Car Photography

Edwardioo

Edwardioo

Messages
89
Name
Edd
Edit My Images
Yes
i want to be able to tke photo's like this one, i have a canon 1000d and i do have photoshop, what other bits of equipment will i need to get the photo lookin like this? Cheers, Ed:)

widebody_modified_subaru_impreza_wrx%20(01).jpg
 
That shot in particular...a very wide lens. In fact a lot of car photography employs the use of wide lenses.
 
Surely thats a rig job attached to the car and then cloned out in photoshop??
 
To do a shot like this you need some rather more specialist equipment. There's a post on it over on DIYPhotography in more detail, but you basically use two suction cups to attach a beam to the car with the camera on the end of it. You then set a long shutter speed and a ten second timer and you and a couple of mates push the car a few metres during the exposure. Then you Photoshop the beam out in PP. Quite simple when you know how it's done, but produces stunning results.

Here's the link:
http://www.diyphotography.net/take-cool-car-photos-with-a-diy-specialized-car-rig
 
Edwardioo said:
i want to be able to tke photo's like this one, i have a canon 1000d and i do have photoshop, what other bits of equipment will i need to get the photo lookin like this? Cheers, Ed:)
Click to expand...

You'll also need a massive amount of experience, skill, and talent. That tends to be the deciding factor. :bang:

If you've got a good portfolio and plenty to offer (and a great attitude) you might be able to assist a car pro, but there aren't many of them about, and competition for their time is fierce.
 
Last edited:
Edwardioo said:
i want to be able to tke photo's like this one, i have a canon 1000d and i do have photoshop, what other bits of equipment will i need to get the photo lookin like this? Cheers, Ed:)
Click to expand...

I'd set your aim a bit higher than a pretty crappy rig shot.

also if your skill at shooting still cars is in it's infancy forget about rig shots as they are harder to compose and get the light right.


as for a rig shot all you need at some suction cups a few clamps a long pole and a magic arm plus the skill to remove the rig afterwards.

my advice would be to practice still shots
 
Urban Grimshaw said:
That shot in particular...a very wide lens. In fact a lot of car photography employs the use of wide lenses.
Click to expand...
you need to get your facts right car photography does not employ a lot of wide lenses.
 
Cheers for the replies people, helped quite alot, i myt just practice my still shots 1st, then move on to more complicated stuff when i've mastered still shots lol :)
 
The other thing I'll add is that be really careful about the background you shoot against. Doing it on someone's driveway looks awful (unless they're mega-rich and have a stunning driveway) so take your time to pick a decent back ground. Think about what feeling you want to put across with your shoot. If it's a rat/euro look then maybe one of those housing estate garage areas (like 10 garages all in a block) with cracked tarmac with weeds growing through would work with the car, but if it's a pretty car then a clean industrial background would probably work better.
 
Yh i've been practicing on industrial estates taking loads of shots, trying to get the best shot, but ill try with my new tripod and see wt i can do :D
 
disagree with you about the first of those two looking good POAH

I think like tone mapping and HDR wide angle for car shots is over done
 
POAH said:
wide lenses do the same to cars as they do to faces
Click to expand...

Yep.

Personally, I reckon 35 or 40mm (or crop equivalent) is about the limit if you're going to fill the frame with the car, unless you've a special effect in mind.

This is at 27mm and it's far from a conventional magazine shot


200703_3831 by cybertect, on Flickr


17mm, but it's all about the graphic and it's the front end of a New Beetle, which is curvy already (ignore the background - it's a meet and you work with what you're dealt)


IMG_4531 by cybertect, on Flickr

40mm and things are feeling more relaxed


200609_0819 by cybertect, on Flickr


I've taken far more (and better) pictures of cars with my 70-200 than my 17-40
 
Last edited:
Edwardioo said:
hmm not sure what to get :/
Click to expand...

between 50mm & 85mm is spot on perspective for a car IMO

longer lenses can shrink cars just like wide lenses make them fat. don't get me wrong you can take some interesting shots with wide angles BUT 95% of shots are not shot with a wide angle
 
TCR4x4 said:
Surely thats a rig job attached to the car and then cloned out in photoshop??
Click to expand...

You can also be in a car and matching the same speed but you could achieve a similar effect by panning at continuous mode to get the right shot.
 
`course if you go too wide, you run the risk of turning a nice DeSoto...

2d7a55ca.jpg
[/IMG]

...into something weird:cuckoo:

f5160488.jpg
 
POAH said:
nonsense :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

How is it nonsense? Have you ever picked up a car magazine or looked on the internet? Or are you being condascending based purely on your own experiences?

