identifiable (especially to a railfan), catenary posts, many rails, engine, etc. There is a line between interpretation and blur, and this one falls into the blur zone, I think because there is sufficient detail remaining, and that detail is sufficiently distracting (posts! orange! rails!) to suppress whatever mood or pattern the abstraction would otherwise convey. And at the same time, perhaps because one expects certain things at trackside, the distraction gets confusing. What is that behind the posts on the left? What is that orange zone? Some details are abstracted (ok, blurred :) ) to the point they cannot be identified, but others are not, and this is a problem here.

Put differently, what is the subject? I find that abstract works often put a focus either on one important element, or they put the focus on no subject, instead being primarily works that consider pattern, or texture, or other dimension. Here, there is a clear subject, there is an interesting event, a trespass, with the train bearing down. But, the blur confuses rather than focuses, it takes away attention from the action but does not replace it with something else for the viewer's attention, merely distraction. The eye recognizes the event and one wants to know more (does the person have a face of fear or of distraction?). But there is no more here, it is eliminated and replaced with other stuff. The balance between identification and abstraction does not fit the subject.

So, I am no longer a fan of the image. But this is inappropriate as a full consideration of the image. The additional question is where do we/Mitch go from here? Can one do full-blur rail photography in an effective manner? I don't know, but here are some dimensions I would consider. First, what spot make for a good subject for a blur? The poles here are awful, in my view, unless they become a focal point. At least in this take they are too strong as a secondary element. How much detail at trackside is too much for this level of blur? Are there other magnitudes of blur that work better, and does that vary by location? I would look first to locations with less detail.

Second, what is the blur, the art, trying to do? Is the focus going to be on color? On patterns? What are the elements that remain after distortion/blur that capture a viewer's interest? I suspect those will have to do with interesting color variation along with a simpler division of the image area, simpler forms that hold up well to blurring.

Just some thoughts. (BTW, I presume I took this waaay more seriously than Mitch did. I just find it worth pondering.) I view this as an interesting first attempt. We will see if Mitch or anyone else pursues this and finds images of greater artistic merit. Nice try!

PS: I encourage you to read the comment from Mitch regarding what he intended, what he did, and why he likes the result.

Keith Burgess: Mood and Texture

With the annual CRPA conference coming up this weekend, I've decided to resume this blog with an appreciation of the work of two-time CRPA contest winner Keith Burgess. His work can be found here and here. His CRPA winning shots are here (2007) and here (2009).

Keith has an extensive body of work so I could pick out all sorts of themes; I'm going with a few shots that combine aspects of texture and mood. Texture, taken literally, conveys a tactile impression visually: soft, rough, slippery. I view it as more than that, as a way to emphasize part of the character of location. Texture itself also contributes to mood, just as light does, so photographs that emphasize both dimensions are particularly powerful.

The first image brings out the dryness of the high desert with a large patch of close-up rock in the foreground and general high contrast due to the mid-day sun. The textures of the arching rock on the left and the distant rock wall add to the roughness of the image, contracting with the curve of the arch. Desolate yet beautiful!

In the second image the use of texture is more straight-forward and at the same time more unusual. The shimmer and granularity of the water contrasts with the diffuse, soft slopes and the smoke off the engines, giving a counterpoint to the presence of the train. Beautiful terrain but it doesn't look like a great time to be there, the mood is somber, yet with signs of life from train and sparkling water. By no means a striking image but worthy of contemplation.


The third image is a classic B/W with low light creating strong shadows on the ground, highlighting the dirt, stones, debris, and rails of the yard, contrasting with the diffuse shapes and tonal variations in the steam and the rigid geometry of the wall and doors on the right. The presence of the shovel mechanism conveys a sense of abandonment or waste, or at least better days, even though the facility looks to be active and well kept. I'm a fan of the emphasis through contrasts and shadows on the rough ground textures.

