Automotive Photography Competition #199 [Voting]

[zeppelin]

Vote for whose photo you think is best

John Thawley
Rolling Thunder
Sebring Int'l Raceway - Sebring, FL
January 27, 2009
LG Motorsports GT2 Corvette
Hand held rolling car-to-car shot
Canon EOS 40d
Sigma 12-24mm
ISO 100
Aperture f/7.1
Shutter 1/40 sec.
Focal length 13mm
Processed in Aperture for color, contrast and sharpness. Uncropped.

Aiasib
'keeps the engine from jumping through the hood'
12.21.2008
Canon Powershot s5is| clarify



shockwaveracing
"One Bad-Ass RX-7"
Canon EOS 5D + Sigma EX DG APO 70-200
30.01.2009
Crop + RAW Edit



John Hegg
Driving (Snow)
Downtown Chicago
January 14, 2009 7am
Camera FinePix S5000
Tv 1/60
Av 3.2
Exposure Comp.+1
ISO 400
Post PSE Straightened, cropped, levels, curves, sharpened

Timothy (in VA)
Ice Star
January 28, 2009
Sony DSC-S500



Niko_Fx
02/09/2009
350Z
Canon 450D (HDR)
Boynton Beach, Florida.

Good luck to everyone this week!

[Soloracer]

Thawley, stop winning

[Niko_Fx]

Well thanks for the vote Badda I knew I had no chance against Thawley, but considering that 14 votes (so far) are not for him, I'm rather surprised to get only one... Maybe I'm not that good yet.

[Kitdy]

Well thanks for the vote Badda I knew I had no chance against Thawley, but considering that 14 votes (so far) are not for him, I'm rather surprised to get only one... Maybe I'm not that good yet.

I think it's a great shot.

[cmcpokey]

Well thanks for the vote Badda I knew I had no chance against Thawley, but considering that 14 votes (so far) are not for him, I'm rather surprised to get only one... Maybe I'm not that good yet.

hdr hurts my brain

[zeppelin]

Which is funny, because well done HDR often displays a scene more representative of what the eye sees. With Niko's, while I had an idea in my head, I didn't realize it as an HDR until I read it. Very tastefully edited, and well done.

[cmcpokey]

i agree it is a well done hdr... but its not a style that i care for. i thought it was interesting the first few times i saw it, but then it started looking too distorted. i like things to be simple, from car design to art to food. play on the strengths of the subject without excess adornment. the hdr is just too much going on, not simple at all.

[John Thawley]

I think it's a great shot.

And if you take away the HDR?

[IBrake4Rainbows]

I think it's a decent composition of a detail of his new vehicle. So yeah, not a terrible shot.

Somehow I didn't like the tone of that comment.

[John Thawley]

I think it's a decent composition of a detail of his new vehicle. So yeah, not a terrible shot.

Somehow I didn't like the tone of that comment.

Wasn't implying it was a "terrible" shot. But I'd disagree with your assessment of it being a detail shot.

If you were intent on featuring the detail, I assume in this case it's the taillight, I think you'd position the car so it would flow back into the frame and have the taillight become part of something in reference. Here, the car is simply chopped off. The antenna is awkward. The wiper is awkward. The badge could be showing to identify the car. These are things that would be critical if you were going to put the "detail" into some sort of context.

Lastly, I don't see an advantage to the horizon being on a slant or having half a frame of parking lot.

But, hey... that's just me. My comment was only to imply that (like a spicy dish or a sweet desert) the first attraction to this image is the unusual look presented by the HDR treatment.

I don't think there was any "tone" to my comment. Glib, perhaps... but if we can't call it the way we see it... and if we can't handle a little criticism, we shouldn't post work seeking the praise or approval of others.

Just an opinion...

JT

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Wasn't implying it was a "terrible" shot. But I'd disagree with your assessment of it being a detail shot.

If you were intent on featuring the detail, I assume in this case it's the taillight, I think you'd position the car so it would flow back into the frame and have the taillight become part of something in reference. Here, the car is simply chopped off. The antenna is awkward. The wiper is awkward. The badge could be showing to identify the car. These are things that would be critical if you were going to put the "detail" into some sort of context.

While I agree there may have been a better angle at which to pose the car, I think the angle which has been captured is not one you often see on this vehicle - that is the little details inside the tail light.

I personally would have moved perhaps another 20-30 degrees around the vehicle to capture the shot.

I agree the Antenna is awkward. But as for the badge - the tailight is fairly recognisable without the need for a blatant slap.

Lastly, I don't see an advantage to the horizon being on a slant or having half a frame of parking lot.

I'm guessing that was as much to do with showing off some HDR

But, hey... that's just me. My comment was only to imply that (like a spicy dish or a sweet desert) the first attraction to this image is the unusual look presented by the HDR treatment.

I don't think there was any "tone" to my comment. Glib, perhaps... but if we can't call it the way we see it... and if we can't handle a little criticism, we shouldn't post work seeking the praise or approval of others.

Just an opinion...

JT

I also agree Criticism is healthy but it must also be balanced with the aspects of the shot that have worked, rather than to condescend.

The colouring and unusual reflective nature of the HDR shot was also what attracted me to the shot. I also like it because it's an unexpected angle - and thats the beauty of photography in my mind, you can be somewhat abstract in what you see

[John Thawley]

While I agree there may have been a better angle at which to pose the car, I think the angle which has been captured is not one you often see on this vehicle - that is the little details inside the tail light.

I personally would have moved perhaps another 20-30 degrees around the vehicle to capture the shot.

I agree the Antenna is awkward. But as for the badge - the tailight is fairly recognisable without the need for a blatant slap.



I'm guessing that was as much to do with showing off some HDR



I also agree Criticism is healthy but it must also be balanced with the aspects of the shot that have worked, rather than to condescend.

The colouring and unusual reflective nature of the HDR shot was also what attracted me to the shot. I also like it because it's an unexpected angle - and thats the beauty of photography in my mind, you can be somewhat abstract in what you see

Understood. Just to be clear, though... my original comment was not directed toward the photo or critiquing the photo. I was merely responding to the KITDY's post "I think it's a great shot." Great is word I use selectively.

JT

[LeonOfTheDead]

ok, it's quite obvious that JT has the best shot here. no doubt about that.

still, I voted for Niko.
why? simply, because I like the shot. JT's is technically perfect I guess, afaik, but I never liked that kind of shot, just a personal opinion.
I think Niko's composition is good, even if the antenna ruins a lot the view, and the car is a little too centered, I would have liked a bit more landscape.
What I appreciate, even not being a fan of HDR, is that he took the camera, took the car, and went out for taking some pics of it, and not the kind of pics you can find on ebay cars.
He went under the point of this comps for the folks that aren't even hoping to have half the skills of JT, or Zeppelin, or Pat Ernzen and so on. We just take shots of what we see and like, trying to do our best.
He is not the only one who did it, just in this case is the one who did it that I preferred. I like even John Hegg's one, but it's a little too black and white, the snow hiding too much of the subject.
problem is, JT and the other can, obviously, run for the best shot period, while the others usually, as I did in the past, can only try to post good looking subjects, and interesting views which, in most of the cases, could have been captured in a better way with more skills and perhaps even a better equipments.

I don't want to say there should be two categories, for the pros and the amateurs, but that the criteria I use in judging the pics, apart from being completely different from that of say JT just because we have a different knowledge on the math, is also different if I'm looking at JT's shot or say Niko's shot.
I really appreciate the presence of both categories here, but sometimes it's alsmot impossible to compare their shots between each others.

[Rockefella]

ok, it's quite obvious that JT has the best shot here. no doubt about that.

still, I voted for Niko.
why? simply, because I like the shot. JT's is technically perfect I guess, afaik, but I never liked that kind of shot, just a personal opinion.
I think Niko's composition is good, even if the antenna ruins a lot the view, and the car is a little too centered, I would have liked a bit more landscape.
What I appreciate, even not being a fan of HDR, is that he took the camera, took the car, and went out for taking some pics of it, and not the kind of pics you can find on ebay cars.
He went under the point of this comps for the folks that aren't even hoping to have half the skills of JT, or Zeppelin, or Pat Ernzen and so on. We just take shots of what we see and like, trying to do our best.
He is not the only one who did it, just in this case is the one who did it that I preferred. I like even John Hegg's one, but it's a little too black and white, the snow hiding too much of the subject.
problem is, JT and the other can, obviously, run for the best shot period, while the others usually, as I did in the past, can only try to post good looking subjects, and interesting views which, in most of the cases, could have been captured in a better way with more skills and perhaps even a better equipments.

I don't want to say there should be two categories, for the pros and the amateurs, but that the criteria I use in judging the pics, apart from being completely different from that of say JT just because we have a different knowledge on the math, is also different if I'm looking at JT's shot or say Niko's shot.
I really appreciate the presence of both categories here, but sometimes it's alsmot impossible to compare their shots between each others.

This. I voted for JT but if I see a shot I like by a lesser-skilled photographer who I feel put his heart into a shot and posted in the comp hoping for a chance at winning, I'll throw them a vote here and there. While that shot in question may not be of the best technical merit, I'll skew my own personal voting criteria to encompass that.

Sure, it sounds like bullshit because the sanctity of 'competition' is thrown out the window by something that would seem like sympathy voting or popularity contesting, but again, I'm no professional. Plus the heavy hitters in this competition, and there have been quite a few over the 3 or 4 year span we've had these competitions, can afford to have their ego put in check by losing here and there and chalking one up to an underdog.

I guess to use an example for all of this to be put in the context I want to deliver: when I use to bowl in a league as a young'n with a few friends on a team, you would end up playing teams that were either much better or much worse than you. In order to make things competitive and worthwhile, a handicap would be set according to the collective players' averages and skill levels. Say, if my team had an average of 177.5 and we played a team of kids with an average of 133.9, you would probably see them entering that match with a handicap of about 30 per playerr. With that point difference set, our team would lose out for a poor performance and the opposing team could win if they played above expectations. Or vice-versa. I find that similar to this. If one of the 'better' photographers here posted a brilliant general/automotive shot, I would by all means respect that by giving that competitor a vote. Conversely, if an amateur photographer made a great shot which may not be the BEST overall but is at least in the running for one of the best, I see no crime in giving that person a vote.

Photography is very subjective. If there would be a system to follow in judging every photograph, we could dump all types of voters in the garbage and institute a machine to carry out the process. If it comes down to difference in opinion, we should leave it at that. Providing insight and constructive criticism is fine by me and I would encourage it, but I'd hate to see these threads turn into nasty debates on the issue.

[John Thawley]

This. I voted for JT but if I see a shot I like by a lesser-skilled photographer who I feel put his heart into a shot and posted in the comp hoping for a chance at winning, I'll throw them a vote here and there. While that shot in question may not be of the best technical merit, I'll skew my own personal voting criteria to encompass that.

Sure, it sounds like bullshit because the sanctity of 'competition' is thrown out the window by something that would seem like sympathy voting or popularity contesting, but again, I'm no professional. Plus the heavy hitters in this competition, and there have been quite a few over the 3 or 4 year span we've had these competitions, can afford to have their ego put in check by losing here and there and chalking one up to an underdog.

I guess to use an example for all of this to be put in the context I want to deliver: when I use to bowl in a league as a young'n with a few friends on a team, you would end up playing teams that were either much better or much worse than you. In order to make things competitive and worthwhile, a handicap would be set according to the collective players' averages and skill levels. Say, if my team had an average of 177.5 and we played a team of kids with an average of 133.9, you would probably see them entering that match with a handicap of about 30 per playerr. With that point difference set, our team would lose out for a poor performance and the opposing team could win if they played above expectations. Or vice-versa. I find that similar to this. If one of the 'better' photographers here posted a brilliant general/automotive shot, I would by all means respect that by giving that competitor a vote. Conversely, if an amateur photographer made a great shot which may not be the BEST overall but is at least in the running for one of the best, I see no crime in giving that person a vote.

Photography is very subjective. If there would be a system to follow in judging every photograph, we could dump all types of voters in the garbage and institute a machine to carry out the process. If it comes down to difference in opinion, we should leave it at that. Providing insight and constructive criticism is fine by me and I would encourage it, but I'd hate to see these threads turn into nasty debates on the issue.

So, what this means is everyone should adopt their own formula for voting using some sort of handicap system?

If that's the case, why should anyone post? Measurement is measurement. It's kind of like the people who set their watch fast so they're not late. They never truly know what time it is... start fudging in their "adjusted time" and ultimately, they're late. It doesn't work except in the STANDARDIZED system of Daylight Savings Time.

That said, regardless of ego bruising... winning or losing, someone in my position has plenty to lose. After all, if I'm being categorized as some sort of benchmark (and that's ok), then others have the bragging rights of beating me. I only have the distinction of being beat by (your words) an amateur. So, when I win, the attitude is, "so what, he's a pro." However if someone else wins, "hey... he beat a pro." And... I HAVE (or had) NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. Except, now you tell me that some are not voting consistently or FOR THE BEST PHOTO as mentioned at the top of the voting page. So what's the point?

My reason for participating has been to raise the bar by sharing knowledge, freely giving of my time and freely giving advice. After all, there's no prize money here.

So, if I'm perceived as a bully or for some reason I'm out of place participating here, perhaps I'll forgo entering in the future. I mean, really.... it's one thing to take the professional risk of being upstaged by some one that may or may not be of lesser talent, but to know that people are tossing around charity votes now puts a completely different light on the situation. It seems to me, I can only "lose." FWIW.

This is maybe becoming not fun.

JT