Automotive Photography Competition #212

[zeppelin]

Automotive Photography Competition #212




Rules (http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/863226-post149.html)

• The deadline is Sunday 11:59 PM EST
• The photograph can contain any automotive image (containing no adulterous material)
• The proposed picture must be your own and not found on the net.
• The photograph must be attached using the UCP system. Any picture not attached using the UCP system will not be in the voting thread.
• Your image may be up to 800 pixels wide or tall.
• Photograph may contain post-processing editing
• It is preferred that you state enhancements made, but not necessary.
• The photograph must be taken no earlier than three months before start date
• Each photographer cannot vote for himself, they must vote for the others.
• Any users who enter and vote for themselves automatically receive a 2 week penalty from the competition and all votes previously given to his/her photo are removed.
• The entry must contain the following information in the same order :

User name
Subject matter/photo title
Date taken
Camera Type | additional information you feel important



Standings 2009

pat_ernzen: 4
-
G_13191: 1 / Rasmus: 1 / Sauc3: 1 / john hegg: 1 / superwaxer: 1 / cmcpokey: 1 / Soloracer: 1 / Ecnelis: 1 / basman007: 1 / kvisser: 1 / nikowgcf: 1 / macfly: 1

[basman007]

Escort BDA
basman007
4/4
Holland
Canon 40D, 70-200 F2.8 IS
200mm, 1/400, F3.5, ISO100

[kvisser]

kvisser
jag in the garage
May 2009
nikon d90, slight raw adjustments


http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g311/karmakvisser/photo%20comp/rmc09OH121japthudoorlr.jpg

[akrmalas]

next time

[Rijoh]

Rijoh
Daddy does a burnout
March 15th, 2009
Canon EOS 450D

http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=306568&stc=1&d=1242468168

[henk4]

Henk4
Canon 40D
28-300 IS
-09-05-2009

[basman007]

http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/8296/81857182.jpg (http://www.imagehosting.com/)

Your picture is too big to enter this competition. It needs to be 800 pixels max. Read the rules for more info ;)

[Niko_Fx]

Niko_Fx
C6 Z06 - HDR
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
05/15/09

http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=306587&stc=1&d=1242581708

[Timothy (in VA)]

Timothy (in VA)
Gee-Tee-Oh
May 11, 2009
Sony DSC-S500

[akrmalas]

my bad i didnt notice i'll delete it

[basman007]

Timothy (in VA)
Gee-Tee-Oh
May 11, 2009
Sony DSC-S500

that's very close to that wall! or does it only look that way?

[zeppelin]

my bad i didnt notice i'll delete it

Feel free to enter this week's competition, it's not too late. I'll be putting the voting thread up tomorrow evening, so if you post your image within the size constraints, it will be included.

[pat_ernzen]

that's very close to that wall! or does it only look that way?
That's actually the first thing I thought/noticed as well.

[Timothy (in VA)]

that's very close to that wall! or does it only look that way?

It was parked pretty close, come to think of it. At the time I didn't really notice since I was concentrating more on the car itself.

[Fumacher]

Fumacher
Lola Aston Martin
Spa-Francorchamps
10-05-2009
Nikon D90

http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachments/photography/306640d1242636544-automotive-photography-competition-212-foto0001.jpg

Too bad we didn't meet Wouter, Henk. I really enjoyed watching the races :)

[nikowgcf]

NIKOWGCF
PORSCHE 996 GT3 RS
PHILLIP ISLAND 16-5-09
CANON 400D
1/250th shutter
F10
400 ISO
418mm focal length

[nikowgcf]

Niko_Fx
C6 Z06 - HDR
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
05/15/09

http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=306587&stc=1&d=1242581708

Love your work!

[clutch-monkey]

niko is that a monaro/gto next to the corvette?

[#1 Mustang Fan]

Love your work!

How come?

[Dary]

It is nice photo, but it needs some fixing to be a great one.

[Niko_Fx]

Love your work!

Thanks :)


niko is that a monaro/gto next to the corvette?

Yep, it probably had the entire exhaust done, cause it sounded amazing :)

[nikowgcf]

How come?

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess. Just like the colour, reflections and sky. Also like previous work submitted by my namesake.
(We aren't related by the way.)

[kvisser]

It is nice photo, but it needs some fixing to be a great one.

IMHO, its a rather ordinary shot "enhanced" by hdr. I don't like the contrast and I really don't like the hood up nature of the shot. I guess HDR made the shot somewhat more interesting but still not compelling. I think hdr can be a fun tool, you just can't depend on it to take a nominal shot and make it something terribly special. Just my 2 cents.

regards

ken

[Niko_Fx]

Many photos that win are just still images of parked cars that with the right camera and post-processing come out looking pretty neat. When I asked to have HDRs banned from the photo comp (or any post processing for that matter) nobody said anything, now, every time I submit one, I hear complains.

If it is considered cheating because some people are impressed by an "enhanced yet ordinary" photo then ban HDRs already.

I don't get the chance of going to tracks and take action photos like a lot of people, so I gotta defend myself somehow. It really isn't all that hard to get a nice spot and start shooting on continuous mode either... with the right zoom, on the right ISO, shutter speed, etc. until you get a good shot out of 1000 then do some editing and done.

Unfortunately I have a wifey who hates motorsports and an HDR of a parked Z06 is all I can submit, either ban HDRs or stop hating on them because it's getting quite annoying. I don't understand why there's so much hate coming from everybody only because a member liked my photo.

[Dary]

IMHO, its a rather ordinary shot "enhanced" by hdr. I don't like the contrast and I really don't like the hood up nature of the shot. I guess HDR made the shot somewhat more interesting but still not compelling. I think hdr can be a fun tool, you just can't depend on it to take a nominal shot and make it something terribly special. Just my 2 cents.

regards

ken

Yeah it is nice, because it can be better. In another hand, some shots are just hopeless, not worth editing, enhancement, spending time on it. Thats what i meant.

IMO, HDR "tech" will lead in the near future.

[#1 Mustang Fan]

HDR was introduced so that you could use a range of photographs to get the maximum exposure range for that image, so you can expose for the highlights properly as well as exposing for the shadows properly. And to me your shot would've been just fine without some serious overworking in the HDR department.

I'm not hating on HDR, I just don't think it was necessary in those circumstances to use it (maybe if it was used correctly not to just crazily "enhance" the photo), to me it looks more like a piece of digital artwork than a piece of photography. The overall composure of the shot is not that good, though the angle isn't bad.

Thing is I might think about voting for a shot like yours if it were normal and had proper colour, bump more contrast etc, but the HDR ruined it for me and I just couldn't figure out why someone could like it.

[Cotterik]

IMO the HDR works well in niko's entry. Yes, the effect itself was introduced to correctly expose photographs that in raw format were under or over exposed but the nature of HDR itself is an effect to deliberately perform these days. I use it myself alot for effect and with niko's it is no different. His entry does work well. Because the emphasis on the contrast of the clouds and the reflection on the bodwork is what HDR brings out in a photo like this. It is afterall a combination of 3 or more levels of exposure that create the effect with tone mapping. It works well in the way that it creates the dark moody weather effect whilst bringing out the shine and colour of the car. It is deliberate and the shot in my opinion does gain from HDR.

Anyway Its been over a year since I entered and even longer since I used to lead the standings :rolleyes: but to mark the celebration of my first car I thought I'd enter this week.

Cotterik
My New Corsa SXI
Warrington, UK
Nikon D80 w/ 18mm Wide Angle + Reverse Polarizer
14/05/09

http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachments/photography/307277d1242938431-automotive-photography-competition-212-6.jpg

[nikowgcf]

Niko_Fx;885575 I don't understand why there's so much hate coming from everybody only because a member liked my photo.[/QUOTE]

Mate, I apologise to you, for causing so much drama. I'll keep my thoughts to myself in future. Still love your work.

[Niko_Fx]

Thanks Cotterik.


And to me your shot would've been just fine without some serious overworking in the HDR department.

That remains your opinion though, not Nikowgcf's :confused:


Thing is I might think about voting for a shot like yours if it were normal and had proper colour, bump more contrast etc, but the HDR ruined it for me and I just couldn't figure out why someone could like it.


You have to admit that there's been worse photos than mine in these comps... Why all the fuzz about my photo? :confused: He likes it, what's the big deal?

I'm interested to see what you can come up with, here you go:

[f6fhellcat13]

Niko_Fx I don't understand why there's so much hate coming from everybody only because a member liked my photo.

Mate, I apologise to you, for causing so much drama. I'll keep my thoughts to myself in future. Still love your work.

Please don't. I know your comment kicked up a bit of a shitstorm, but the purpose of these threads is to get better and get advice, even if you don't participate actively(me). I personally think that HDR panders to a certain taste, so some like it and some don't. I do not really like it, but it is legal and I'm in no way angered by Niko's use of it.

[Rockefella]

I'm interested to see what you can come up with, here you go:

Bored.


http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=307293&stc=1&d=1242963471

[#1 Mustang Fan]

Mate, I apologise to you, for causing so much drama. I'll keep my thoughts to myself in future. Still love your work.

No please don't, your comments are always welcome. Just remember to bring a valid point to the argument :p

Don't take this upon yourself, I caused the "shitstorm" not you.


IMO the HDR works well in niko's entry. Yes, the effect itself was introduced to correctly expose photographs that in raw format were under or over exposed but the nature of HDR itself is an effect to deliberately perform these days. I use it myself alot for effect and with niko's it is no different. His entry does work well. Because the emphasis on the contrast of the clouds and the reflection on the bodwork is what HDR brings out in a photo like this. It is afterall a combination of 3 or more levels of exposure that create the effect with tone mapping. It works well in the way that it creates the dark moody weather effect whilst bringing out the shine and colour of the car. It is deliberate and the shot in my opinion does gain from HDR.

I don't believe it does work well, see attachment. The nature of HDR is to make a photo perfectly exposed. Whereas your trying to tell people that the nature of HDR is this effect used in Niko's image? This effect your talking about is overuse of natural HDR, while I'll agree that it works in certain circumstances (with its own limits of course), it does not here.


Please don't. I know your comment kicked up a bit of a shitstorm, but the purpose of these threads is to get better and get advice, even if you don't participate actively(me). I personally think that HDR panders to a certain taste, so some like it and some don't. I do not really like it, but it is legal and I'm in no way angered by Niko's use of it.

I absolutely agree, overuse of HDR attains to a certain persons tastes but there's always a line. I also am in no way angered by the use of it, but I would only seriously consider abusing HDR if it was going to turn into a half decent photo.


You have to admit that there's been worse photos than mine in these comps... Why all the fuzz about my photo? :confused: He likes it, what's the big deal?

I'm interested to see what you can come up with, here you go:

Ok, I've had my way with it for a little bit.

http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=307294&stc=1&d=1242965775

[Sledgehammer]

Thanks niko for the unedited shot's. I got to try my first hdr, no idea if its any good though, btw, I really like your work with the sky and the reflections on the hood.

http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=307296&stc=1&d=1242968830

[henk4]

. When I asked to have HDRs banned from the photo comp (or any post processing for that matter) nobody said anything,

Did you ask me? Because I would have been greatly in favour of such a ban. (havn't there not been polls on the subject?) My discussions with Pat Ernzen need not to be repeated here, but IMHO Niko's shot is not something I would fancy, let alone submit for a competition. To my taste it is far too artificial.

[Cotterik]

See now both of your attempts to re-HDR or improve niko's photo have actually lessened the effect when compared to his own. Whereas niko's HDR looks deliberately overcast yet not underexposed, yours mustang looks accidentally underexposed and badly cropped. Sledge's isnt as bad but is greyed out on certain areas and in others over contrasted. I think mustang you're opposing the fact that HDR can be used in instances like this. To be quite honest I think if niko's photo was plainly taken it would lack the immediate impact. The weather at the scene appears to not favour a naturally well exposed photograph. But with some artificial tone mapping it turns out quite well in areas. Its not a very strong HDR. But it improves the photo from what it could originally provide.

HDR tends to favour reflections, cloudy skies and bright colours. Niko's has the makings of a good HDR scene but the exposures as I already mentioned dont provide much to work with. And yes, Henk HDR is artificial. Thats the whole point. Photomatix and tone mapping was and is there to adjust exposure of photographs that werent correctly taken but it provides a chance to give for some really unique photos. If niko's shot had more colour and detail in the sky, and was possibly zoomed out more with better reflection on the right hand side of the car you could easily come out with a HDR such as this one:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2247/2158395487_f0d5dbef7f.jpg?v=0

[Niko_Fx]

I like Sledge's the best out of the three. Rock's is too white in the back and the contrast seemed to be increased too much... Mustang's is pretty dark and is almost as if parts of the car disappeared, I don't like the cropping either.

Sledge looks good and more natural, but the artificial taste that mine has is what attracts a lot of people...

This is just my opinion of course, and seeing how everybody edits the photo differently and adjusts it accordingly to their taste, reminds me that we are all different, we all think differently, and we all have different tastes... Like Niko said, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.

[Rockefella]

I don't know how to HDR. I thought I could get around it by making three layers with the mid-exposure set at 100% (base-layer) and the other 2 overlayed with 50% opacity. It didn't work out too well so I just played with one of the shots until I thought it looked interesting I guess.

