Full Version: Magazine profiles model railroad photog
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
A Q&A with model railroad photographer Paul Dolkos by Popular Photography magazine:

http://www.popphoto.com/how-to/2013/03/i...aul-dolkos
Nice to read his comments after having seen his photos over the years. I enjoyed the gallery. I remembered the moose in the covered bridge shot. Still makes me smile.
Thanks!
I see he uses software magic to improve his photos..That's good and all but,I would rather see "real" photos instead of doctored up photos since they are IMHO they can be "faked".
Helicon Focus is not used for "faking"pictures ,it is software specifcally designed to improve depth of field in your pictures.I don't use it because quite frankly I'm not that good a photographer. Nope
Catt Wrote:Helicon Focus is not used for "faking"pictures ,it is software specifcally designed to improve depth of field in your pictures.I don't use it because quite frankly I'm not that good a photographer. Nope

John,I seen far to many photoshoped photos and IMHO Helicon Focus isn't much better when it comes to doctoring a average photo..
Photoshopping is not the same thing as Helicon Focus.Photo shopping is altering a phote by adding or subtracting items in the picture.Helicon is taking the same picture multiple times then using the software to stack the pics to increase depth of field.The picture remains the same except you can see items in the distance much more clearly.
Catt Wrote:Photoshopping is not the same thing as Helicon Focus.Photo shopping is altering a phote by adding or subtracting items in the picture.Helicon is taking the same picture multiple times then using the software to stack the pics to increase depth of field.The picture remains the same except you can see items in the distance much more clearly.

That is true enough but,its still doctoring a photo..I prefer real life photos that hasn't been retouched or faked out.You can't see the true photo of a supposedly "super" modeler's work..

I suppose I'm critical of digital photos since they are so easy to manipulate.
"Photoshopping" is the use of Adobe Photoshop. It can rotate, sharpen, crop, correct color, and adjust brightness and contrast, things every digital photo needs. It can also remove or intensify colors, remove or add elements of the image, turn it into a painting or watercolor or pencil sketch, and do about a million other things. To say that Photoshop is inherently evil is simply ignorant. Every photo y ou see on Flickr stream has had something done to it in Photoshop. No, I don't remove or add items or make a cloudy day sunny, but the simple reality is that every digital image needs some polishing to look its best. That's just the reality of the technology.
railohio Wrote:"Photoshopping" is the use of Adobe Photoshop. It can rotate, sharpen, crop, correct color, and adjust brightness and contrast, things every digital photo needs. It can also remove or intensify colors, remove or add elements of the image, turn it into a painting or watercolor or pencil sketch, and do about a million other things. To say that Photoshop is inherently evil is simply ignorant. Every photo y ou see on Flickr stream has had something done to it in Photoshop. No, I don't remove or add items or make a cloudy day sunny, but the simple reality is that every digital image needs some polishing to look its best. That's just the reality of the technology.

I'm not ignorant just cautious about digital photos since they can be misleading unless the photographer states what he did to enhance his photo..

What I'm talking about is a guy takes a so/so picture,photoshops it with a real clouds and real hills in the distance.I fear a lot of hocus pocus is going on with some "super" photos.
Anything you could do with Photoshop, you could have done with xacto knives, negatives, and a lot of time.

If anything, using computer software to manipulate depth of field is actually providing a more realistic view of what you'd actually see looking at the model. Your eye is great at depth of field for small objects. CCD chips are not.