There are LOTs of kit and techniques which are extensively used in car photography; there isn't a right or wrong way to it. There are reasons that UWA lenses and the like are used, just as there are reasons that you might use a long-zoom lens. Just because you don't use them doesn't give you the right to patronise everyone who says otherwise. As a photographer of any kind, you should be flexible enough that you take a variety of lenses and work around the subject.

As for what lens gives the 'best perspective' (by which I assume you mean the perspective which shows the least distortion), that would be the standard focal length for whichever camera you're using. If you're using a camera which has a chip with a cross-diagonal of 28mm, then 50mm will give the impression of compressed perspective, just as a 200mm or 600mm lens would. Anything less than 27mm could be classed as 'wide-angle' on that particular example. There's a reason that images submitted for technical articles or legal proceedings have to be shot at focal-lengths specific to the camera being used.
 
Last edited:
because it is nonsense and it's based in my and other friends published works.

if you want to take pics with a wide angle you are more than welcome to do so.


Circuit Hero said:
How is it nonsense? Have you ever picked up a car magazine or looked on the internet? Or are you being condascending based purely on your own experiences?

There are LOTs of kit and techniques which are extensively used in car photography; there isn't a right or wrong way to it. There are reasons that UWA lenses and the like are used, just as there are reasons that you might use a long-zoom lens. Just because you don't use them doesn't give you the right to patronise everyone who says otherwise. As a photographer of any kind, you should be flexible enough that you take a variety of lenses and work around the subject.

As for what lens gives the 'best perspective' (by which I assume you mean the perspective which shows the least distortion), that would be the standard focal length for whichever camera you're using. If you're using a camera which has a chip with a cross-diagonal of 28mm, then 50mm will give the impression of compressed perspective, just as a 200mm or 600mm lens would. Anything less than 27mm could be classed as 'wide-angle' on that particular example. There's a reason that images submitted for technical articles or legal proceedings have to be shot at focal-lengths specific to the camera being used.
Click to expand...
 
They do have their place.

Musicman said:
Personally, I reckon 35 or 40mm (or crop equivalent) is about the limit if you're going to fill the frame with the car, unless you've a special effect in mind.
Click to expand...

[emphasis added]

You don't have to be inches from the bonnet for every shot.

If you're going to place the car into an environment, then a wide lens will help enormously; perspective takes care of itself as the car is further away and if it's for magazine publication you may be able to leave a large area of blank something or another for them to lay a headline or some text over.

For rig shots, you're going to need a pretty wide lens just to make the rig a manageable length.

For a beginner, however, neither of these things is really going to be a priority. Nor is a UWA lens going be provide bread-and-butter shots. If you've a choice between spending your money on a decent UWA zoom or a decent mid-range zoom, I'd go for the mid-range one every time.

I've got a 15mm fisheye in my kit. When I need it, it does things no other lens can do for me and I'm very glad I have it, but it's not something I use every day like my 50mm f/1.4.

Handling the perspective of a very wide lens is tricky. If you're getting the the hang of things, somewhere around the standard [50mm] angle of view or slightly longer is a lot easier to learn effective composition with than a sub-20mm UWA.
 
that does not even make sense :shrug:

I never said don't use them I said they are not used that much which is a pretty big difference but hey what do I know.


Circuit Hero said:
:cuckoo:

ignorance-ignorance-point-of-view-la-la-la-la-demotivational-poster-1258905282.jpg


To the OP, use whatever you like so long as it looks good and gets the job done. Don't listen to the photography illuminati there... :thumbs:
Click to expand...
 
ok can someone list a few lenses that would be good to take photos with, maybe include a wide angle lens lol
 
Edwardioo said:
ok can someone list a few lenses that would be good to take photos with, maybe include a wide angle lens lol
Click to expand...

As you can see by the arguments above, that's a pretty open question. As long as it fits to your camera and it has glass in it, then it will take a decent photo of a car.

Only you can answer which lens is best for you by developing your personal style with what you have and growing as a photographer from there.

Personally I'm going to a show on Saturday and will be taking my 17-55mm lens for paddock shots and 70-300mm lens for track shots.
 
Mark G said:
As you can see by the arguments above, that's a pretty open question. As long as it fits to your camera and it has glass in it, then it will take a decent photo of a car.

Only you can answer which lens is best for you by developing your personal style with what you have and growing as a photographer from there.

Personally I'm going to a show on Saturday and will be taking my 17-55mm lens for paddock shots and 70-300mm lens for track shots.
Click to expand...

Have you got some photo's of cars or anything that you have taken with these lenses?
 
POAH said:
...you can take some interesting shots with wide angles BUT 95% of shots are not shot with a wide angle
Click to expand...

That's funny, because if you search for 'car photography' on Google Images, about 70% of the photos (of cars) have been captured with a wide angle.

I can only assume we have been exposed to vastly different media sources over the years, because what you're saying simply isn't true for my own experience of 'car photography'.
 
after years of taking car photos, including many published in magazines, starting out get yourself a 24-105mm and a 100-300 and a good sterdy tri-pod. try to shoot early morning or dusk, if u shoot shadow side us fill flash. try to shoot on concreate (soaking wet is better!) for cars and grass/mud etc for 4x4.to get the expensive looking shot like the one u pictured it is possible to do something simular, with the right settings, from another car moving at the same speed, but it wont be a long exposure shot!

hope this helps

and remember a car shot doesnt have to include the whole car!
 
Interesting thread.

The OP asked what he could do to take shots like he posted. As pointed out, that's a wide angle lens with a rig.

The shot is from Fast Car magazine and was taken in a multistory carpark. Exposure time is usually a couple of seconds and the car will be pushed or driven very slowly with someone holding the end of the boom to steady it (they all bounce slightly) whilst triggering the camera, usually from a remote.

I suspect there's a flash gun triggered at the front and possibly another in the footwell of the car to light the interior/occupant and one at the rear further away.

The rig is removed in photoshop either through use of the clone tool, or sometimes with the help of additional shots. It depends on the rig. A multipole on you can sometimes remove one pole at a time to remove the rig. With a single pole I try to put the camera on a tripod at the same point it would be on the rig and take some shots .

It's useful to check other photographers work. Contributors to fast car include:
James Lipman - http://www.jameslipman.com/
Stephen McCann - http://www.smcphotography.co.uk/ & http://www.bebo.com/c/photos/albums?MemberId=4748284653
Phil Steinhardt - http://www.steinhardtphotography.com/2011/automotive.html
Chris Wallbank - http://www.cjwphotography.co.uk/sp_index.php?dir=./Automotive

Also check out
Tim Wallace - http://www.ambientlife.co.uk/
Nick Grant - great stuff - http://www.nickgrant.co.uk/ & http://www.flickr.com/photos/grantgb/sets/
Tim Andrew - http://www.timandrew.co.uk/
George Williams - http://www.gfwilliams.net/

You'll find a lot of wide angle shots, especially in magazines as they seem to like them as dynamic. I had a quick browse through my published pictures and a lot of them are wide shots (16-24mm on a 1.6x crop) with a few at very wide angle (10mm), but also a few at 50mm and longer.

The short answer is that it depends on what you are trying to do/achieve, what the location/situation gives/demands. But do check out other photographers for ideas/inspiration.

Have a look through
 
just because google turns up lots of images does mean they are any good ;)


Urban Grimshaw said:
That's funny, because if you search for 'car photography' on Google Images, about 70% of the photos (of cars) have been captured with a wide angle.

I can only assume we have been exposed to vastly different media sources over the years, because what you're saying simply isn't true for my own experience of 'car photography'.
Click to expand...
 
most of my published wide angle shots are from shows or cruises where you want a wide shot of crowds etc if you don't get the angle right with wide shots you'll end up with distorted lines which look nasty which is a real problem with rig shots because unless you have a big rig (easton chang for example).
 
I like some of Easton Chang's work - http://www.eastonchang.com/

Some good example and a write up here: http://speedhunters.com/archive/2010/07/14/photo-roll-gt-gt-easton-chang.aspx

Note the first shot is a 1Ds Mk2 1/8th sec, f22 at 17mm. Rig shot suckered onto the roof of an R8.

Third shot is with a 400d, rigged onto the side of a HSV. 1/25th sec, f22 at 17mm. Note the reflections - always look for the rig in reflections!

4th shot is a rig shot on the roof, using a 5D mk2, 1/30th sec, f9, at 24mm

Last shot was with a Phase 1!

A nice selection of his shots. A lot of his rig work I've seen is using standard Manfrotto stuff.

If you want to see the size rig Poah is implying, take a look at http://www.youtube.com/user/eastonchang#p/u/17/WQ927f0h0S0

These are generally hired in for the day as they cost a fortune and take ages to rig to the underneath of the car. I've also seen them in glass box section, but the advantages is minimal post production.
 
I'm off to FiTP this weekend which is a static show, I'll be armed with my 10-24 and 35 prime :D

It's good to have a wide lens at a show, as people tend to get in the way especially if its a busy one!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top