DT 4.0.1
Nice image. Thanks for sharing.
Photo that should be approximately 188x (where x = [0…9]). 
Ingredients:
Tonal variations → authentic sepia preset.
2 grain modules at maximum.
Diffuse/sharp → preset Imitate line drawing (2 iterations)
and other ingredients.
If you want b/w, change tonal variations module to monochrome module and that’s it.
Cheers!
To everyone: enlarge this to the full width of your monitor. Wow!
To @arturoisilvia: yes, that little diff trick is superb!
Have fun,
Claes in Lund, Sweden
Thank you Brian for posting and making it possible to edit a real life Thomas tank engine 
My version is with colours but with a little bit more focused crop. DT4.0.1
Ultimately as a judge we have to have a personal opinion. If I was to judge the original posted image I would have to say it looks unnatural. I thought it was trying to imitate an infrared look. It just looks surreal to me.
As a teacher of photography I do not impose my personal interpretations upon students but rather embrace their unique interpretation. I want to give them the skills to achieve what they want, not what I want. As a commercial photographer and portrait photographer I had a saying, “beauty is in the eye of the person with the wallet”. But as a judge I ultimately fall back on my personal opinion and that is why I have been asked to judge.
Have fun with your photography and ignore everyone’s opinion and listen to your own heart for what you like and enjoy.
I think it was an ironic judgment as certainly he was not pleased with the rendering.
To approach this rendering, on contrary, I have to push the contrast, global and local.
Hi, thanks for sharing. I liked the overall composition so I didn’t crop. Old vehicles make photographs really look like a fragment of time. I added a bit of a retro Kodak Portra look.
dt 4.0.1
IMG_0140.CR2.xmp (13.0 KB)
did the judge talk about the image you just posted? Because there’s a lot of contrast. Also the image itself has a lot of contrast because it’s shot in harsh sunlight.
Yes I agree. Not a lack of contrast…maybe too much in my opinion. Just forgive judges…they are only human after all.
I guess the HDR look is deliberate and contain more detail than my interpretation. However, I’m not a fan of HDR as it usually looks false, largely a matter of personal taste.
Thanks for posting. My try in darktable plus some sharpening in the Gimp.
Looks good @bernyemm (fancy seeing you here!). Maybe a touch underexposed in the shadows though.
Underexposed in the shadows.
It’s a bugbear with me as I cut my teeth on film negatives and black & white prints. It’s a conundrum of the times we live in. I still think in terms of printed images on paper which had a certain magic. Images on a computer screen seem to lack that quality which I can’t verbally describe. For me, there has always been an indescribable beauty in the black and white printed image which never left me and I always felt something was missing when I looked at a colour image. Even colour slide images projected on a screen lacked that certain something that a monochrome image had . Maybe that’s why I was such a fan of early Ansel Adams images.
Very nice interpretation.
There are labs who will make a digital print on gelatin silver paper. I’ve had. a few printed. They are really nice but pricey.
If that lacks contrast, people saying so should check their eyes or their monitor!
Maybe the image is overly sharpened, but I think the contrast is nice.
Sander Knopper’s version may be a bit better, however.
To be honest , I think the colour versions work better!
The red and blue really draw the eye’s attention.
