Behind the scenes - Pepper Yandell Ferrari F40 shot
Discussion
First off... The photo.
Very impressive...
Now, the work gone behind it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57P3LTgPBmM
Very impressive...
Now, the work gone behind it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=57P3LTgPBmM
Surely it would've been easier (and more fun) to actually take the F40 to a tunnel with a chase car or a rig rather than just construct the photo in a dingy office somehwere.
It's a nice end result but having seen the "making of" I just think it may as well be a screengrab from Forza.
It's a nice end result but having seen the "making of" I just think it may as well be a screengrab from Forza.
It's all about control, being able to control the lighting (angle, hard or soft light, colour temperature, reflections, spill), the flames and the background. The photographer can work tethered, checking critical focus and exposure and reshooting as necessary, whilst getting the important bit, the lighting, bang on.
In addition there is the aspect of minimising risk. You could spend all afternoon ragging a client's F40 up and down a car park trying to get the perfect shot, with the risk and expense that entails, or you could comp the finished car shot into a stock, or previously shot, background.
In addition there is the aspect of minimising risk. You could spend all afternoon ragging a client's F40 up and down a car park trying to get the perfect shot, with the risk and expense that entails, or you could comp the finished car shot into a stock, or previously shot, background.
markmullen said:
It's all about control, being able to control the lighting (angle, hard or soft light, colour temperature, reflections, spill), the flames and the background. The photographer can work tethered, checking critical focus and exposure and reshooting as necessary, whilst getting the important bit, the lighting, bang on.
In addition there is the aspect of minimising risk. You could spend all afternoon ragging a client's F40 up and down a car park trying to get the perfect shot, with the risk and expense that entails, or you could comp the finished car shot into a stock, or previously shot, background.
At what point do you stop and just computer generate the whole shot?In addition there is the aspect of minimising risk. You could spend all afternoon ragging a client's F40 up and down a car park trying to get the perfect shot, with the risk and expense that entails, or you could comp the finished car shot into a stock, or previously shot, background.
agent006 said:
markmullen said:
It's all about control, being able to control the lighting (angle, hard or soft light, colour temperature, reflections, spill), the flames and the background. The photographer can work tethered, checking critical focus and exposure and reshooting as necessary, whilst getting the important bit, the lighting, bang on.
In addition there is the aspect of minimising risk. You could spend all afternoon ragging a client's F40 up and down a car park trying to get the perfect shot, with the risk and expense that entails, or you could comp the finished car shot into a stock, or previously shot, background.
At what point do you stop and just computer generate the whole shot?In addition there is the aspect of minimising risk. You could spend all afternoon ragging a client's F40 up and down a car park trying to get the perfect shot, with the risk and expense that entails, or you could comp the finished car shot into a stock, or previously shot, background.
Most owners would probably rather have a video of Chris Harris giving it some at Anglesey.
markmullen said:
whilst getting the important bit, the lighting, bang on.
Apart from making sure that the highlight along the side is dashed to reflect the overhead lights and not a continuous line...I'm afraid I'm in the anti brigade; it just seems rather sterile and predictable to me.
I'm in the anti brigade too. All digital images can benefit (and I think need) some photoshop work but I am not a great fan of the composite image. For the shot he was required to do I admire the skill that went into it and appreciate it but it would never find a place on my wall as it just does not bring out any emotion other than nice pic, move on.
On first glance it just looks like a stunning shot - but then when you look closer it becomes obvious it's a bit photoshoppy. I'm not against heavy manipulation in this context, but the way I see it is; if you're going to cheat, cheat well enough that no-one can tell!
Giveaways are the hardness of the shadow, the reflections not matching the lights and it seems to me that the direction of the blur of the tunnel is slightly off in places. Still a big achievement though, and really cool that he posted the 'making of' video
Giveaways are the hardness of the shadow, the reflections not matching the lights and it seems to me that the direction of the blur of the tunnel is slightly off in places. Still a big achievement though, and really cool that he posted the 'making of' video
agent006 said:
At what point do you stop and just computer generate the whole shot?
For quite a while! Many car manufacturers use 100% CGI for press images and so on. It's got to the point where you really can't tell what's real and not in some cases...There's no doubt a lot of thought and skill has gone into this shot, and the end result is a great image. However, I've seen this photo before now and used to love it...but now, after seeing the making-of, I can't look at it the same way. If it was up on my wall I would always look at it remembering how the shot was made. I'm all for using photoshop to enhance photos rather than create images from scratch in a CGI way. That being said, it's just another different type of skill...and if I hadn't seen the making-of I would still love that shot! Each to their own I guess.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff