Porsche 911 vs Focus RS photoshoot. C+C please...

[Synchromesh]

Would love to have your views on the shoot I did this weekend...

1.

911 vs RS tracking shot by jlewisbarned, on Flickr

2.

IMG_6385 by jlewisbarned, on Flickr

3.

911 panning by jlewisbarned, on Flickr

4.

IMG_2876 by jlewisbarned, on Flickr

5.

IMG_2901 by jlewisbarned, on Flickr

6.

Porsche 911 rear by jlewisbarned, on Flickr

7.

Focus RS front by jlewisbarned, on Flickr

8.

Focus RS rig shot by jlewisbarned, on Flickr

Thanks for looking and I look forward to your comments...

Sync

[Iang84]

liking the shots but think you should have used a slightly faster shutter speed as in the tracking shots the bodies are a bit blurred which I think spoils it slightly

[dxbtiger]

5 is the standout one for me.

Agree with the blurred motion shot comment above.

That Porsche is so clean the paint looks wet!

[//dean]

1. It's out of focus. If it's not sharp then it should be deleted - it only takes a minute to check a few images for sharpness on the back of a DSLR. Generally speaking most art directors, editors & all other clients will want the number plates to be pin sharp. Don't be put off if you're not getting many/any sharp tracking photos though, it takes a lot of practice to get a technique that works, you'll probably find most peoples hit rates to be 1 in 5 at best. Mines about 1 in 100, I'm still working on it.

Composition is okay although the cars ideally need to be bigger in the frame. You need to advise the drivers not to turn their heads towards the camera, the chap driving the 911 is looking right down the barrel of your lens!

2. Again, it needs to be sharp or, with panning it needs a specific sharp point if you're using a long exposure. Always going to be tricky with 2 cars though and it's a case of practicing. You do have a sharp point but it's the door mirror of the Focus and isn't interesting, needs to be a plate really.

3. As above

4. Kinda works because the driver is the sharpest thing here.

5. Not digging the reflections and spills of light over the body work. Also, try and refrain from photographing cars against walls, it's not very interesting (unless the wall is).

6. Is fairly nice although a little busy. It's lacking a bit of oooomph and the sky is blown out.

7. I like the idea here, I think the reflections all over the bumper ruin it for me though, that and the driver seats not having the harness holes showing.

8. You need to get much further away however, it looks like you're suffering major bounce with your rig and so I doubt it's possible. It's easily the worst of the set and so I'm not going into WB issues etc.

[4Lmike]

I agree completely with Deans comments....but this set of pics is 10 times better than your first post!

[DB7 pilot]

If you don't mind getting off your arse and getting up to the Midlands, I've a clean 1969 Pagoda SL and a tidy 2000 Aston DB7 Vantage that I've no good shots of that you could try.

[DB7 pilot]

Occasionally get that way. Ok Synchro, will advise.

[ILoveLamp]

Synchromesh said:

That's what I wanted hear, better if not 'good' yet. Hopefully the next set will be 10x better than this. Now I've just got to find someone near Bristol who want free pics of their supercar for my 3rd attempt...

How about non super-cars?

I'm about to drop ride height a little and some nice pictures wouldn't go amiss.

Love the location under the suspension bridge

[Corsair7]

Suggest removing tax disks before shoot....
Always seems to be done on really good professional shoots.


Me, I love them all though.