Weekly Photography Comp 17

[sl55kleemann]

CONGRATULATIONS Rebirth of Xar !

http://img204.exs.cx/img204/6743/jagalwcnycxar0ga.th.jpg (http://img204.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img204&image=jagalwcnycxar0ga.jpg)
Standings so far: Fastautos:2, Egg Nog:1, Rebirth of Xar:4, McReis:3, SPH Ferrari:2, Niko Fx:1, Titanboy 24:2, Pterps:1, Karc:1, Pinin 1.

Podium for comp. 17:
Rebirth of Xar : 12 votes
Titanboy_24 : 10 votes
henk4 : 6 votes

44 voters you break the record ! nice!

Rules:

* The proposed picture must be your own and not found on the net.

* Only the photographs taken the month in progress and the past month are accepted.

* Only one photograph per person and weekly contest allowed; you may not change your photograph once it has been entered.

* There are 5 days to submit your photograph, a poll will be created after 5 days for people to vote on.

* Your image must be a resolution of 800*600 or lower. If it is not, your picture will not be in the voting thread.

* Each photographer cannot vote for him, they must vote for the others

* The picture should get submitted with: the name of the car, where it was taken or at what event, and the date and the type of camera

Good luck!

[Wouter Melissen]

It appears that the subject on the picture is many times more important than the quality of the picture. To be frank, I'd never publish a shot like this.

EDIT: the car is actually blue, not grey:

[henk4]

Bugatti 50T
Retromobile, Friday 11-02-2005
Sony Cybershot

[danno]

It appears that the subject on the picture is many times more important than the quality of the picture. To be frank, I'd never publish a shot like this.

EDIT: the car is actually blue, not grey:

and your point was.................... :D

[henk4]

and your point was.................... :D

he might be doubting the quality of the jurors :D

[Wouter Melissen]

and your point was.................... :D
To me it sounds like the 'Weekly Spot The Nicest car and even though the picture only shows the car's antenna you'll win contest,' rather than the Weekly Photography Contest.

[danno]

oh ok, i didnt see the last competition, but the picture that won was certainly very good.

[McReis]

To me it sounds like the 'Weekly Spot The Nicest car and even though the picture only shows the car's antenna you'll win contest,' rather than the Weekly Photography Contest.


I twice claimed that, allthough I won the competition 3 times. Having you saying the same gives me some moral...:)

Sunday i'll be at a classic car/bike meeting. I'll be taking photos. Lets see what happens then if I post some good pictures of old cars noone knows... just like your father does except my pictures are much better...:D:D:D:D

[Wouter Melissen]

oh ok, i didnt see the last competition, but the picture that won was certainly very good.
I really did not want to go down this route, but you forced me. Almost half of of the picture is overexposed to the point where it's white. The background is completely distracting from the subject, the underexposed 'grey' non centered Jaguar. Like I said in my first post, the only thing remarkable about the picture is the subject.

[henk4]

oh ok, i didnt see the last competition, but the picture that won was certainly very good.

Well I tend to disaggree, lighting is awful there are parts of the picture completely white, too many people in the background, other cars shouldn't have been there, the top of the central building should have been visible and as Wouter pointed out, the car is blue.

And please do not come with the "sour grape" argument because I did not win. My pic wasn't that good either :D

[shockwaveracing]

To me it sounds like the 'Weekly Spot The Nicest car and even though the picture only shows the car's antenna you'll win contest,' rather than the Weekly Photography Contest.


the truth is spoken at last... the location of the pic was excellent but the photo wasn't that special he took better photos of it...

like the one below...

[Mustang]

reet lets see what i have for this month

Focus WRC 2005/2006
Nikon
autosport 2005

[Wouter Melissen]

the truth is spoken at last... the location of the pic was excellent but the photo wasn't that special he took better photos of it...

like the one below...
It's better, but still not centered and the background is very distracting.

[shockwaveracing]

It's better, but still not centered and the background is very distracting.


yes but the juxtaposition of the Phantom of the Opera sign (and what it says) against the car is what makes it interesting... and better than the one that won last weeks competition...

[Pinin]

Ferrari 365 GTS/4 Daytona, Ferrari F355
Graypaul, Nottingham
3rd January
Canon PowerShot A85

[drakkie]

The new Ford Focus, with my dad in it :)
AutoRai, amsterdam, the netherlands
february 11 th
Olympus D-540

http://img12.exs.cx/img12/8449/p21100820hw.th.jpg (http://img12.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img12&image=p21100820hw.jpg)

[Rebirth of Xar]

Thanx to everyone who voted for me.. heres to another controversial comp win..

Viper Gts on Red Hres
Times Square, Nyc
Feb. 5, 05
Sony Dsc-P72
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=90760&stc=1
________
marijuana pictures (http://trichomes.org)

[Speedracer38]

Ferrari 360CS
January 2005
Connecticut
Panasonic FZ20

[UCR]

Murceilago.
The other week.
Samsung 3.2.
Autosport.

[Wouter Melissen]

Thanx to everyone who voted for me.. heres to another controversial comp win..
I wonder if this would get any votes if it was a regular car and not a viper.

[UCR]

I wonder if this would get any votes if it was a regular car and not a viper.
I Can see your point,
But do you walk around New York, searching for rare or special cars?
Thats effort, and maybee its not his job to take photographs of cars, but he does his best.

I think there very good.

[henk4]

I Can see your point,
But do you walk around New York, searching for rare or special cars?
Thats effort, and maybee its not his job to take photographs of cars, but he does his best.

I think there very good.

It may be effort, but effort that does not result in exceptional pictures, but of course he is doing his best.

[Wouter Melissen]

I Can see your point,
But do you walk around New York, searching for rare or special cars?
Thats effort, and maybee its not his job to take photographs of cars, but he does his best.
I can paint something, put in a lot of effort and it'll still be a bunch of crap; effort is not a criterium in judging something creative.

[VtecMini]

I know very little about photography, but i'd say it's a 50/50 split between subject matter and picture quality. Maybe I'm slightly biased, but which makes a greater photograph; a perfectly taken shot of a well framed supermarket, or an amateurish snap of the breathtaking views taken from the top of the Himalayas? I appreciate it's not a great analogy and I totally understand the point Wouter is making, but I think you see what I'm getting at.

[forza_autodelta]

Rebirth your pictures are excellent do you have some from alfa romeo or aston martin of the sixties please?

[ScionDriver]

Taken: Friday February 11
Where: 2005 Chicago Auto Show
Car(s): Ford Mustangs (1 Roush, 1 Steeda, 1 Street Scene Equipment, 1 Saleen)
Camera: Canon Rebel EOS Digital SLR

[McReis]

Rebirth your pictures are excellent do you have some from alfa romeo or aston martin of the sixties please?

Not many of those around times square...:D

[henk4]

Not many of those around times square...:D

one every five minutes :D

[SPHFerrari]

i dont wanna come off as a hardass cuz i wasnt too nice in the last comp but im gonna say what i think anyways. i totally agree with what wouter and henk were saying and thats almost exactly what i was saying to someone else when he was winning the last comp. i dont think his picture is good at all, it is COMPLETELY the car. his picture was almost half blown out and the car doesn not stand out at all. i think it is entirely the fact that the car was what it is that won him the comp. and i will be a bit more annoyed if he wins this comp with that picture. i dont think it is good at all. it is blurred, distracted, and just not a very good picture. it really has become a 'spot the best car you can and get some image of it' competition. of course you need to have somewhat of a photogenic car in your picture, but a skilled and quality picture should win over a crappy shot of a better car.

[SPHFerrari]

anyhow here is my modest contribution.

Lamborghini Murcielago
Weston Mass
January
Canon EOS Digital Rebel

[Rebirth of Xar]

ok I will respond to everyones remarks..
first off.. I try my best with a POS 3.2MP cam. sure the picture that im entering is blurry and what-not but thats bcuz The pic was a somewhat long expusure and it was cold out and unlike many "Pros" on this forum I dont use a tripod. I won last month becuase I got lucky and spotted an ultra rare car and took a decent picture of it with a shitty camera. Most Car Pic comps are won by the best overall shot. Car + Background + Quality.. If the picture looks good itll win no matter what car it is.

I can guarantee that if the picture I entered this week were taken with a $1000 8MP camera no one would be complaining..