Niko I think in your original the sky was too burned out, or at least the clouds were. I liked everything else.

[#1 Mustang Fan]

See now both of your attempts to re-HDR or improve niko's photo have actually lessened the effect when compared to his own. Whereas niko's HDR looks deliberately overcast yet not underexposed, yours mustang looks accidentally underexposed and badly cropped. Sledge's isnt as bad but is greyed out on certain areas and in others over contrasted. I think mustang you're opposing the fact that HDR can be used in instances like this. To be quite honest I think if niko's photo was plainly taken it would lack the immediate impact. The weather at the scene appears to not favour a naturally well exposed photograph. But with some artificial tone mapping it turns out quite well in areas. Its not a very strong HDR. But it improves the photo from what it could originally provide.

HDR tends to favour reflections, cloudy skies and bright colours. Niko's has the makings of a good HDR scene but the exposures as I already mentioned dont provide much to work with. And yes, Henk HDR is artificial. Thats the whole point. Photomatix and tone mapping was and is there to adjust exposure of photographs that werent correctly taken but it provides a chance to give for some really unique photos. If niko's shot had more colour and detail in the sky, and was possibly zoomed out more with better reflection on the right hand side of the car you could easily come out with a HDR such as this one:

Yeah, my cropping was bad, the whole thing took less than 5minutes. Though the framing of the original isn't what would be called good. Forgot to reorganize layers, thats the only reason its under.

I'm not debating whether HDR can be used in instances like this, I'm debating that it shouldn't be abused in instances like this.. What immediate impact would it lack? The stupidly overclocked HDR "Technique"? Because that's a effect that's not wanted anyway. It doesn't need to be overdone to look good. And thats where your image comes in, its not overdone, nor does it look as if all the dials have been turned up to full power when in PS or PM. The effect has been used to its full potential rather than just plain abused.


I like Sledge's the best out of the three. Rock's is too white in the back and the contrast seemed to be increased too much... Mustang's is pretty dark and is almost as if parts of the car disappeared, I don't like the cropping either.

Sledge looks good and more natural, but the artificial taste that mine has is what attracts a lot of people...

This is just my opinion of course, and seeing how everybody edits the photo differently and adjusts it accordingly to their taste, reminds me that we are all different, we all think differently, and we all have different tastes... Like Niko said, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.

The artificial part is the what puts the image way below any other in terms of standards. The photo isn't hilariously bad but the HDR usage is laughable, there is a line where the HDR effect suddenly becomes too much.

Attached is reasonable HDR attempt.

[Niko_Fx]

Niko I think in your original the sky was too burned out, or at least the clouds were. I liked everything else.

My dad can beat your dad.




Attached is reasonable HDR attempt.

That did come out pretty good :)


The artificial part is the what puts the image way below any other in terms of standards. The photo isn't hilariously bad but the HDR usage is laughable, there is a line where the HDR effect suddenly becomes too much.

Are you serious now? I guess I should be glad that it's not "hilariously bad..." Aren't you taking this a bit too far? Remind me to criticize the living hell out of your future submissions ;)

These HDRs right here can perfectly define overdone.

http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/1159/25022009054and2moretone.jpg

[#1 Mustang Fan]

Are you serious now? I guess I should be glad that it's not "hilariously bad..." Aren't you taking this a bit too far? Remind me to criticize the living hell out of your future submissions ;)

These HDRs right here can perfectly define overdone.

Lol I was trying to get you to submit. I was kind of slightly serious, if that works :p

Don't worry I'll try to remember to tell you, I probably deserve it anyway.

mhmm, yours doesn't touch those :eek: They're kind of retro, But now yours seems halfarse, you should turn it up a notch. See how it comes out.

Edit: Someone wanna create the voting threads?

[henk4]

The more efforts I see here of people trying to use HDR, the more I am convinced that it should be banned from the photo competition. As someone said it can be used to make a bad shot interesting (or similar words). A bad shot IMHO is a bad shot, shooting photos is to use the camera options (shutterspeed, ISO, DoF, filters etc) in the framework of the composition within available light (and yes that includes a flash and the use of a tripod). But these computer animations are too far away from photography. These sort of images are "shouting" (I am tempted to use the word vulgar, but that has also another connotation) and lacking inherent quality. And yes, Niko I have noticed that people here like such images, which, again, makes me wonder why I should bother to participate. (PS can anybody tell me what HDR stands for? High Definition Rubbish:)))

[superwaxer]

I think HDR should be banned as well. HDR doesnt show off your skill as a photographer, it shows of your skills on reading HDR tutorials and applying it to your own pictures. The idea of HDR is to add dynamic range to a photograph. Im very sorry to say this, but it is rarely achieved successfully without screing it up. There is a fine line between "real" and "cartoonish" when it comes to HDR.

Maybe we can start an HDR photo comp? :p

[nikowgcf]

Please don't. I know your comment kicked up a bit of a shitstorm, but the purpose of these threads is to get better and get advice,


Thanks, F6hellcat ..I have to admit I had never heard of HDR before. So I have learnt heaps from my original 3 words "love your work". I will go down the HDR path and play around with it. I still think it is a great enhancement device I only use photoshop to downsize the photos I submit but if others want to use enhancing assists and it's legal for the comp, so be it I'm happy with that.

[johnnynumfiv]

UCP is on the left, Henk is the right.
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=307579&stc=1&d=1243265162

[LeonOfTheDead]

I thought Wouter was thinner...

[henk4]

UCP is on the left, Henk is the right.
[

where does Superwaxer fit in? He seems to be on my side, very odd of course, but there are times when I am apparently not the only one defending a certain point of view.

[LeonOfTheDead]

where does Superwaxer fit in? He seems to be on my side, very odd of course, but there are times when I am apparently not the only one defending a certain point of view.

I'm pro the no-editing campaign.
And I don't like fatty-happy-screaming-buy scouts.

[Wouter Melissen]

I thought Wouter was thinner...

Not much.

[derekthetree]

I find myself in the improbable position of really liking Niko's photo but being opposed to editing in the photo comps!

Its been discussed a lot before and we seemed to have reached a position of (dis)agreement. Every so often it does seem to kick off again (in very strange style this time!)

I appreciate the skill in balancing a photo or creating an HDR'd one, but I still think a photography competition should be about taking photos not making them.

[henk4]

I appreciate the skill in balancing a photo or creating an HDR'd one, but I still think a photography competition should be about taking photos not making them.
In short, it should be about Photographs and not images.

[pat_ernzen]

As far as the end result of a photo being "artificial", well done HDR is more accurate to what the human eye sees than what a camera would normally capture.

[pat_ernzen]

pat_ernzen
La Bala
March 1st, 2009
Canon 20D
http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=307613&stc=1&d=1243362584

[superwaxer]

As far as the end result of a photo being "artificial", well done HDR is more accurate to what the human eye sees than what a camera would normally capture.

Thats true. However, that means that everyone else who chooses not to HDR their photographs will be one step behind those who do. Thats what I enjoy most about photography, not to take pictures of beautiful things, but take beautiful pictures of beautiful things. This thread is there to help you improve your photography skills AND to portray your skills as a photographer, not your skills of creating an HDR or a photograph to show "what the human eye sees".

Nice entry by the way Pat.

[Rasmus]

[...] everyone else who chooses not to HDR their photographs will be one step behind those who do.

I don't vote for an HDR pic, just because it's HDR. 9 times out of 10 I don't even like the effect. I don't vote for a BW pic either just because it's BW. That said, I do like if the competitiveness forces me to learn new techniques and grow my skills. Competition can be healthy.

This is a good example of HDR that I think is tastefully done: On Black: 12:24 Copenhagen Central Station by Michael.DK (mostly away) [Large] (http://bighugelabs.com/flickr/onblack.php?id=2242997232&size=large)

[Niko_Fx]

Can someone make the voting thread and start comp 213?

HDRs are not appreciated on UCP, got it... can we move on?

[Kitdy]

I think we might need a new photo competition manager, zep isn't around much these days.

[f6fhellcat13]

Can someone make the voting thread and start comp 213?

HDRs are not appreciated on UCP, got it... can we move on?

Maybe not having an outright ban is for the best. Anybody who has viewed this thread will certainly be cautious about submitting an HDR photograph, but if somebody feels they have a truly-awesome HDRed photo, and are willing to withstand the scrutiny, then they still can.

[Niko_Fx]

I think we might need a new photo competition manager, zep isn't around much these days.

Pretty much anybody can do it, just follow the format from previous comps... I'm pretty busy this week or else I would have done it already... specially to drop the whole HDR subject which is getting on my nerves already.

[#1 Mustang Fan]

I'm onto the voting threads now.

[derekthetree]

In short, it should be about Photographs and not images.

Pretty much, very well put.


HDRs are not appreciated on UCP, got it... can we move on?

I'm not quite sure why HDR is being viewed so differently from other editing techniques... just call it Elevated Lively Scaling instead ;)