Why are there so few car photographs?
Discussion
DavidY said:
Derek Smith said:
Photography is all about the final image.
No. Photography is about 3 images-1) The one in your head
2) The one The camera takes
3) The final edited version
Most photographers strive to make 1 and 3 the same image!
I accept that 1) and 2) have some function, but the whole process is aimed at 3).
Rogue86 said:
trackdemon said:
At the risk of stirring up a hornets nest, if someone is relying on photoshop & compositing to create an image, they are not really a photographer but a digital artist. Now there's nothing wrong with that per se, but using a straightforward/boring shot as a basis doesn't make sense to me. Learn photoshop, sure, but pushing yourself photographically will raise the whole game, even if the resulting image is intended for use in a composite.
As a photographer I am essentially paid to get the shot in any scenario. If that means shooting the bare, technically-accurate essentials to create the image I want, knowing I will be limited on the shoot itself then thats my problem and not the clients. If its for a portfolio image then a potential client will have no idea what went into the shot (and shouldnt) so time spent creating it really isnt an issue. You never know what that could be worth to you professionally. The only time that getting something spot on in-camera is important is if you're a journalist (where you wont have the safety net of shooting in raw) or for a magazine, where the rates are so pitifully low that Im shocked anyone still actually does it.
I couldn't disagree more. Fully understand there are times when it's necessary to fall back on using backplates, but to essentially give up on getting a great image in camera because it doesn't matter reinforces my view of the difference between a photographer, and a digital artist. I'm not saying one is better than the other, merely different, but there's a gap between the two.
" for a magazine, where the rates are so pitifully low that I'm shocked anyone still actually does it."
Maybe you've worked with the wrong magazines....
_dobbo_ said:
I don't disagree with much of what you've posted, but this bit stood out to me.
Anyone can take a photo of a supercar as you pointed out - Aventador pictures everywhere. Make a photo of a Mazda stand out and you've really achieved something. So practicing with a car like that is better than practicing with a supercar as it forces you to be creative and different in a way you don't have to be with a more interesting vehicle.
Sometimes, what I want is a photo. Sometimes what I want is art. Sometimes it's somewhere on the spectrum between the two. The joy of wielding the camera is that I get to make the decision where it falls between those two points.
Edited by RenesisEvo on Friday 10th November 17:07
Derek Smith said:
1) doesn't exist and 2) is changed. The only one that is kept and published is 3), and that is the only one that matters to the photographer.
I accept that 1) and 2) have some function, but the whole process is aimed at 3).
DerekI accept that 1) and 2) have some function, but the whole process is aimed at 3).
If 1) doesn't exist then how do you go about composing the image!!!, of course the whole process is aimed at 3), it is after all the resultant image from the process!!!
trackdemon said:
I couldn't disagree more. Fully understand there are times when it's necessary to fall back on using backplates, but to essentially give up on getting a great image in camera because it doesn't matter...
Actually you've inadvertently agreed with what I was getting at... its not about caring, its about getting the best you can with the equipment and opportunity you have and then ultimately being able to realise the potential of that image. Somewhere in there are the needs and aims of the project itself, client budgets etc. It's interesting that we're even discussing this given how far removed your final image is from the base frames that make it up.trackdemon said:
reinforces my view of the difference between a photographer, and a digital artist. I'm not saying one is better than the other, merely different, but there's a gap between the two.
This I would disagree on, there is no difference. Clients dont care about what you label yourself as, they care about your capability. Most won't throw money at the logistics of making a shoot work in reality, but will throw it at someone who can do it in post. They're not interested in defining what you are and where that fits into their shoot roster.trackdemon said:
Maybe you've worked with the wrong magazines....
Yeah that's probably it.I've illustrated articles for years and was editor of a magazine for a short time. The picture editor would prefer it if you submitted the image as it came out of the camera but that is only because they will mess around with it and the originality gives them more opportunities. All the faffing about in photoshop, cropping and carefully working out what images to include and which to leave out you should leave out. Ignore dividing thirds, just send the image in with lots of space around it.
Transparencies were a godsend as you got them whole and, of course, as taken, 6x6 even better as there was often the choice of landscape/portrait.
Photoshop was a pain. My picture editor would often ask me to try and get the 'proper' image from the photographer.
Transparencies were a godsend as you got them whole and, of course, as taken, 6x6 even better as there was often the choice of landscape/portrait.
Photoshop was a pain. My picture editor would often ask me to try and get the 'proper' image from the photographer.
Rogue86 said:
trackdemon said:
Crystal ball?
No they're both hairy.
