Critique my car photography (non Porsche material)

[AFC-911]

Ok, I'd like to know where I can improve not only on shooting. But any thoughts would be appreciated, most especially on post-processing. I just cropped these and that's it.

I know these could probably be better with a little more editing, but I don't know which way to go.















Here's the rest of my Flickr.

Flickr: lucidlydreaming's Photostream

[m21sniper]

Most of them are quite nice, but the 1st picture is just not compositionally interesting. It has too much void space.

The 2nd pic is brilliant.

[javadog]

Find better backgrounds. In each photo, there is something distracting behind the car. Look for angles to get rid of these things. For example, in the two shots of the car driving down the road, choosing to take the photos at slightly different times would have perhaps eliminated the pole that appears to be growing out of the trunk in the first one, or eliminating the other vehicles in the second one. Changing postion, changing focal length and waiting for just the right opportunity to click the shutter can make a difference. You could also use a much slower shutter speed to blur the background, which is nice in a moving shot. Reduce the ASA setting if you need to, to allow a slower shutter speed and a wide aperature (to minimize the prominence of the background.)

In the static shots, the stripes on the ground are distracting, as are the reflections they cause. You'd have to have moved the cars to fix this. Consider using fill flash when shooting and reducing the brightness in the editing phase.

Have fun,
JR

[pwd72s]

Originally Posted by javadog

Find better backgrounds. In each photo, there is something distracting behind the car. Look for angles to get rid of these things. For example, in the two shots of the car driving down the road, choosing to take the photos at slightly different times would have perhaps eliminated the pole that appears to be growing out of the trunk in the first one, or eliminating the other vehicles in the second one. Changing postion, changing focal length and waiting for just the right opportunity to click the shutter can make a difference. You could also use a much slower shutter speed to blur the background, which is nice in a moving shot. Reduce the ASA setting if you need to, to allow a slower shutter speed and a wide aperature (to minimize the prominence of the background.)

In the static shots, the stripes on the ground are distracting, as are the reflections they cause. You'd have to have moved the cars to fix this. Consider using fill flash when shooting and reducing the brightness in the editing phase.

Have fun,
JR

+1 Poles and signs "growing" out of cars are distracting. So are scantily clad babes, but nobody seems to mind that.

Here's one of my favorite pics of my old car, taken by Scott Kinder. BUT...the trash can in the background detracts..

[AFC-911]

Originally Posted by javadog

Find better backgrounds. In each photo, there is something distracting behind the car. Look for angles to get rid of these things.

In the static shots, the stripes on the ground are distracting, as are the reflections they cause. You'd have to have moved the cars to fix this. Consider using fill flash when shooting and reducing the brightness in the editing phase.

For the moving shots, keep in mind that I was driving, so I shot those blind. I'll take your advice for the next time I have a dedicated driver.

Agreed on the ISO. I lent out my camera beforehand with the ISO at 200 & got it back at 320...Stupid me for not checking.

For the static shots, short of moving the cars or digitally removing stuff, is there anything else to improve on? I couldn't move the cars (didn't know the owners).

I also want a CPL to enhance the colors. Any advice on post-processing?

[masraum]

For the first photo, I actually like the composition except for the pole and the sign. With the motion blur and the space in front of the car, it looks like the car is getting ready to streak out of the frame.
The first photo could use some color adjustment, maybe just saturation or possibly a little white balance to bring out the green and yellow.

I've read several times that the best lighting for photographing cars is actually a bright overcast day. So you don't have the sharp point source of light from the sun. Granted, that's not always something that you can arrange when the cars are around.

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by AFC-911

For the moving shots, keep in mind that I was driving, so I shot those blind. I'll take your advice for the next time I have a dedicated driver.

Agreed on the ISO. I lent out my camera beforehand with the ISO at 200 & got it back at 320...Stupid me for not checking.

For the static shots, short of moving the cars or digitally removing stuff, is there anything else to improve on? I couldn't move the cars (didn't know the owners).

I also want a CPL to enhance the colors. Any advice on post-processing?

What point are you trying to make with the photos?

Of all of them, I think the first one is ok except for the pole as mentioned. The rest...I'm not feeling it. As above the background clutter (McDonalds? Handicapped signs?!?) makes me not want to linger.

I wouldn't worry about PP at this point. Get the composition right, then worry about the look. No functional difference between iso 200 and 320 so don't blame that. imho you should work on framing and composition, and if you're going to worry about any setting it would be aperture to try and control DOF and subject isolation.

Shooting cars sitting in a lot is difficult but can be done. You have to be creative and use your feet. You have to see the whole shot, and I much prefer to get more abstract or tight to avoid background distractions. That is unless the background provides some interesting counterpoint or context for the shot.

These are some impromptu snaps I took when a car show materialized in the parking lot of the hotel where I was staying. This is more on the abstract side of things, but I think what at least *I* was seeing gets across to the viewer. I do have ones of whole cars and multiple cars, but I wasn't as drawn to those finished products.

Most of these have no post processing.

[AFC-911]

Nostatic,

Beautiful captures.

I wasn't trying to make an artistic point, just capturing photos at a car meet. And no, I wasn't trying to go abstract, so the owners (and other members of the club) can identify their cars.

[Pazuzu]

Originally Posted by nostatic

As above the background clutter (McDonalds? Handicapped signs?!?) makes me not want to linger.

I agree, and that involves learning DOF and how to exploit it. I don't mind background clutter in car pictures (I mean, cars are found on streets and parking lots, native environs are fine), but you don't want those signs and such to be so apparent that the eye naturally spends time trying to read them. If they were there, but out of focus from DOF, they'd be fine.

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by AFC-911

Nostatic,

Beautiful captures.