Forza Autodelta sorry I do not have any pictures of 60s Masers and Astons.. hopefully Ill atend some shows in the near future and snap some up as they are some of my favourite cars..

PS a sighting on the street is worth 10 at a dealer..
________
Mercedes-Benz 200 history (http://www.mercedes-wiki.com/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_200)

[SPHFerrari]

having a 3.2 mp camera is no excuse. i think i took lots of great pics with my 3.2 mp camera, ones a lot better than what i have taken so far with my 6.3 mp camera. and exactly, it was a long exposure without a tripod. you dont do that. this is a PHOTOGRAPHY comp. you dont have to be a pro to know that you dont do long exposures at night without a tripod. if we are supposed to ignore the fact that your mechanical photography skills are no good, then what are we supposed to do. that just proves my point. you cant just take a picture of a good car, if its not a good picture it should not win, no excuses.


Most Car Pic comps are won by the best overall shot. Car + Background + Quality.. If the picture looks good itll win no matter what car it is.
i agree that is the THEORY, but apparently not what happens, and thats my problem. if that is the case, you get 1 out of 3 of the requirement for a winning pic for last weeks. you had a good car, not a good background, and not good quality.

i dont agree that had your picture been taken with a thousand dollar 8mp camera. if it came out the way it did here, i would say exactly the same thing, only you couldnt blame it on your camera (which i dont feel is fair anyway cuz 3.2mp is plenty to get a decent picture if your good). with the best camera in the world, your picture would still be blurry because you attempted a long exposure without a tripod, and it would still, IMO, not be a winning quality. if you feel that the only way you ucan take a good picture is with a better camera, then theres nothing i can say to you except these competitions are not won on the basis of the camera's quality, but that of the picture, and not even the physical quality of the picture. when its an 800*600 entry size, 5 extra million pixels will not help you. an 800*600 size picture is only 480,000 pixels, no matter what camera you use. then again, with more megapixels the picture quality may look slightly better once made smaller like that, but, again, it is not the physical quality of the picture, but how good a capture it is.

[Rebirth of Xar]

having a 3.2 mp camera is no excuse. i think i took lots of great pics with my 3.2 mp camera, ones a lot better than what i have taken so far with my 6.3 mp camera. and exactly, it was a long exposure without a tripod. you dont do that. this is a PHOTOGRAPHY comp. you dont have to be a pro to know that you dont do long exposures at night without a tripod. if we are supposed to ignore the fact that your mechanical photography skills are no good, then what are we supposed to do. that just proves my point. you cant just take a picture of a good car, if its not a good picture it should not win, no excuses.


i agree that is the THEORY, but apparently not what happens, and thats my problem. if that is the case, you get 1 out of 3 of the requirement for a winning pic for last weeks. you had a good car, not a good background, and not good quality.

i dont agree that had your picture been taken with a thousand dollar 8mp camera. if it came out the way it did here, i would say exactly the same thing, only you couldnt blame it on your camera (which i dont feel is fair anyway cuz 3.2mp is plenty to get a decent picture if your good). with the best camera in the world, your picture would still be blurry because you attempted a long exposure without a tripod, and it would still, IMO, not be a winning quality. if you feel that the only way you ucan take a good picture is with a better camera, then theres nothing i can say to you except these competitions are not won on the basis of the camera's quality, but that of the picture, and not even the physical quality of the picture. when its an 800*600 entry size, 5 extra million pixels will not help you. an 800*600 size picture is only 480,000 pixels, no matter what camera you use. then again, with more megapixels the picture quality may look slightly better once made smaller like that, but, again, it is not the physical quality of the picture, but how good a capture it is.
I try my best and I enter my best if my best isnt good enough for you then why dont you do better? you certainly have the access to the cars why not show me a "Perfect" picture? as for the why a $1000 8Mp cam would make a better picture? becuz it wouldve made a sharper, crisp and not needed as long of an exposure for better results as a POS sony DSCp72. I dont want to hear any more of this "the better shot didnt win" BS just bcuz the pictures you entered didnt win. I always vote for the pic i thought contained the best overall package. dont complain to me for winning the comps bcuz I just enter the picture that I think I did best on in the week not the picture I thought was "perfect". If your gonna complain then do it to the people who voted for me.
________
BMW X5 specifications (http://www.bmw-tech.org/wiki/BMW_X5)

[carlover]

Why are you guys mouthing off at Xar? It's not like he forced people to vote for him. He just happened to get lucky and spot a nice car and take a picture of it. Even if it wasn't the best picture people voted for him. Deal with it. It's not like it's a comp for money or anything. Anyways, here's my entry. BTW, great picture mustang. Love the TV in the backround. :)

Lamborghini Murcialago Barchetta
NAIAS 2005
January 17th
FujiFilm fine-pix A2-10

http://img203.exs.cx/img203/1664/naias20050927ey.th.jpg (http://img203.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img203&image=naias20050927ey.jpg)

[Mustang]

Jesus fooking christ, this is a friendly inter forum comp, its called "weekly photosgraphy" not who has the best pic or who has the best car in there pic.

Its just for showing pics that members have taken and then the membersc can decide which pic they like the look of.

sure there are many things wrong with alot of them but unlike wouters etc these pics are just for hobbies not for work.

[carlover]

Jesus fooking christ, this is a friendly inter forum comp, its called "weekly photosgraphy" not who has the best pic or who has the best car in there pic. Its just for showing pics that members have taken and then the membersc can decide which pic they like the look of.
sure there are many things wrong with alot of them but unlike wouters etc these pics are just for hobbies not for work.
Exactly. You people can critizise all you want, it helps in fact, but if you're going to at least do it in a nice spirited way.

[SPHFerrari]

NO NO NO. i no. i wasnt going to blame Xar at all, just make a commentary on the competition. but then i had to comment on Xar after some things he said i disagreed on. this is not an attack on Xar.

i am not complaining mine didnt win, i didnt even enter last week and i dont think ill win yet this week either, i have seen other pics that are better. i too vote for the pic i think is better. but i dont vote based on who has the best car, its who took the best photo. forgive me if u disagree but thats what i think the competition should be based on.


not needed as long of an exposure for better results as a POS sony DSCp72
NOT TRUE AT ALL. are you joking? i dont even know where to begin to explain why thats wrong. i suggest you read up on how exposure works and how it is all related to three factors, ISO, shutterspeed, and aperture. more MP will not in any way allow you to have shorter exposures at night.

[carlover]

NO NO NO. i no. i wasnt going to blame Xar at all, just make a commentary on the competition. but then i had to comment on Xar after some things he said i disagreed on. this is not an attack on Xar.
Ok good. Just seemed like things were getting a little heated. Didn't want it to get worse then the chop comp is sometimes. ;)

[Speedracer38]

i agree it is hard to get good pics with POS cameras....i used to use a HP 3.2 MP camera and u cant even mess around with any settings. Xar i know exactly what you mean. also SPH i know where your coming from. im still learning all the features my camera has and its very interestening to learn all the stuff.

[SPHFerrari]

i dont agree its hard to get good pics from a 3.2 mp camera
form 3.2 mp camera:
http://supercarfreak.net/gallery/albums/album691/Untitled_7_copy.jpg
http://supercarfreak.net/gallery/albums/album722/Untitled_4_copy_003.jpg
http://supercarfreak.net/gallery/albums/album268/Untitled_4_copy_001.jpg
http://supercarfreak.net/gallery/albums/album667/Untitled_6_copy.jpg
maybe its just me but i find these to be pretty good pictures.
just so theres not confusoin, these obviously have nothing to do with the comp

[Mustang]

it is possible to get great pics like those with a 3.2mp camera its just that the biggest size image you can use is smaller

[carlover]

I wonder if this would get any votes if it was a regular car and not a viper.
If it was a regular car it would not get any votes simply because it would not be sticking out from the other cars in the backround. A "gem in the rough" so to speak, does make a good picture. A "granite in the rough" however, makes it look like a random jumble of cars. Just my $0.02. BTW, I don't like RoX's picture to much this week, but some people might.

[Rebirth of Xar]

NOT TRUE AT ALL. are you joking? i dont even know where to begin to explain why thats wrong. i suggest you read up on how exposure works and how it is all related to three factors, ISO, shutterspeed, and aperture. more MP will not in any way allow you to have shorter exposures at night.
When I say 8mp camera I talk about the overall camera quality and the amount of technoligal features it has... not just saying bcuz its a bigger picture its a better shot.
you cant compare a normal picture shot from a 3.2mp dscp72 with a 3.2mp shot from a sony f717 bcuz its obviously going to prove how my picture wouldve been a million times better.
________
headshops (http://headshop.net/)

[carlover]

Its just for showing pics that members have taken and then the membersc can decide which pic they like the look of.
Well, of course, with a little compition added for fun. :)

[SPHFerrari]

When I say 8mp camera I talk about the overall camera quality and the amount of technoligal features it has... not just saying bcuz its a bigger picture its a better shot.
you cant compare a normal picture shot from a 3.2mp dscp72 with a 3.2mp shot from a sony f717 bcuz its obviously going to prove how my picture wouldve been a million times better.
well, the only thing i can think of that would have helped ur photo in any way would be a higher ISO, and i dont know if your camera offers that.

[Speedracer38]

the 3.2 MP camera i used couldnt do anything with exposure and apeture...it was so old all u could do is take a pics with flash.

[carrera_gtcrazy]

Model car of a Lamborghini Gallardo
Taken: February 12,2005
Taken with: Hp 850 Photosmart.

[SPHFerrari]

oh well if that was the case yea theres nothing to do about that. the viper pic is still, imo, kinda crap. if u cant make it better just dont use that pic, thats just my opinion. w/e. lets just get back to the comp.

[Rebirth of Xar]

oh well if that was the case yea theres nothing to do about that. the viper pic is still, imo, kinda crap. if u cant make it better just dont use that pic, thats just my opinion. w/e. lets just get back to the comp.
Im sorry but maybe you should get your eyes checked... The glare in the picture is just how it looks in real life. And why wouldent i enter it if it wasnt the picture that i thought was best? seriously why would you even think of saying something like well your picture is crap and you shouldentve of used it when you are using a shot like yours? have you seen the picture that you are submiting? what does that have that mine doesnt? I have a beautiful colorful background with a beautiful car. although it may not be completely crisp (like a more expensive uptodate camera) but it still has alot to offer when compared to your car show cutoff rear of an even more expensive car than mine going back to oh so debated "crap pic with nice car = more votes" theory that you talked about before..
________
Honda HA-420 HondaJet specifications (http://www.honda-wiki.org/wiki/Honda_HA-420_HondaJet)

[SPHFerrari]

when did i talk about glare? lol. ITS BLURRY!!! mine is crisp, it has nice clean colors, shows good detail and has a nice depth of field. YOU CANT BLAME CRISPNESS IN THIS CASE ON THE CAMERA. even if you think you can, its still not a clean looking image. if you think thats the best you have go ahead and enter it. im just voicing an opinion.

[Rockefella]

Dealing with all of this, let's not critique each other's pictures. Xar never made fun of anyone, and he submitted his favorite picture, in compliance with the comp rules. Blame the people that voted for him. :)

[Rebirth of Xar]

when did i talk about glare? lol. ITS BLURRY!!! mine is crisp, it has nice clean colors, shows good detail and has a nice depth of field. YOU CANT BLAME CRISPNESS IN THIS CASE ON THE CAMERA. even if you think you can, its still not a clean looking image. if you think thats the best you have go ahead and enter it. im just voicing an opinion.
it may be crisp but you have zero background and a cut off tail light with a dark and extremely blurry background ok i guess you win this argument.. thats why yours is such a perfect shot.
________
volcano classic vaporizer (http://vaporizer.org/reviews/volcano)

[johnnynumfiv]

Rebirth your pictures are excellent do you have some from alfa romeo or aston martin of the sixties please?

I have some at a race track, not in the city if you want them.

[Titanboy_24]

Xar man, you know that if the last comp was based only on the image, I would have won by a landslide. I'm not the best photographer nor am I claiming to be, but I just question this comp when people vote for you NO MATTER WHAT. Even if it is a shit pic of a nice car, people bow down to you like you are the next Ron Kimball. Your ego is also something that needs some work, I myself have not had much respect for you because you are frankly a flamboyant showoff. Even in the end of your post "heres another controversial win" like honestly man....thats not cool. I have noticed this since the begging and have kept my mouth shut, but this shit has gone on for too long.

Anyways, back on topic....here is my pic

Lamborghini Murcielago
NIKON COOLPIX 8800
Lamborghini Toronto
February 1st 2005

High Res
http://img56.exs.cx/img56/2085/dscn93821cg.th.jpg (http://img56.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img56&image=dscn93821cg.jpg)
Entry Res

[Rebirth of Xar]

"heres another controversial win"
i never said that i said heres to another controversial win as in the jaguar pic.. ive had other wins when people have complained about the same thing thats why i said it.

I may seem flamboyant but thats because i want as much exposure as I can possibly get because i want people to see my pictures. why else would i submit pictures to websites and post up links to my pictures? I cant be liked by everyone but it certainly wont make me look at you differently or make me act differently towards you. and if you dont like me topics you certainly dont have to click on them if you dont want to.
________
mflb (http://mflbvaporizer.com)

[Titanboy_24]

That must suck to have everyone complaining every time you win...but just the fact that people are complaining, maby that should tell you something. As for exposure, I post my pics everywhere too and for the same reason. This has NOTHING AT ALL to do with that, this has to do with how you win comps regardless of the photo you submit, and brag about it none the less.

[Rebirth of Xar]

...just the fact that people are complaining, maby that should tell you something
what?
how am i the one thats doing something wrong if i take a picture, like it enough to enter it in a picture comp and win? Its not like I get voted on just by my name. People vote because they like the pics nothing else.
its not like i win every comp. like i said before i enter the pics i consider my best if i have a good picture of a MB I still submit it. It just depends on what I see out.
________
Toyota Crown Comfort picture (http://www.toyota-wiki.com/wiki/Toyota_Crown_Comfort)

[Titanboy_24]

Its not like I get voted on just by my name

I really question this sometimes...but I am just voicing the opinion of me and some other members. Good luck this week, no hard feelings.

[henk4]

Rebirth your pictures are excellent do you have some from alfa romeo or aston martin of the sixties please?

There are a vast amount of such pictures in various places on this site, go and do a search. If you have any very special request let us know.

[henk4]

I have been asleep during most of the previous discussions, but I would like to make a couple of points.

Yes you can make pretty good pictures with a 3.2 camera. If I would still be using a normal non-digital camera, I would not hesitate to scan slides or negatives. Many of the pics I have been putting on the forum were made like that and that's how the old pictures of UCP were made.

And no, my criticism (and I am sure the same goes for Wouter's) was not directed at RoX personally, as somebody else already mentioned, it is not his fault that many people liked his picture. In fact I never had any contacts with RoX so I am absolutely neutral. I have been critical about the picture itself, and implicitly then about the people who voted for it.

There is always room for discussion whether a picture is meeting artistique standards, which by their very nature are subjective, however when a picture has severe technical flaws, then it has to be artistically very good to overcome those. Here that was not the case and hence my negative comments on the pic, (and again implicitly on those who voted for it).

[sl55kleemann]

A lot of talk but no more pictures :D

[henk4]

A lot of talk but no more pictures :D

sorry, I already posted, hope you can make it to Retromobile, would give subjects for years of photo competitions. :D

[McReis]

Dealing with all of this, let's not critique each other's pictures. Xar never made fun of anyone, and he submitted his favorite picture, in compliance with the comp rules. Blame the people that voted for him. :)


That's how I feel, and that's why I never took my critics too far, because I kenw the photographers are the ones who come out complaining. But it's not their fault. UCR, for example, a posted pics for some times, just to be fun, They were horrible but, then again, noone was forced to vote for him.
He does his best, and it's nice enough allthough somtimes we knew the way to do it better. An i guess he knows to, after analising the pic at home.
I have an 1000€ 8mp camera but I don't understand nothing about photography. I'm still practising and I don't have many time left for that. So i just keep trying... I took some really goo d pics too with a P72.

[Rebirth of Xar]

im debating over whether i should buy a new high quality camera or a new cell phone.. either a $400 phone or a $500 camera.. im gonna start hunting ebay to see what i can find..
________
extreme q (http://extremevaporizer.info)

[henk4]

im debating over whether i should buy a new high quality camera or a new cell phone.. either a $400 phone or a $500 camera.. im gonna start hunting ebay to see what i can find..