As usual the last image is my favorite of the set. The variety of textures! Snow blowing in the air, seen as distinct streaks of snow, and also as snow dust kicked up by the train; the ripples in the water; the fine lines of the tree branches; the ballast and ties. The backlight and the snow reduce the extent of color, and the yellow engine noses is soft rather than bright, subtle. The backlight also makes the blown snow streaks visible and creates a quiet mood.

These shots are not necessarily representative of Keith's work; none are strong in color or bold in composition. The effects are quieter but the photography is no less excellent. Well done; I'll have to revisit the collection some day, perhaps the night CPL shots or his other work.

Until then, consider what I have written as you contemplate this shot. It's like a homework assignment! :)

Upcoming Rail Photography Contests

I was unaware that Railfan & Railroad magazine has a contest. Unfortunately entry deadline is extremely soon, last day of September or first day of October, something like that. $200 first prize; don't recall the theme, if any. Sorry for not having more info; I couldn't find any info online. Now I know to look for it next year.







Trains magazine also has a contest (link here, big file, 3.6MB), first prize is a Canon 50D! The theme: "Bridging the Gap." Deadline October 31; for details follow the link.



Finally, the Center for Rail Photography and Art is doing their annual contest again. This year's theme is "Beyond the Locomotive" with the added explanation that "This year’s theme challenges the photographer to understate (or even eliminate) the locomotive in the photograph and emphasize other aspects of the railroad environment." First prize is also a Canon 50D! Deadline December 31; modest entry fee of $10 for non-members of the Center. Link here.

Good luck, everyone!

PS: I forgot all about Day In North America, a competition/compilation where everyone submits their shots taken on one day; the selected shots appear in an issue of Railroads Illustrated. That day was October 3, 2009, so it is too late to make a plan, but if you took a nice shot that day, the information for submission can be found here.

"Great Railroad Photography"

A new publication is coming out. It appears to be a magazine or an occasional publication in magazine form (it says "Premier Issue") but I can't tell the frequency. The initial issue has 8 essays by known names: Ande, Burgess, Crise, Flanary, Lawrence, Lothes, Scanlon, Zimmmerman. The webpage (link here) says 8 essays, 100 pages. It is being done by the people at Carstens and Railfan & Railroad magazine. Looking forward to it!

Tying it Together - Image vs. Viewer

Early in the history of this blog it was suggested to me never to write about my own shots. Overall that is good advice, it is hard to be objective about one's own stuff, and frankly there is too much good stuff out there to write about instead. But sometimes one has a more intimate knowledge of one's own work, and sometimes one just has a point to make and so what, really, it's my blog. So I proceed ...

And besides, one point here will be that opinions vary and people approach shots from different places.

Consider this shot, what I call my "pumpkin" shot (captioned version here). One person whose opinion on rail photography I respect says they really like the shot. Another person whose opinion on rail photography I respect says the shot does not hold together. How can we reconcile these opposing viewpoints?

The shot is straightforward, a train in the background, some pumpkins in the foreground. The train is distant but conspicuous in location and motion and is obviosly the subject. So what ties the pumpkins to the train?

From one perspective, not much. There are no agricultural rows, say, that lead from one to the other. There is no apparent notion of the train serving the farm. Two objects, two worlds, arbitrarily brought together by the photographer. I see such shots from time to time, the photographer has stepped away from shooting the train to shooting the train in its environment, and the second object was present, and the photographer put them together. More to it than a simple wedgie but, really, it "does not hold together."

From another perspective, connections are prevalent. First, the frost on the ground can suggest late fall, and sure enough, a pumpkin suggests late fall. Second, while the compositional elements may not connect strongly, the shot has a pastel flavor throughout that joins, with various pinks throughout. The shot does not have a great deal of contrast, often a bad thing, but perhaps here it adds to a feel of softness, of lack of differentiation, of evenness. Third, the textures are harmonious - an expanse of gently frosted turf, and even the pumpkins nest into the plants, blend in, their forms becoming less distinct as they do in tonality as well. The train and foreground blend together and bond together, not in terms of compositional elements but in color and tonality and texture.

So the shot can be viewed in different ways. How it is viewed depends on what the viewer brings to the shot. Does he love fall, does he love the cripness of a frosty morning, and also the tranquility? If one misses the frost and the color then it is just a train here, some vegetables there.

Does she love agriculture, does she feel a bond to the land, to the farmland? There will be no flow between train and pumpkins, just two different spots on the image separated by dry weeds, unless one has an appreciation, a positive response of some sort, to the foliage. (I myself have a distinct negative reaction to an expanse of corn in particular that makes me less appreciative of the across-the-cornfield view seen in, say, shots from Ohio. They just have a boring foreground to me.)

Images come together, coalesce, in many ways. Commonly they do so in terms of composition, element A leads the eye to element B leads the eye to element C. Sometimes, however, the connections are through other dimensions, through common characteristics, repeated color, complimenatary tonality. Ultimately, however, that connection is made not only by the image but by the viewer, who sees with the eyes but draws connections and appreciates in the mind.

Two Interesting Sites

I'm always looking for web sites with interesting images. Actually, I wish I could spend more time on that, and one goal of this site is to seek, find, and present the gems. Here are two gems I have run across.

Gallery of Steel: International Railway Art Exhibition is "where I capture and share the very best, most artistic, compelling, creative, moving, bold, original, unique, edgy, brilliant (in my opinion) railway-related photographs on Flickr." A person (persons?) after my own heart! A nice range of creativity, most notably in a sizable volume of HDR work, done not for realism but for expression. This is a Flickr-based moderated group of images. There is a regular page here but what is interesting and nicely done is the alternative black-background presentation linked to above. The regular page includes a brief statement of principles from which the above quote is taken.

Beyond the Wedge is less creative than Gallery of Steel in that it does not feature photography that deviates from representational photography to the same extremes. Which doesn't mean it is worse, or better, just different! One thing I notice (because my preferences favor them) is the many shots that involve capturing equipment and other details, plus broader perspectives, with severe and/or non-standard cropping. But that is just one part of a set of images with interesting variety. Also Flickr-based, also moderated.

Two website, recommended for you viewing pleasure! Always accessible through my links at lower right. I'll keep looking for more.

Steve Crise and Cut-off Elements

A natural instinct for any photographer is to include the subject in the frame. This extends to supporting elements also. To many eyes something that is cut-ff is something that isn't right.

But it need not be so. Let's take a look at some shots by Steve Crise (webpage here, railroad stuff here). Yes, it is my second look at Steve's stuff, and there are LOTS of other photogs with great stuff, but the topic came to mind and it turned out he has some shots worth discussing. I go where my mind takes me! (And besides, as long as it has been since the last post, I really need to follow my thoughts while they are active and get some things written.)

Consider this signal shot (annotated version here). Why not include the entire signal? Well, for one, then the shot becomes a shot of a signal, an in-your-face signal to boot, with a background, rather than a scene with a signal in it. Cutting off the top serves to de-emphasize it somewhat in favor of the background (as does the corner placement of the signal head). The dueling sets of foreground and background lights are also in better balance.

Now, take a look at this shot featuring multiple cut-offs (annotated version here): crossing sign in the corner but also the boxcar, and signal post, at the bottom. The cut-off of the crossing sign is somewhat understandable, along the same lines as above: feature it more prominently and it becomes the story instead of contributing to the story. Here, keeping it in means that the shot has some depth rather than being essentially flat, and gives some context for the unusual signal.

But what of the cut-off undercarriage and trucks? Well, they are conventional but the don't need to be included. This shot is about a crossing, done with a signficant degree of abstraction, but hardly abstract. (I love semi-abstracts!) To the knowlegeable viewer, the undercarriage and trucks are inferred; we know they are present. In their place we have a stronger sense of color, a stronger focus on the details of the boxcar (excellent placement of the signal pole between black and yellow, by the way!) and more abstraction. Box car with verticals and horizontals (ribs in the door) in the lower half and curves and diagonals (in bracket, in signal face, in the fragment of the "X") up top. Here, the cut-off serves not so much to balance the image as it does to increase the degree of abstraction so that there is greater focus on the basic forms of lines and curves.

I can enhance the point by comparing with a more conventional shot at the very same location (annotated version here). In this shot the crossing sign is again cut off, to a lesser degree, but the other elements are not, other than the trailing end of the engine. So the look is more "conventional" in framing, much like the first shot, and has no abstraction. Rather, it is a "tight" look at a scene.

It isn't clear here why the cut-off was chosen, although one may surmise from the small distance between nose and left edge, the cutting-off of the back end of the engine (which does place the signal box in a good location close to the right edge), and the signal cut-off, which reduces the sky, that Steve simply wanted a cramped look, perhaps to increase the size of and attention to various details of the scene. Also, the sign is rather ugly, poorly lit (and thus oddly colored?). It doesn't work for me, so I'm not a fan of this one. But it isn't the fault of the cut-off sign.

Let's finish with another successful shot. This shot takes an ordinary (but attractive!) train and signal scene, one we have all shot a zillion times, and adds a second signal in the foreground (annotated version here). The signal head is trimmed just a bit on the side but the bottom half of the post is not shown.

So what does it add? Well, it adds a bit of framing and considerably extra depth. The two signal heads, blurred and focused, form a line with the nose of the train. The in-your-face signal - sure it is blurred but a sharp one would still be a red light in a black disk on a silver pole - tells a strong story as one associates the red with "stop" (never mind that the signal does not face the train). In this case I don't think the side cut-off matters so much, perhaps it mainly serves to place the pole against the edge rather than leaving a gap, while the bottom cut-off allows the signal's scale to be larger, a stronger presence. Many shots would be overpowered with such a close-in element but here the background, with both the scale of the mountains and the detail of the boarding crewman, holds its own.

These shots are examples of only some dimensions and styles of cut-off shots. I have seen lots of other varieties, but most seem to share the same motivation, to eliminate either extraneous detail, or extraneous lack of detail (as when cutting off part of a compositional element also eliminates a great deal of dead space) in order to focus the composition on what the photographer sees as important.

Variations on the Basic Pan

I usually don't care for pans; to me they seem like roster shots with shallow DoF, just an engine and a blurred background, just a different kind of blur. Diesels especially, even with the implied motion there isn't much life in those sorts of shots. But I have seen pans that bring more to the table; here are a few. The key is that the background show some context or offer some contrast, some juxtaposition to the subject.

Mike Bjork's trolley shot above (captioned version here, RP shots here) does a bit of both. I like rain shots when they give the image a bit of shimmer and the wetness on the pavement does that here. The context is a busy intersection, and the contrast is in color, the right purple of the trolley versus the reds of the store lighting and the streaks of various other lights in other colors, a bit of yellow, a bit of green, a bit of white. Very nice (and not only because I am a big fan of rich color)!

Mitch Goldman, well known for his pans (and other great shots, RP shots here) has been developing his zoom pan technique recently. What I love about this one (captioned version here) is the context. It can be tricky to do an "electrified pan" because one can end up with just a mess of blurred wires and catenary structure. Mitch solves the problem here by doing a zoom pan at a station. By doing the nose-on shot he has room to include trackside elements; by shooting at a station he finds interesting elements to include, not just the shelter but the yellow warning stripe and the wooden paths for boarding on the inner track. He places the train further back, increasing the depth and thus adding to the sense of motion, not just a generic blur but an approaching speedster. Excellent!

For the final shot, let's go back to Mike Bjork. He recently shot what I will call a "wedgie pan" at Cascade Tunnel (captioned version here). The wedgie angle results in the pan only freezing part of the engine, but look at what one gets from that angle, a view going back down the train to the portal, adding context and interest. Given that the angled view means less panning is required, one gets less blurring of the background, which here means the trees retail reasonable definition. Add to that lots of snow and the semi-selective color that comes with shooting BNSF orange during darkening conditions and you end up with a super shot!

I am glad to see that people have found ways to liven up what to me is the rather staid if not dull basic pan shot.

Nick Suydam: Master of the Night

I won't claim to have made a full study of all night-time rail photography work. I don't want to get into recent debates, or more serious ones, about what constitutes excellence in the night. All I want to do, really, is to point out that Nick Suydam's recent slide show, "A Late Night in the City: The Railroad Capital After Dark" is tremendous!

Consider the shot above. One of the hardest thinks I find to deal with is the "foreground obstruction." Put something in front of the viewer's face, and the viewer's eyes go there, generally to ill effect. Here it works, however, as the post serves to act as an internal frame, turning the scene into something of an asymmetric diptych, with the main scene on the left, a man and the train, and the secondary scene on the right. The man and the platform tie the pieces together as he is on the left side but about to walk onto the right, where the vanishing point for the various lines lies. The color is a surprisingly attractive yellow, with splashes of blue and red. One engine is seen from the side, the other nose-on. A really interesting combination of elements!

Here is an entirely different sort of shot. Moody, and telling a simple story, or perhaps not, perhaps it has more questions than answers. An engine, a backlit girl, and a round thing of some sort. Some fog, some beams of light, just a bit of track, the form of the engine invisible, with even the numberboards displayed only subtly. Very mysterious, where is the location, is it a pedestrian crossing, where is the girl going and what is she putting in her mouth, what is the mound in the foreground? A simple study, nice. (I'd like it a bit better if I knew what the round thing is.)

The next shot is a dusk shot. I won't claim that this is a great shot, maybe not even a good shot, but I find it interesting, mostly because of the compexity. It is a maze of geometric patterns and blocks of light. I like the way some of the cars have only single containers, exposing the ends of some of the containers to light, creating dark/light variation, with other bright blocks formed by the ribbed container side and the signal box. I like the way the signal bridge in the background is lit up but the foreground cantilever is dark. I like the way the verticals in the train (container sides, wells, container edges) go along with the verticals in the power line support structures. I like the way the yellows and pastels are accented with the red in the signals and the green reflecting off the sides of the train.

But does it fall on the busy, disorganized side of complexity? Maybe, but I am interested in how to capture complexity so I find it interesting to contemplate. Is there a lack of a recognizable composition? Maybe, although the solid rectangles among the complex mix of lines and the contrasting signals do provide some structure. Would I put it on my wall? Well, no.

Ok, then, let's now get to a shot I love. This shot is what pulled me in to this body of work, what led me to search it out to see what else was there. This shot has it all, forms, lines, mood, color, depth, motion. What a dramatic scene!

As always, I like to think about the nuts and bolts of the scene, but here that seems inadequate to the task. There is an internal frame of the train portrait, but it is itself composed a fascinating set of geometric elements and interesting color/texture patterns on the metal surfaces of what is customarily a forbidding place, the underside of a bridge/viaduct at night. And the bolts, both near and far, the shadows! Into that area the train is seemingly moving, but what an interesting angle! The distortions of the extreme wide lens and the fog cause the train to emerge as a monster, red eyed, and what is the nature of its lair with its glowing light underneath? A wondrous image, best thought of lyrically rather than analytically.

Consider the variation in compositions, in style, in abstraction versus documentation across the shots here, and in the all the shots in the slide show. Nick's work is not only fabulous but it shows his versatility and his artistry. An outstanding body of night photography. If you want to see more of Nick's stuff, go to his web page or to his Flickr site.

Running Gear

I'm a fan of equipment detail shots, and one subject that always draws the attention of photographers is the running gear of a steam engine. But how to capture that scene? How to convey some combination of the grandeur (especially with very large drivers or cylinders), the power, the motion, the intricacies of the movement, in a still image?

In a sense this exercise reminds me of 12-bar blues. The limits of the form are narrow, yet the results span a wide realm. It is as if the constraints themselves inspire one to work harder to capture and present one's vision. With running gear shots the limits are not quite so narrow, but the possibilities are still endless despite the specificity of the subject. Here are some variations.

I'm a fan but not a huge fan of Nick d'Amato's shot (captioned version here). In looking at running gear I like the interplay between the curves of the drivers and the lines of the rods and so forth. In Nick's shot the curves are barely visible and the lines are primarily horizontal, with just the one short diagonal. The shot does not have a nice blend of geometric elements. Also, being a flat shot, a shot taken perpendicular to the subjext, it does not have a great deal of depth. What I do like are the textures on the metals, not to mention the wisps of steam here and there and the light coming through from the back at top center, not to mention the many bolts.

Keith Burgess goes for the angle and steam approach (captioned version here, website here), with the main rod and the steam telling the story. The presence of the steam is sort of a tradeoff; one loses the details of what is a magnificent beast but instead one gets a stronger sense of its life. The steam on the right also hides what would have been distracting complexity, putting the focus on two main rods and one wheel, although my curves-favoring eye is also drawn to the upper curve in the next driver forward. (I will admit to a bit of confusion as to why it is so high; I feel like I am misreading something in the mechanical arrangement.)

I'm afraid that this shot is also not fully successful to my eye, however. The upper left and upper center in particular is somewhat of a formless mash of elements, and the image does not have strong contrasts. The angled view offers depth in the presentation of the main rods, but the impression of depth is tempered by the steam to some extent. It is cool to see the detail in the layering of rod ends on a common pivot (journal?), but ultimately there are a lot of trees here but it is a bit weak on the forest. (I love lots of Keith's shots and will feature some down the road.)

Mitch Goldman goes for what I will call a "detail pan" (captioned version here) with interesting results. This one, unlike the others and unlike most running gear shots, shows the gear running! He's got the up/down on the rod and the circular motion of the drivers, excellent! There is a large expanse of open background flying by. For some reason, that does disturb me, I must say. I think I would prefer a bit more of the boiler to be visible to provide some more weight at the top of the picture. It is nice that the driver area is so open - and so well lit! - but there is a bit missing of what I can only call gravitas. Still a cool shot. I bet Mitch could take a running gear crop of any of a number of his pans and I would love it, but I only like this one.

Kelly Lynch's shot (captioned version here, website here) has some really interesting details. First, it has a particular, eccentric (a pun!) mix of focus and out of focus areas; Kelly used a lens baby to create the effect. The focus is on the pivot, an oddly-shaped piece of metal, but with the connections going to it and the contrasting angle formed by the line of the secondary rod and the U-shape in the right foreground, and the drivers in the backgrounds, with their spokes, there are lots of fascinating lines, curves, and shapes to feast on. All seen at a dynamic angle.

Second, the surfaces of the rods scream METAL! in their dull sheen, in their bronze/green/ gray colors, in the variations such as the varying thicknesses in the rods. The variations in the light, with stronger reflections on some surfaces than others, adds to the feel. This shot says machine in this added textural/visual dimension that to some extent Nick's shot also does but Keith's and Mitch's do not. (It occurs to me that the other shots do not have as much tonal variation as I would like to see in BW/monochrome images, with Nick's shot being perhaps an exception, whereas this shot has both color and tonality.)

Finally, the spray of water adds an interesting contrast in detail and in texture, and implies some motion and a story element as well. A fine, fine mix of characteristics resulting in a strong composition.

Boy, this has been an unusually grumpy thread for me! Some might say picky. I like these shots, and I especially like Kelly's shot, but I think I will just continue to seek what I will find to be the perfect running gear shot. Something with a stronger sense of drivers, of big wheels, yet preserving the other dimensions. Perhaps these photographers have already found their perfect shots. Nice work.