![Image](http://railroadfan.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10333/level.jpg)
The only editing done to this was the size change for the gallery. I know it needs cropped, sharpened, a little color work, and all that jazz, but I need help on how to level it. Nothing I do looks right. JT, HELP ME!
![Laughing :lol:](http://www.railroadfan.com/phpbb/images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
Thanks JT, I never submitted that one to RP though.J T wrote:Try to level it with the vertical on the engineer's side of the nose. There's a pretty good line there to level it with. I think that's probably what the screener saw. It looks like it needs a little CCW rotation.
I'd rather not lug a tripod around with my DSLR all day. Really no point to that when you can level in photoshop.railohio wrote:If you used a tripod with a level you wouldn't have this problem.
Why would you add one more step to your post-processing when you can eliminate it? The point is to not spend more time behind a computer. That's like saying "why would I get the exposure right in camera when I can just fudge it in photoshop?" There are tripods out there that are light and strong at the same time. Having said that, I don't use mine a lot only because it really isn't very light and it's more for studio work.Y@ wrote:I'd rather not lug a tripod around with my DSLR all day. Really no point to that when you can level in photoshop.railohio wrote:If you used a tripod with a level you wouldn't have this problem.
I just don't see the point to it at all? Why go spend more money on something that I really don't need?conrailmike wrote:Why would you add one more step to your post-processing when you can eliminate it? The point is to not spend more time behind a computer. That's like saying "why would I get the exposure right in camera when I can just fudge it in photoshop?" There are tripods out there that are light and strong at the same time. Having said that, I don't use mine a lot only because it really isn't very light and it's more for studio work.Y@ wrote:I'd rather not lug a tripod around with my DSLR all day. Really no point to that when you can level in photoshop.railohio wrote:If you used a tripod with a level you wouldn't have this problem.
Well it's a quick fix, not something that takes time. If you're shooting something like a wedding and you're pressed for time on the photographs and want to eliminate your post-processing time, then I could see lugging around a tripod. But as far as railfanning goes, it just creates more of a hassle to set up and tear down a tripod in a situation where you don't truly need it.Why would you add one more step to your post-processing when you can eliminate it? The point is to not spend more time behind a computer. That's like saying "why would I get the exposure right in camera when I can just fudge it in photoshop?
Not all tripods or even monopods are giant, there are quite a few nice, light, and strong models available. So what you're saying is, it's no time at all to fix the 250 photos you might shoot in a weekend? That time adds up. What do you think the guys do who shoot pro sports? Rarely do they have time to waste in getting the action shot and 99% of them shoot off a monopod.LSRC wrote:I'm with Y@. There's not much of a point lugging around a giant tripod when you're chasing trains, especially if you're in a crunch where you don't have time to set up and tear down. All you need to do is carefully level with your eye in the field, and if you screw up, it's only an extra thirty seconds in photoshop to fix it.
That's just silly. Shoot off a monopod then or watch what you're doing.LSRC wrote:It's also possible to get unlevel photos even when using a tripod with a level. It's certainly possible to bump the tripod, misread it, etc. in which case you'd be back to leveling it in photoshop.
That thirty seconds adds up real quick. I don't shoot off a tripod at weddings only because of that reason alone.... I don't have time. You have to be ready for the moment, I MIGHT shoot off a tripod during formals but being pressed for time normally I don't because I can get it darn close if not perfect and I find it's a little easier to hide levelness with people than it is trains.LSRC wrote:Well it's a quick fix, not something that takes time. If you're shooting something like a wedding and you're pressed for time on the photographs and want to eliminate your post-processing time, then I could see lugging around a tripod. But as far as railfanning goes, it just creates more of a hassle to set up and tear down a tripod in a situation where you don't truly need it.
It's true that not all monopods or tripods are giants. But I've found that unless you're foaming alone, you're going to have to collapse and fold the legs (or leg). That takes time. For example, I was shooting a train on Monday evening. I had less than twenty seconds to park the car, grab the camera, run to the top of an icy hill, and focus if I wanted to get that shot. Had I been using a tripod, I wouldn't have gotten the shot.Not all tripods or even monopods are giant, there are quite a few nice, light, and strong models available. So what you're saying is, it's no time at all to fix the 250 photos you might shoot in a weekend? That time adds up. What do you think the guys do who shoot pro sports? Rarely do they have time to waste in getting the action shot and 99% of them shoot off a monopod.
That and I'd need some kind of way to mount the tripod to the top of a Subaru...Conrail Jon wrote:Only time I use a tripod is at night or when shooting video. It's a PITA otherwise.
One more step? It literally takes less than 10 seconds to level a shot in photoshop. How long does it take for you to set up your tripod, make sure it's level, etc? Aside from that, even if you think you have it perfectly level because a little bubble on your tripod told you it was, chances are quite good that the shot will still be unlevel to some degree.conrailmike wrote: Why would you add one more step to your post-processing when you can eliminate it?
The point is to not spend more time setting up a shot when a train is approaching.The point is to not spend more time behind a computer.
No, it's not like that. Very poor analogy, IMO.That's like saying "why would I get the exposure right in camera when I can just fudge it in photoshop?"
They do make little levels that attach (stick?) to the camera, Norm. I've seen a few photographers that have had them, I've just never really thought about getting one.Norm wrote:I'm with JT on this one. I used to have a tripod, but disposed of it because it was bulky and inconvenient to set up. If you depend on one for a level picture it must be on level ground or you have to make adjustments to get it so.
When shooting, I try to keep the camera level, but if I'm off a degree or so it a very quick and easy fix in Photoshop that only takes a few seconds. Then I can crop to my satisfaction. I don't worry about RP because I've never sent them one.
Just an opinion, but it would be nice if every DSLR had a small pendulum in the viewfinder to indicate the horizon is level. Probably never happen, but it's a thought.
(Looks for the 'like' button. Oh wait, this isn't FB)MDH wrote:What's the big deal about level? Just grab the edge of you monitor and turn it 'till it looks right!![]()
![]()