Fiona Kindness's R32 GTR Time Attack Car

T

thacko

Messages
222
Edit My Images
Yes
Had the pleasure of shooting this today ..................

Hope u like the pics

img_2058.png


img_2061.png


img_2083.png


img_2081.png


img_2114.png


img_2097.png


More on my site www.thackophotography.com
 
#2 for me looks pretty nice.
But why is the panning one so blurred? Was that intentional or you got that one wrong?
Usually panning is done being in totally parallel position to the moving subject, and I am assuming your position on that one wasn't exactly parallel to the moving vehicle.
 
zulupentax said:
Usually panning is done being in totally parallel position to the moving subject, and I am assuming your position on that one wasn't exactly parallel to the moving vehicle.
Click to expand...

Usually WTF? And you don't need to assume, the fact we can see front and side of the car confirms it wasn't parallel.

Parallel panning would mean you'd only ever see the side of the car which would be driving in a perfect circle with the photographer at the centre. A large minority of panning shots are captured side-on but the majority feature either the front/ rear/ top of the car also.

OP- the tilts and wide angle are too extreme for me. Done well with your exposures under the damp circumstances. I'd much rather see a panning shot like you posted than something with no motion. How did you focus?
 
Do nothing for me, can't really see detail of the car, and some of those angles are way over the top. Sorry....

Steve
 
AndWhyNot said:
Usually WTF? And you don't need to assume, the fact we can see front and side of the car confirms it wasn't parallel.

Parallel panning would mean you'd only ever see the side of the car which would be driving in a perfect circle with the photographer at the centre. A large minority of panning shots are captured side-on but the majority feature either the front/ rear/ top of the car also.

OP- the tilts and wide angle are too extreme for me. Done well with your exposures under the damp circumstances. I'd much rather see a panning shot like you posted than something with no motion. How did you focus?
Click to expand...

Pretty much on the button, Panning shot doesn't work for me #1 and #4 appear to have the Location as the Subject, #2 the wing ruins the shot for me (maybe if you were further away?) and #3 isn't parallel and is focused too much on the bonnet rather than the engine, #6 is OK

Just try to remember your rule of 3rd's in future (y)
 
AndWhyNot said:
Usually WTF? And you don't need to assume, the fact we can see front and side of the car confirms it wasn't parallel.
Click to expand...

Am lost with that sentence, particularly with the "WTF". Sorry rather than making an assumption thought I would rather ask/clarify. Was that supposed to mean a go at me? Or the idea of that expression got lost in translation for me.

Sorry but my grasp of english language in relation to comprehending certain terminology can be limited at times ;), so I thought better ask first
 
zulupentax said:
Am lost with that sentence, particularly with the "WTF". Sorry rather than making an assumption thought I would rather ask/clarify. Was that supposed to mean a go at me? Or the idea of that expression got lost in translation for me.

Sorry but my grasp of english language in relation to comprehending certain terminology can be limited at times ;), so I thought better ask first
Click to expand...

WTF = what the flip or similar ;)

Yes, at the time I was having a go at you claiming panning shots are "usually" parallel. This is wrong. As I explained further into my comment, if the shot we were critiquing had been shot parallel then it would only show the side of the car and none of the front. Therefore you didn't need to "assume" as it was obvious from the photo that it wasn't shot parallel.

Looking back, I was picking on your choice of words more than what you were trying to say - hope I didn't cause any offence :)
 
AndWhyNot said:
WTF = what the flip or similar ;)



Looking back, I was picking on your choice of words more than what you were trying to say - hope I didn't cause any offence :)
Click to expand...

None taken.

I think we are going to get entangled in a word game here, regarding "panning" :).

I am no expert at all on these. Thata's one point first of all.
Secondly I know some people sometimes try to pan a shot, wrongly I must add, without being in parallen to the subject. This I know because there was a recent example of someone who was struggling to get panning shots and his main mistake was his positioning in relation to the subject. So members had to tell him where he was going wrong.
Please by no means I am trying to imply this to the OP here that he might be ignorant with relation to knowing exactly how to pull a panning shot.

And finally my assumption about the image is that it looked that there was an attempt to acquire panning. The way I see it is because the middle parts of the car where the door is it looks more focused and less blurry than the rest of the image, and the wall and background is also more blurry than the car itself. Leading me to assume that there was a panning attempt.
But hey, apologies if I am totally wrong. I have been known to be quite wrong on lots of things ;)
 
zulupentax said:
None taken.

I think we are going to get entangled in a word game here, regarding "panning" :).

I am no expert at all on these. Thata's one point first of all.
Secondly I know some people sometimes try to pan a shot, wrongly I must add, without being in parallen to the subject. This I know because there was a recent example of someone who was struggling to get panning shots and his main mistake was his positioning in relation to the subject. So members had to tell him where he was going wrong.
Please by no means I am trying to imply this to the OP here that he might be ignorant with relation to knowing exactly how to pull a panning shot.

And finally my assumption about the image is that it looked that there was an attempt to acquire panning. The way I see it is because the middle parts of the car where the door is it looks more focused and less blurry than the rest of the image, and the wall and background is also more blurry than the car itself. Leading me to assume that there was a panning attempt.
But hey, apologies if I am totally wrong. I have been known to be quite wrong on lots of things ;)
Click to expand...

Wow all this banter haha

Well I can't belive one shot has caused all this.

As for me being ignorant well that's pretty harsh!

I'm full aware of how to pan, I think if you looked at my previous shots you would see this and half your post would have been pointless. My attempt here wasnt so much a pan but a panesque kinda shot where there was one small spot on the car in focus but the rest blurry, it's hard to explain what I mean but meh, half of you don't like the shots so that's fine

The person getting them taken likes them so that's all that counts to be honest. I'm pretty sick of this site now ...... Noone seems to get a good response unless they are part of the tp "scene" or take boring straight on, perfect side on or "proper panning"

So say what you feel cos I'm bored of it haha

I won't be back ........
 
Heres one i took earlier :p

mlr-sneek1.png
 
Thacko,

I think the exposure control and the editing has worked well although the editing around the spoiler for the rear end shot spoils it (pardon the pun).

I think the main thing I don't like with the set is that the car is in one place for every shot (other than the panning shot). Would be nice to have the car in a different spot for each typ of shot.

I used to do all the extreme angles with my shots but they really aren't needed, a slight tilt can work with some frames.

Just looked on the site and I think you've kept the best ones on there.

(y)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top