Weekly Photography Comp 17

[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 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

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

[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

[Quiggs]

Taken Feb 16, 2005, with Canon 300D.

I continue to whore out my car.

[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...