There are also manuals about on :How to photograph cars. :D :D

[Wouter Melissen]

im debating over whether i should buy a new high quality camera or a new cell phone.. either a $400 phone or a $500 camera.. im gonna start hunting ebay to see what i can find..
It's not as much the quality of the camera that makes the picture, but the photographer. Both of your shots in this thread are difficult because of the poor lighting, which is something that's not going to change wether you use a $250 camera or a $2500 camera. If you take a look at rob's picture in the previous competition thread, you'll see what different settings can do; use a tripod and longer shutter times, that'll make a lot of difference in low light.

[McReis]

im debating over whether i should buy a new high quality camera or a new cell phone.. either a $400 phone or a $500 camera.. im gonna start hunting ebay to see what i can find..


With mobile phones, more complexity only makes for worst usability...
I've changed phone recently for one of these camera things. I don't like it very much. I wish I hadn't given my previous to my girlfriend. It was very small and light compared to this. And in the end, a phone will always end up worthing less than 50 dollars. Go for the camera.

[SPHFerrari]

ill state again that my arguments were more like an appeal to the voters than an attack on xar, because, of course, he cant help that people vote for him. but then i had to respond to some posts by xar and others and so thats why it looked as tho i was blaming him.


There are also manuals about on :How to photograph cars.
i just bought that book by James Mann called how to photograph cars. i also got 'understanding exposure' by bryan peterson, which i think is a must read for a new photographer.

[carlover]

i just bought that book by James Mann called how to photograph cars.
I ordered that book off Amazon but it hasn't come yet. Is it good? It better be. I spent 22$ on it.

[Rebirth of Xar]

There are also manuals about on :How to photograph cars. :D :D
yea I wanna see you walk around NYC like an idiot with a tripod waiting at lights for cars to pass by then have trouble taking the picture because the car doesnt react like you had thought it would... photographing cars in New York isnt easy. I seriously cant be bothered with a tripod.. and as to why i try these shots? Im limited to the options that I have infront of me. I must fit certain angles of the car and also incorporate enough of the background in the little time that the car is still otherwise the shot will be too blurry. As for the settings on the camera there are constant light changes in the area ranging from street to street. Sometimes the cars appear when you least expect it and dont have an opportunity to change the settings. I try to always have the best common setting that will tend to work best with the amount of light that most of the streets i will be walking on will have.
________
YSR80 (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/Yamaha_YSR80)

[SPHFerrari]

I ordered that book off Amazon but it hasn't come yet. Is it good? It better be. I spent 22$ on it.
yea i think it was worth 22 dollars. i learned a few techniques i hadnt known before.

[carrera_gtcrazy]

SPH ferrari, is the book good? I might go buy it if its worth it, since im just staring photography and really want to learn.

[SPHFerrari]

you should buy "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Peterson. great read and very helpful/informative. i suggest that over "How to Photograph Cars" but theyre both nice.

[carrera_gtcrazy]

Ok thanks, i think ill pick up both books.

[henk4]

yea I wanna see you walk around NYC like an idiot with a tripod waiting at lights for cars to pass by then have trouble taking the picture because the car doesnt react like you had thought it would... photographing cars in New York isnt easy. I seriously cant be bothered with a tripod.. and as to why i try these shots? Im limited to the options that I have infront of me. I must fit certain angles of the car and also incorporate enough of the background in the little time that the car is still otherwise the shot will be too blurry. As for the settings on the camera there are constant light changes in the area ranging from street to street. Sometimes the cars appear when you least expect it and dont have an opportunity to change the settings. I try to always have the best common setting that will tend to work best with the amount of light that most of the streets i will be walking on will have.

I never mentioned a tripod :D but as you managed to get two different pictures of the Jag, it was obviously parked there, so it could have helped if you happened to have one with you. Was it there for a foto shoot, because what strikes me is that people are hardly paying attention to the car, which probably would have been the case if it had been surrounded by photographers. Anyway few people would recognise it for what it is, because it looks so much like an Aston adn all Astons look the same these days :D

[Fumacher]

Nikon 2100 (yeah the 2 megapix...my old digi)
Autorai 2005
15 feb 2005
BAR F1 car

Well what kinda pics do u guys wanna see in here?
Whole cars?? or can it be detail shots as well??? cos i think my BAR- nose looks pretty cool :)

