Digital cameras and model railroading

[nachoman]

I occasionally browse through model railroader magazines from the 80s or early 90s, and compare the modeling seen therein to what I see today. I notice a marked difference in detail levels - with today's modelers adhering to higher detail standards not just with their rolling stock, but with their structures and layouts in general.

It is true that commercial products have improved details, and a highly detailed model is much cheaper than it used to be. for example, one can pick up a bachmann spectrum steamer for a hundred bucks today, but 30 years ago one would have had to spend more money on imported brass to get that level of detail. So, it is much easier for someone to have a higher detail standard than they did 30 years ago.

But 30 years ago there were no digital cameras. I never took close-up photos of my models until I bought a digital camera about 6 years ago. I would think most of us were the same way. One needs to have a decent film camera and lenses in order to take close-up pictures of models. A point and shoot 35mm camera simply doesn't cut it. And - that film needed developing, and it would often take something larger than a 4x6 print to see much detail on a model photo. Plus, the developing lag time didn't allow for instant scrutiny of the photography or the modeling subject.

I have noticed that evan my relatively cheap 4 megapixel digital camera can capture model details quite well if I give it proper lighting. And, I can plug it into my computer to get nearly instant feedback. I have noticed myself caring more about smaller details than I did before - some of them are details small enough that one's eyes will never be able to see well in person - but the camera will catch them. If I didn't have a camera, or never planned on photographing my trains, I think I wouldn't bother with such details and never notice that they were missing.

The digital photograph is a good critic. Do you think that the advancement of digital cameras, and the nearly ubiquitous ownership of them has pushed our hobby to a higher detail threshold?

[Russ Bellinis]

I'm not sure. I suspect that the availability of more detailed products probably has more to do with the higher detailed layouts shown in the modeling magazines today. I think the standards for photography in MR has always been high. For many years they touted pinhole lenses even having articles on how to modify an existing lens to make a pinhole lens in order to get the best depth of field for model photography. I think that if the modeler was not capable of doing publishing quality photography, they would send out one of their staff to get professional quality photography for feature layouts. I suspect that any higher levels of detail in layouts featured in the modeling press is probably the result of more highly detailed models being available. There are so many small detail products available that were just not on the market a few years ago. An example that comes to mind immediately is BLMA. I think also many modelers are doing better scenery than used to be the standard. I remember an article on Jack Burgess' YVRR about 20 years ago where he mentioned that he didn't realize all of the color variations including greens in California's "golden grass" until he tried to model it. I suspect to, that the move toward prototype modeling as well as walk around wireless dcc control systems may have a lot to do with the increased level of detail. When you sit in a "control tower" to run your railroad detail is not as noticeable as when you follow your train up close and personal as it moves around the layout.

[tomustang]

I would say after taking a picture of a just finished result and looking at it shows far better details than with the naked eye, and of course the ego spots the minor mistakes and want to correct them.

[Sumpter250]

Before digital, I used a Minolta SRT 101 35mm camera. I did end up purchasing a macro lens for the detail shots. The greatest benefit of digital, is the photoshop programs, and instant uploads so the pictures can be seen by others. For detail ?, high resolution pictures, cropped to just the area where the detail is. For detail ?,
Put your ego on hold. Not only is the super fine detail there.......so are all the " super fine mistakes"!

[doctorwayne]

The camera is a great aid in seeing your mistakes, often not noticeable in person because your eyes scan everywhere that's visible. In a photo, though, your field of vision is restricted and the errors often "poke you in the eye".

Last night, Mister Nutbar visited for a photo session, and we were discussing this very topic. I mentioned that a photo that I have posted several times, here and in other forums, contained just such a boo-boo, although in all the time that I had been posting it, I'd never noticed until just recently. For your further inspection :
[album]171[/album]

I'm surprised, too, that no one else noticed and commented.

Wayne

[Selector]

Well, I think that is the point. The much quicker feedback allows us to say, "Aw, crap, that pine is leaning against the backdrop!" We correct the fault, redo the shot, and say, "The human figure now looks to be behind the cab and waving at the tender..." We either back the train or move the figure if it is possible, and redo the shot.

I will agree that the much faster, contemporary, feedback is very useful for teaching us to see things. But while the digital camera has come into its own, the way we model railroads has also changed somewhat...it has evolved. What we like to see has changed a bit, what we take for important details changes, and so on.

Wayne, the front truck? And leading two driver axles? I think the third driver set might still be railed.

-Crandell

[doctorwayne]

Wayne, the front truck? And leading two driver axles? I think the third driver set might still be railed.

-Crandell

Yup! Oddly enough, when I finally did notice something amiss, it was only the two derailed driver sets. I didn't notice the lead truck until a subsequent viewing.

Wayne

[tetters]

Wayne, the front truck? And leading two driver axles? I think the third driver set might still be railed.

-Crandell

YES!!! I resisted the urge to scroll down and noticed the front truck too! Do I get a cookie?

[2-8-2]

The digital photograph is a good critic. Do you think that the advancement of digital cameras, and the nearly ubiquitous ownership of them has pushed our hobby to a higher detail threshold?

I think it's a combination of two things...

I, too, have several of my late grandfather's old MRR magazines from years gone by. First and foremost, there is a marked improvement in the quality of the models and scenery components themselves. Companies like Woodland Scenics have really raised the bar of realism, and I also believe that the modelers themselves are being more creative with their usage of scenic elements.

And yes, I also believe the advancements in digital photography have MADE both the producer and the end user of modeling products want to create a higher level of realism. So much detail can be lost in a grainy photograph, and those days are practically gone. Most cell phones these days are equipped with a better camera than people were used to 20 years ago. Heck, even 10 years ago. Technology is almost obsolete by the time it hits the shelves.