I wasn't trying to make an artistic point, just capturing photos at a car meet. And no, I wasn't trying to go abstract, so the owners (and other members of the club) can identify their cars.

Thanks, and understood. In that case I would try to shoot wide open and isolate the subject. Go with Aperture priority and go as low as you can go (this is why gawd invented the 50/1.4). Move around to get some different angles and if you can get a narrow DOF the background clutter might turn into nice bokeh.

I'm not a fan of heavy post processing, especially using gaussian blue to fake bokeh, "art filters" and other tricks, but ymmv. And in general, your best light is going to be early AM or late PM (golden hour). Don't be afraid to experiment, especially with angles and lenses. After a couple thousand shots you'll likely start to find things that work for you.

If you're shooting to sell, then you have to please the customer. In that case, I'd still try the above, but you'll also have to get some "classic" shots, and do your best to control the background. Framing and composition are always king in my book - pp can't save that. The good thing is that with a decent camera you likely have enough pixels to crop so there are some things you can fix in post. But your feet and hands are the best "pre processors" around.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by nostatic

What point are you trying to make with the photos?

Of all of them, I think the first one is ok except for the pole as mentioned.

I totally disagree. The first picture is just not compositionally interesting. The Eye clings to the car in one corner, with nothing to cause it to take in the rest of the photo.

I like the 2nd one the best, by far.

[Talewinds]

Agreed, what the others said.
What stands out to me, that has been mentioned, is that depth of field. In those parking lot pics it goes back almost to infinity, seemingly. Makes me wonder if you're shooting w/ a point-and-shoot digicam? What are you shooting with?
You get nice puffy clouds in Florida, it'd be nice to polarize that sky...
Also, the only other problem I see is that you're taking pictures of Miatas...

[nostatic]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

I totally disagree. The first picture is just not compositionally interesting. The Eye clings to the car in one corner, with nothing to cause it to take in the rest of the photo.

I like the 2nd one the best, by far.

Well, everyone has an opinion, but let me elaborate on why I think the first is best of the bunch and the elements that are in play (and those that distract).

The shot tilts down. That causes us to naturally follow right. With the main subject left, this composition actually is pretty good at leading us to read the image left to right.

The motion blur of the guardrail and its alignment with the car bumper enhances this left to right motion, and also gives the impression of speed (good for a sports car). The blurred sign to the right reinforces that.

This is where the lightpost causes problems. It is not sufficiently motion blurred, and detracts from the image of speed and the eye translation.

The other thing that the image is lacking is color - it is mostly grays with some green (much of that buried in shadow). I would either look at pumping up saturation (though I generally avoid that) or I'd go B&W (my preference) and increase contrast and definition a bit.

[scottmandue]

Where are the nasty bikini clad hoes wearing too much makeup and high heels sticking their butt out while hanging on the car?

Pfft... and you call yourself an artist!!!!

[Pazuzu]

Originally Posted by nostatic

The motion blur of the guardrail and its alignment with the car bumper enhances this left to right motion, and also gives the impression of speed (good for a sports car). The blurred sign to the right reinforces that.

That alignment was what I saw immediately. It was like the car had a laser pointing out it's path, or was a slot car. It took the car itself, which is huddled over on the left side, and stretched it's influence across the entire field of view.

I would either look at pumping up saturation (though I generally avoid that) or I'd go B&W (my preference) and increase contrast and definition a bit.

Enhancing the greens and blues, while suppressing any color left in the grays and silvers would make an interesting, high contrast art shot.

[nostatic]

two variations - I didn't photoshop out the pole, but that would be a viable next step imho





I'm not really feeling the B&W conversion - the top gets lost in the shadows. I think a selective saturation (I just did the whole spectrum) is probably the way to go. I like the yellow line getting enhanced.

[madmmac]

Leading lines, motion blur, color or not all add to auto shots. A polarizing filter really helps to knock down window reflections.

Here you go Paul....30 second fix. More time and it would be hard to tell. Also took out those yeller lines.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by nostatic

Well, everyone has an opinion, but let me elaborate on why I think the first is best of the bunch and the elements that are in play (and those that distract).

The shot tilts down. That causes us to naturally follow right. With the main subject left, this composition actually is pretty good at leading us to read the image left to right.

The motion blur of the guardrail and its alignment with the car bumper enhances this left to right motion, and also gives the impression of speed (good for a sports car). The blurred sign to the right reinforces that.

This is where the lightpost causes problems. It is not sufficiently motion blurred, and detracts from the image of speed and the eye translation.

The other thing that the image is lacking is color - it is mostly grays with some green (much of that buried in shadow). I would either look at pumping up saturation (though I generally avoid that) or I'd go B&W (my preference) and increase contrast and definition a bit.

I agree with the light post, but my eye sticks firmly on the car.

Your pictures, in contrast, are extremely interesting in a compositional sense, and almost subconsciously force the eye to take in every square inch of your photos.

Great job by you.

[AFC-911]

Originally Posted by Talewinds

. Makes me wonder if you're shooting w/ a point-and-shoot digicam? What are you shooting with?
You get nice puffy clouds in Florida, it'd be nice to polarize that sky...
Also, the only other problem I see is that you're taking pictures of Miatas...

I was shooting with a Nikon D70. That was the 2nd day I used it.

I'm used to professional TV cameras. DOF & rack focusing is so easy on those cams. I'm just now transitioning into DSLR still photography.

Nostatic,

I like what you did there with the colors. Was that just more saturation of colors?

PS - sorry for the lack of bikini-clad girls. Next time, I'll just take pictures at a car wash event.

[nostatic]

It's a little contrast increase and some extra saturation along with "definition" (this done in Aperture). I'm not a pp whiz by any means...I fake my way through it. I generally just do some minor tweaks to things. At some point I'll dig into pp more, especially playing with curves, but there are only so many hours in the day...