[Wouter Melissen]

yea I wanna see you walk around NYC like an idiot with a tripod waiting at lights for cars to pass by then have trouble taking the picture because the car doesnt react like you had thought it would... photographing cars in New York isnt easy. I seriously cant be bothered with a tripod.. and as to why i try these shots? Im limited to the options that I have infront of me. I must fit certain angles of the car and also incorporate enough of the background in the little time that the car is still otherwise the shot will be too blurry. As for the settings on the camera there are constant light changes in the area ranging from street to street. Sometimes the cars appear when you least expect it and dont have an opportunity to change the settings. I try to always have the best common setting that will tend to work best with the amount of light that most of the streets i will be walking on will have.
You want the best of both worlds, which unfortunately is not possible. It's like saying I want to go to the moon, but I don't want to fly. Our point is that if you want to make shots at low light that actually do look good, you are going to have to use a tripod or other extra tools. That Jaguar shot would have only worked out if you'd used some very big additional lights. It's simply no feasible that you can take a quality picture of every situation you encounter. Light is a funny thing.

[Rebirth of Xar]

I never mentioned a tripod :D but as you managed to get two different pictures of the Jag, it was obviously parked there, so it could have helped if you happened to have one with you. Was it there for a foto shoot, because what strikes me is that people are hardly paying attention to the car, which probably would have been the case if it had been surrounded by photographers. Anyway few people would recognise it for what it is, because it looks so much like an Aston adn all Astons look the same these days :D
the car was infact there for a fotoshoot and I just happened to arrive and start snapping pitcures before the photo crew. Once i started I was worried about getting stopped by them as I was getting some really detailed shots and they were giving me the wild eye. I had unfortunately lowered the amount of lighting on the camera feature so all the really good pictures came out on the dark side. there was even a money shot that went to waste.. When you look at the ground pictures you can still clearly see how the camera isnt that good (considering that its a 3 year old camera that has been a daily driver sort to say.. its been used almost everyday that Ive had it with well overe 20,000 pics taken on it). so when i complain about my camera its for a real good reason. going back to the ground pics.. i can guarantee that if it was with a newer camera it wouldve focused perfectly as the camera was sitting on the floor.. how much steadier can it get?


You want the best of both worlds, which unfortunately is not possible. It's like saying I want to go to the moon, but I don't want to fly. Our point is that if you want to make shots at low light that actually do look good, you are going to have to use a tripod or other extra tools. That Jaguar shot would have only worked out if you'd used some very big additional lights. It's simply no feasible that you can take a quality picture of every situation you encounter. Light is a funny thing.
not exactly.. the jaguar photographers didnt use any extra light so are you saying that its impossible? they just happened to be using top of the line cameras and the lighting on the car wasnt even that bad but the camera settings were indeed a bit off which i realized whne i got home.. and i put my camera on the ground as often as i cansee a good shot for it bcuz its supposed to ensure a focused shot (but it doesnt always do this..).
________
vaporizer affiliate program (http://vaporizeraffiliateprogram.com)

[Wouter Melissen]

not exactly.. the jaguar photographers didnt use any extra light so are you saying that its impossible? they just happened to be using top of the line cameras and the lighting on the car wasnt even that bad but the camera settings were indeed a bit off which i realized whne i got home.. and i put my camera on the ground as often as i cansee a good shot for it bcuz its supposed to ensure a focused shot (but it doesnt always do this..).

Well on your picture the contrast between the sky and the car was so big that a large part of the picture overexposed. They either shot the car at a different angle or were only interested in the silhouette of the car.

[Rebirth of Xar]

Well on your picture the contrast between the sky and the car was so big that a large part of the picture overexposed. They either shot the car at a different angle or were only interested in the silhouette of the car.
upon comparin it with the origianl pic i guess i did go overboard on the contrast.. but what ever.. thats why i keep originals..
________
juggalos (http://juggalos.org/)

[Quiggs]

Taken Feb 16, 2005, with Canon 300D.

I continue to whore out my car. :rolleyes:

[laxplayer98]

Rolls Royce Phantom
Last Month
Ft. Lauderdale
Nikon Collpix 4300

[PsychoChimp22]

ffs, sorry people, ive been such a post-idiot lately. Forgot there were another 80 posts i didnt look at... :p