Tasty carpics

[dinkel]

[pic]http://www.paulharmer.com/Resources/octanefrasernash.jpeg[/pic]

http://www.paulharmer.com/morecars.html

From the Octane guy . . .

[V6GTO]

Very tasty indeed!

[anonymous-user]

Fabulous pics. Almost as good as some of the guys on here

How on earth do you get the car so sharp with so much blur in the background like this one?

[dinkel]

He does the trick in Octane's Magazine every time . . .

[Bee_Jay]

LexSport said:

Fabulous pics. Almost as good as some of the guys on here How on earth do you get the car so sharp with so much blur in the background like this one?

Photoshop.

[_dobbo_]

Yep I reckon there's some trickery involved. If you take this one for example:



I reckon either a rig has been photoshopped out or otherwise the background has been blurred - otherwise I can't understand how you could do this?

[joust]

If I told you it was done at ~2mph, would it help you to work out how they do that?

J

[_dobbo_]

joust said:

If I told you it was done at ~2mph, would it help you to work out how they do that? J

Not really, because how can they get a rig to track at exactly the same speed and rotation as the car so that the car is sharp but the rest is in motion - unless the rig is attached to the car?

I could understand if the car was travelling in a straight line but it's not, it's turning.

Would love to hear an explanation!

[chris.mapey]

_dobbo_ said:

Yep I reckon there's some trickery involved. If you take this one for example: I reckon either a rig has been photoshopped out or otherwise the background has been blurred - otherwise I can't understand how you could do this?

I reckon that's a bit of the old "flash & blur" - no trickery.

Use a long exposure, then fire the flashgun manually to show the subject in the clear so to speak.

I'll wager that was taken using a tripod & pan head with the car driving in a slow circle around it (Or the camera attached to the bonnet of a car following...having had anothe look at the image!)

- well that's what I think...

Chris

[dinkel]

That'll work on a track too

[Gruffy]

chris.mapey said:

_dobbo_ said: I reckon either a rig has been photoshopped out or otherwise the background has been blurred - otherwise I can't understand how you could do this? (Or the camera attached to the bonnet of a car following...having had anothe look at the image!) Chris

Yep, I'd suggest that it was shot from a chase car. You'd have to be synchronised bloody well to get it that crisp... but then we don't know how many shots ended up in the bin to get that one

Gruffy

[_dobbo_]

but shouldn't the rear lights have short trails if it's a genuine shot?

[HankScorpio]

If it's not pure PS, the camera is attached to something, be it a rig or chase car, the radius of the movement that can be seen in the floor wouldn't be from a static point.

[kikiturbo]

I think mini was shot from a rig tat was photoshopped later...

speaking of slow shutter car photography.. some of mine..

15 sec, from a rig


another one




1 sec from a rig


1/15 or 1/30 I can't remember, from hand, tracking shot.. you just have to shoot and hope for the best.. (which ain't easy if you are working with a manually wound 6x7 camera..







>> Edited by kikiturbo on Thursday 26th May 21:07

[beano500]

kikiturbo - just love your images!

[kikiturbo]

thanks!

must confess, I do it for a living...
:-)

cheers

vlado

[joust]

_dobbo_ said:

Not really, because how can they get a rig to track at exactly the same speed and rotation as the car so that the car is sharp but the rest is in motion - unless the rig is attached to the car? I could understand if the car was travelling in a straight line but it's not, it's turning. Would love to hear an explanation!

I've seen a similar photo done for another car. Unfortunatly photographers are very passionate about not letting how things are done out into the open.

However, all I will add is that

a) There isn't anything attached to the car (well, there wasn't on the similar one I saw).
b) The front wheels are set where they are for a reason (think about how you would actually drive that position)
c) A 1/25th, 1/10th or 1/5th tracking shot isn't that much harder than a 1/80th if you have a suitable mount for the camera - but clearly the "blur" you get from that is excessive.
d) You can see many examples in Autocar this week. If you look closely at the DB9 Volante shot it shows some more clues.

J

[joust]

kikiturbo said:

1/15 or 1/30 I can't remember, from hand, tracking shot.. you just have to shoot and hope for the best.. (which ain't easy if you are working with a manually wound 6x7 camera..

50 of those, with a predictable "path" for the car, and I'm sure you'd get that car just as sharp as the mini.

No?

J

[Phil S]

_dobbo_ said:

If I were doing that I would set up a rig on a chase car or even try it from the passenger window sill of a car on the inside at low speed.

I think there is some additional Photoshopping going on in that picture as the background is less blurred through the windows and I would expect some sort of trail from the rear lights as well.

[joust]

[quote=Phil S]
If I were doing that I would set up a rig on a chase car or even try it from the passenger window sill of a car on the inside at low speed.[quote]That's close to how it was done on the one I saw, although there wasn't another car involved, just a monopod....

J