Too much information....Seriously though, the Lambo image is pretty much out of camera. 2 x 1.2 Lee grad filters to hold the sky, a tagged exposure to remove haze from the car, & a clean one for the sky; blend in post. That's it. Mags like EVO don't want massively processed pics, they want you to take a proper pic from camera. Studio shoots are different, obviously, but for location stuff...
trackdemon said:
Too much information....Seriously though, the Lambo image is pretty much out of camera. 2 x 1.2 Lee grad filters to hold the sky, a tagged exposure to remove haze from the car, & a clean one for the sky; blend in post. That's it. Mags like EVO don't want massively processed pics, they want you to take a proper pic from camera. Studio shoots are different, obviously, but for location stuff...
I think we have different definitions of "out of camera" - a 3 RAW-frame composite would definitely fall under the tagline of "heavy processing" for most photographers, although is granted a relatively light workflow for most professional car 'togs. I'm not saying there's anything wrong in that mind, far from it. My first 'proper' photography job was all JPEG and in some cases the files never saw a repro-suite. That job was properly difficult too, in a single day you might be shooting 500+ people group shots, air/air stuff at 9G and then working with SF through night-optics into the early hours. All without going anywhere near Photoshop or RAW. When I first started shooting cars I didn't know what to do with the creative freedom that came with photoshop and it was a good 18 months on the job before I settled into the idea that comp'ing in backplates and skies was more appealing to a commercial budget than sorting out the logistics of doing it on-location and hoping the weather played ball. It saved a lot of meetings and opened the doors to much more work!
If Evo have set an event up or you're covering something for them, then of course they expect a certain level of photography combined with a level of PP that enhances it. I would be surprised if they asked to see the RAWs of that at any stage though unless the final image was particularly awful. Granted, any work of mine that has appeared in Evo has been used through commercial clients I have shot for so I havent dealt with them directly and stand to be corrected. I have friends who shoot stills/video regularly for them though and have never had a conversation about PP with them so I would be surprised if it was such a sticking point.
I guess ultimately my point is that as a photographer you need to play to your strengths and post production can be the great leveller to overcome shortfalls in equipment, budget, opportunity and client willingness. I would absolutely rather be shooting a McLaren in Norway than sat in my office editing a studio set onto some backplates mind, though generally having the control of a studio is easier in a lot of ways!
My favourite from a wet evening spectating on the Rally of The Tests,
Rally of The Tests 2017 by Jez, on Flickr
These two deserve a
Rally of The Tests 2017 by Jez, on Flickr
Rally of The Tests 2017 by Jez, on FlickrThese two deserve a
Rally of The Tests 2017 by Jez, on Flickr
Nik da Greek said:
Well said!
For me, that reply you replied to (errrm) is typical of the sort of snobbery and b
ks that surrounds photography on-line. I agree that the BMW photo is not fascinatingly composed, but it's what I'd want to see if I was looking for photos of a BMW... the actual car.
And I for one (though I know for a fact I'm not alone, just maybe on the wrong forum) love seeing endless photos of cars at shows because I like looking at photos of cars
And your point would be completely valid if this wasn't a photography forum for ...... wait for it... 'photography'. It's intent is not so you can 'look at pictures of cars'. It is for sharing and critiquing photography. Which I'm am glad for once this forum has dipped it's toe into. There are some truly talented people on this forum and some truly woeful photographers too. It's my opinion as this is indeed a photography forum, giving feedback to people is very important, not just massaging egos. People are too scared to say what they really think for fear of offending people on here, if you are brave enough to publicly post your work, then you should be brave enough to accept any criticism or feedback it gets, that's the only way to improve. For me, that reply you replied to (errrm) is typical of the sort of snobbery and b
ks that surrounds photography on-line. I agree that the BMW photo is not fascinatingly composed, but it's what I'd want to see if I was looking for photos of a BMW... the actual car. And I for one (though I know for a fact I'm not alone, just maybe on the wrong forum) love seeing endless photos of cars at shows because I like looking at photos of cars
Edited by Craigwww on Tuesday 14th November 03:22
Craigwww said:
And your point would be completely valid if this wasn't a photography forum for ...... wait for it... 'photography'. It's intent is not so you can 'look at pictures of cars'. It is for sharing and critiquing photography. Which I'm am glad for once this forum has dipped it's toe into. There are some truly talented people on this forum and some truly woeful photographers too. It's my opinion as this is indeed a photography forum, giving feedback to people is very important, not just massaging egos. People are too scared to say what they really think for fear of offending people on here, if you are brave enough to publicly post your work, then you should be brave enough to accept any criticism or feedback it gets, that's the only way to improve.
And likewise, your point would be totally valid if it worked like that. But it doesn't. This forum is populated by many people, many of whom post photos that are never commented on at all, whether to say "it's good", "it's bad" or "it's indifferent". They may as well never exist. However, the same four or five posters get slathered in adulation for every single post they makeEdited by Craigwww on Tuesday 14th November 03:22
And that's not sour grapes or resentment because most of the photos posted by some contributors here are utterly stupendous and we're all lucky to be able to see them here, free unadulterated and largely bereft of watermarks. But this is not in any way an open discussion forum full of hints, tips, constructive (or otherwise) criticism and it certainly is not welcoming or all-inclusive
I also agree people don't say what they might like to for whatever reason... fear of causing offense, sheer can't be bothered-ness, whatever it is. I continue to post photos not because I think I'm a good photogrpaher... I know damn well I'm not... but because I think a decent photo consists of more than simply technical excellence and superb post-prod skills and quite a few pics here have great skill involved but little in the was of story. I think content and composition can make up for a deficiency of technical skill. Conversely, I simply scroll past, for example photos of bread or soup because no matter how amazing the skill of the photographer, the picture itself bores me s
tless. I guess maybe that answered my own question... I suppose many people don't critique because they're just not interested enough to voice an opinionEdited by Nik da Greek on Tuesday 14th November 10:39
Craigwww said:
And your point would be completely valid if this wasn't a photography forum for ...... wait for it... 'photography'. It's intent is not so you can 'look at pictures of cars'.
Can I please quote the first post of this thread?OP said:
Why are there so few car related photographs and posts on a vehicle based website.
This is a car forum. The photography area is a subset of that. This thread was, as I see it based on the first post, created to allow people to share their car photos in the photography section. Therefore, I believe, the intent is entirely to look at pictures of cars, exactly opposite of what you have proposed. Or where else do I go to see a collection of different photos of cars on this forum, if not the photography section's car photograph thread? 
If I wanted proper analysis and dissection of a photo I created, a dedicated photography website would be a far better place to go in my opinion. If I took a photo of my dinner, I wouldn't expect much composition and lighting advice on a cookery forum. I am grateful that on this car forum there are some excellent and experienced photographers who are able to offer useful advice and criticism and are willing to spend their free time doing so. I also feel I can share my mediocre attempts knowing that I'm not likely to get laughed out of town (this may happen anyway), and that as long as the subject is a car, I am abiding by the basic premise of the thread; it is a place I can share and get feedback on one of my preferred subjects. I would be considerably less confident sharing my work on a proper photography forum where the subject is no longer necessary of interest.
Some interesting and valid points have been made by numerous contributors. Here's 'two penneth worth'.
A basic photo of a flashy or prestigious car does not necessarily make for a good image just because the car in that image is nice.
A lot of photographs taken contain great cars but the final image produced is often mediocre and one which most people wouldn't give a 2nd look if the car in the image was ordinary or run of the mill.
In my mind a good / great photograph should be rated on the final image rather than the car that is shown within it.
I believe the concept of a great image is to make something ordinary or normal look interesting enough to warrant a 2nd look.
For me, a great and interesting image of a Ford Fiesta will always be better than an uninteresting basic image of a Lamborghini.
A great great and interesting image of a Lamborghini however and then you'll potentially have the perfect combination.
A basic photo of a flashy or prestigious car does not necessarily make for a good image just because the car in that image is nice.
A lot of photographs taken contain great cars but the final image produced is often mediocre and one which most people wouldn't give a 2nd look if the car in the image was ordinary or run of the mill.
In my mind a good / great photograph should be rated on the final image rather than the car that is shown within it.
I believe the concept of a great image is to make something ordinary or normal look interesting enough to warrant a 2nd look.
For me, a great and interesting image of a Ford Fiesta will always be better than an uninteresting basic image of a Lamborghini.
A great great and interesting image of a Lamborghini however and then you'll potentially have the perfect combination.
a few from a very wet and cold Brands Hatch..
A bit 'off' the racing line.. by jon bawden, on Flickr
BMW M3 by jon bawden, on Flickr
Audi A3 TCR by jon bawden, on Flickr
Audi V8 DTM by jon bawden, on Flickr
A bit 'off' the racing line.. by jon bawden, on FlickrBMW M3 by jon bawden, on FlickrAudi A3 TCR by jon bawden, on FlickrAudi V8 DTM by jon bawden, on FlickrGassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff