Dynamic Image

[te51cle]

Thought I'd try to create a more dynamic image out of the original stationary one:



but does the wheel slap bang in the middle of the image bother anyone ? (or the fact that I've clipped the end of the nose off !)

[pmanson]

Love it!

How did you do it?

[simpo two]

Looks fine to me.

pmanson said:

How did you do it?

Gaussian blur for b/g and Radial blur for wheel, I suspect.

[te51cle]

pmanson said:

How did you do it?

Simpo's on the right lines- lots of layers and different blur tools !

Layers: Wheel, body, house, tree, sky, foreground, nose
(don't forget to cut out a section of the wheel so that the brake caliper shows through without blurring)
Radial blur: Wheel
(bit of a pig to get the centre of the blur in the centre of the wheel)
Motion Blur: Foreground, house, tree, sky - all at slightly different angles and distances
Filter->Stylise->Wind, then Gaussian blur to soften it: Nose
Then a blue graduate layer in overlay blending mode placed above the sky, house and tree layers but below the body layer to beef up the sky. Plus a dark orange solid colour fill layer in soft light blending mode to warm the image up a bit.
A little more tarting up here and there and its done.

We've got a competition coming up on Friday so the full size version is going in that.

[simpo two]

You know, it might have been quicker to borrow an f1.8 lens and hang out of another car on the move for the shot...

[theboyfold]

I really like it, but you might want to add a little blur to the reflection in the front of the nose as well, I'm guessing that should look a little blurred too

[te51cle]

theboyfold said:

I really like it, but you might want to add a little blur to the reflection in the front of the nose as well, I'm guessing that should look a little blurred too

I did, but that proved to be the trickiest part to make look right and I agree it isn't really there yet. The trouble I had was that it ended up just looking soft aand out of focus in comparison with the rest of the car. Might have another bash tonight.

[cirks]

te51cle said:

We've got a competition coming up on Friday

Photography or Photoshop competition ?

It's an impressive mod to an otherwise not very interesting shot. As a matter of interest, did you set out to take the shot to modify or was it just an attempt to make a better image from something you took?

[te51cle]

Here's the final version, hopefully the blur on the nose is more convincing now. I've also put the (natural) starburst back in on the tyre.



Its supposedly a photographic competition but seeing as virtually everyone is using digital manipulation of some sort or another then maybe it is a Photoshop comp ? The original shot was taken as I'd been asked to take a few snaps of the cars at a monthly meet and the owner of this C4 had just fitted some new wheels. I thought the shot had some potential and I've been wanting to have a proper go at simulating movement in a stationary object for a while so this seemed like a good opportunity to have a bash. Photographic judges don't seem to read enthusiast car magazines so the standard expected should be a bit lower, I hope !

[simpo two]

te51cle said:

Its supposedly a photographic competition but seeing as virtually everyone is using digital manipulation of some sort or another then maybe it is a Photoshop comp ?

Interesting point. The film photographers of old would pull as many stunts as possible to improve the captured image, eg dodging, burning, sepia toning - so we are simply doing the same, but with far greater power.

For me it's 'What makes a good image?' If a PhotoShopped image looks great, that's fine. However, IMHO the best approach is subtlety. Going back to the Cokin creative filters, which I played with in the '80s, if you looked at the shot and thought 'Aha, Star 4 and Grad Tobacco' then it failed the test. It was fun at the time but I was basking in the effects and not the image underneath. Similarly, I could look at the car shot above and think 'Aha, Radial Blur'. Sorry!

te51cle said:

Photographic judges don't seem to read enthusiast car magazines so the standard expected should be a bit lower, I hope !

An image is an image, regardless of whether it has a car, horse, dog or house in it. I can assess a photo of a rusty camper van even though I wouldn't want one. But maybe what you're saying is that a car nut will overlook shortcomings in the image because they say 'Wow, 1963 Morris Oxford!' etc... and don't notice or care that it's not in focus? And besides, does it matter as long as the person who made the image enjoys it?

[cirks]

Hope my tongue in cheek comment wasn't taken the wrong way. I'm very impressed by what some of you guys can do to an image with Photoshop however, even with the 'tricks' of old (of which I used to do some whist processing my own B&W) I, like Simpo, prefer a good image which perhaps has just been 'improved' rather than drastically altered. There's an image in Digital Photo this month which is an incredibly clever picture combining two completely distinct shots. The result is, what I would clasify as an 'artistic' image rather than a photo per se. I can appreciate both but still am perhaps a bit narrow in my definition of photography.

[te51cle]

On the full resolution version I can still see some small problems that I can't be bothered to fix, it'll be interesting to see if they get picked up on Friday. Next time round I'll improve on the technique. One of the reasons for me trying this out is that there are some precious old cars - with highly strung drivers - that don't want to drive them more than absolutely essential. The idea of someone leaning out of the side of the car or putting a suction clamp on their paintwork would be enough for them to have kittens ! We get plenty of images of these old cars stationary at shows and I'd like to put some life back into them because I think that all cars are meant to be driven rather than looked at.

Some time ago in Amateur Photographer they ran a series showing exactly how the professional printers worked magic on the comparatively dull images taken by the well-known pro photographers. It made me realise how much more work went into the creating of an image after the shutter had snapped, and got me interested in complex manipulations. Its very absorbing stuff !