GolfGTIforum.co.uk
General => General discussion => Topic started by: Diamond Hell on 05 August 2011, 00:57
-
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6131/6010261506_4e757a7744.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/43476789@N00/6010261506/)
IMG_0899 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/43476789@N00/6010261506/) by Diamond Hell (http://www.flickr.com/people/43476789@N00/), on Flickr
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6132/6010259788_d29ea9fa37.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/43476789@N00/6010259788/)
IMG_0894 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/43476789@N00/6010259788/) by Diamond Hell (http://www.flickr.com/people/43476789@N00/), on Flickr
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6026/6010258626_10034cd9c3.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/43476789@N00/6010258626/)
IMG_0919 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/43476789@N00/6010258626/) by Diamond Hell (http://www.flickr.com/people/43476789@N00/), on Flickr
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6135/6009708133_af66056f72.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/43476789@N00/6009708133/)
IMG_0934 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/43476789@N00/6009708133/) by Diamond Hell (http://www.flickr.com/people/43476789@N00/), on Flickr
Lots more to do with them before they're 'done' but this was after a few minutes on each.
-
I think you've got too much light behind and not enough fill light on the car as the arch is far more dominant in all the photos as the car just blends into the shadows
-
I really like the last one, :smiley:
Think a wideangle lens would work really well for that location, get down low and dead centre on the car
-
I think you've got too much light behind and not enough fill light on the car as the arch is far more dominant in all the photos as the car just blends into the shadows
+1 although I LOVE the last one, works brilliantly.
Nick
-
I think you've got too much light behind and not enough fill light on the car as the arch is far more dominant in all the photos as the car just blends into the shadows
I agree and there's post-processing work to be done yet to mitigate this. Feel free to show me your attempts at lighting a black car. :grin:
It's a delightful c*nt of a job.
Think a wideangle lens would work really well for that location, get down low and dead centre on the car
That was the 10-20 at work, on some of those. How wide to you want? :wink: I did find myself wanting to get the camera lower, but couldn't on the tripod.
As said in the first post. This was spending under 10 minutes on each photo when I got back. I'll update when I've had a chance.
-
really wide! hahah Its hard trying to explain what i mean, in my head i know how i would to try and shoot it but getting that into text is hard,
on my tripod you can pull a latch on each leg so the can go flat on the ground which helps with the lower shooting position or ive got this bloody tiny tripod that also means you can geeeet reet low, i would be lying on the floor almost as it were, I know the problem of going to wide is the distortion at the edges,
Im yet to shoot a black car at night and i can imagine its a pain! should be shooting my friends mk1 capri which is black
-
I think you've got too much light behind and not enough fill light on the car as the arch is far more dominant in all the photos as the car just blends into the shadows
I agree and there's post-processing work to be done yet to mitigate this. Feel free to show me your attempts at lighting a black car. :grin:
It's a delightful c*nt of a job.
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4143/4869177427_f84c6aa8f4.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ridg/4869177427/)
Alan's MKV GTI (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ridg/4869177427/) by The Ridg (http://www.flickr.com/people/ridg/), on Flickr
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4136/4876441551_1a488b0470.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ridg/4876441551/)
DSC_8380CRAWs (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ridg/4876441551/) by The Ridg (http://www.flickr.com/people/ridg/), on Flickr
Alan's was actually the first car I shot :smug:
I agree and there's post-processing work to be done yet to mitigate this.
fair enough, but why post unfinished work?
-
Show off :tongue:
really wide! hahah Its hard trying to explain what i mean
Oh you mean this wide:
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_UDSRXz8ncTM/TVA46DBmJLI/AAAAAAAAAcQ/XVxNR38R4fY/s1600/spinaltap-11.jpg)
I do know what you mean. I've shot various things at 10mm, but have shied away from going quite this wide more and more because of the distortion that starts to creep in - I would have previously shot landscapes at the full 10mm, because I could, but I'd be very hesitant in going that wide now, because the distortion is too harsh, unless I wanted to stylise the image, when it's nice to have the option.
I just wound up wanting LOTS of lights last night, but I still think I would have wound up with lots of lights on the car, being annoyed by the points of lots of lights on the car. :grin:
I've found a few new tricks on camera RAW which I'm playing with and I think they're going to save a lot of time in PS later.
-
I do know what you mean. I've shot various things at 10mm, but have shied away from going quite this wide more and more because of the distortion that starts to creep in - I would have previously shot landscapes at the full 10mm, because I could, but I'd be very hesitant in going that wide now, because the distortion is too harsh, unless I wanted to stylise the image, when it's nice to have the option.
+1
wide is only good in certain situations IMO, when it comes to landscapes you can generally get away with it as there aren't always shapes the brain recognises and things hand on those are wrong, ,when it comes to shooting cars, wide can work but most of the time you just end up with a distorted version of the car which doesn't look right.
I've found a few new tricks on camera RAW which I'm playing with and I think they're going to save a lot of time in PS later.
you gonna share the magic?
-
you gonna share the magic?
Nah, cos you smart ar$es have probably been using them for ages and I'll look stoopid. :grin: