The Auto-Image thread

vivekiny2k · 11th June 2009, 22:39

no TG,

Ithink what benni is saying is you have taken the pic when it was sitting close to the curb, motionless. then you have added motion blur giving the illusion of high speed.

at that high speed, that close to the curb, I can not visualize that much of steer (or oversteer) unless you are the official photographer of "seconds from disaster"

Torqueguru · 11th June 2009, 23:54

Ok guys. My fault, will work on it next time. Thanks for the critique. The shot was not for motion blur, my friend for whom I shot it, insisted me to add it. So i did the best I could, thats all. I concentrated on getting the blur working more than anything else. By the way, that photo made to Flickr Explore!

Critique these:

The Auto-Image thread-3612784511_66a20752f4_b.jpg

The Auto-Image thread-3615539579_43cc7d42b8_b.jpg

Regards,
TG.

clevermax · 12th June 2009, 11:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torqueguru

Critique these:
Attachment 146971

TG, one critique from my side. Some of these shots (like this one), it seems that you have used the unsharp mask with a larger radius than an optimum value. This gives the subjects somewhat blunt edges like you see it in television when the reception has very little ghost effect (mountains nearby) during old days when we had terrestrial VHF transmission. Hope you got the point.

Torqueguru · 12th June 2009, 21:59

Hmm, i get you, actually i did a high pass filter and not an unsharp mask...was just playing around. But yeah, I think I too agree with you clevermax

clevermax · 12th June 2009, 22:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torqueguru

Hmm, i get you, actually i did a high pass filter and not an unsharp mask...was just playing around. But yeah, I think I too agree with you clevermax

Oh ok...

May be you need to limit the radius in that before you actually start seeing the image itself, than the edges in your overlay layer's high pass preview...

Sunil

vivekiny2k · 12th June 2009, 22:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torqueguru

Critique these:

in an effort to cover more of windscreen and the dash panels, you have taken this picture from near the headrest of the passenger seat. the symmetry is lost.

Try another one with camera perpendicular to the driver and see if you like the result.

if you want to focus on the car features, taking it without the driver may reduce the distracting asymmetry.

Torqueguru · 13th June 2009, 03:43

@Vivek
The goal of the shot was to show case the driver too in it. So taking him off nullifies the whole point. Camera perpendicular to the driver? Err not to my taste actually. And I didnt quite follow the symmetry thingy that you mentioned. Pardon my ignorance, but I really would like to know more of that.

The Auto-Image thread-3615657411_0bc93f3447_b.jpg

Regards,
TG.

vivekiny2k · 13th June 2009, 04:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torqueguru

And I didnt quite follow the symmetry thingy that you mentioned. Pardon my ignorance, but I really would like to know more of that.

look at his legs, they seem to be going away, even the one closer to the camera seem to be pointing away form it. did you use wide angle?

Torqueguru · 13th June 2009, 04:58

I used a 14-24...yeah u can call it WIDE

Torqueguru · 13th June 2009, 05:30

Vivek, when you said that the legs are pointing away, well isnt that how its supposed to be, you would not want them to point towards you right? It will look rather awkward then i think. Here I applied some distortion correction...but actually, I still would not categorize it as a symmetry issue.

The Auto-Image thread-ssssubaruinsidesmall.jpg

Regards,
TG.

Stratos · 13th June 2009, 10:19

Nothing big or fancy here. Just loved its stance!

Torqueguru · 13th June 2009, 10:45

Thats BIG and FANCY a car buddy! Nice work!

chevelle · 16th June 2009, 04:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stratos

Nothing big or fancy here. Just loved its stance!

imho, the front grille spoils the elegance of jag. the grille looks too bmwish. kidney grills anyone.

remove that and its also elegance personified.

lamborghini · 29th June 2009, 05:49

Hey guys,

Took some photos of our Galant after her shower. Need some feedback on the following photos.
I used a regular Sony Digi-cam, and I know zilch of photoshop.

Thanks

d_payne · 29th June 2009, 11:04

@lamborghini: Feedback as requested>>

Shot #1: I think you were trying to get a creative composition here but it just doesn't work. The leaves are supposed to "frame" the shot but in this case they've just cluttered the foreground and made the shot like a spy-shot or something.

Advice - Try to use the leaves to frame the shot; the leaves can appear on the top of the frame thus leaving the bottom half empty for the car or all around the frame, thus leave the center empty for the car. Since the focal point is the hood and front-grille, the shot just looks wrong.

Shot #2: If you've intentionally focussed on the leaves, then the shot is IMO wrongly composed. What has happened is that the shot is made up of two very discrete elements - the car to the right and the leaves to the left. They don't make for a very balanced frame.

Shot #3: This is the best of the lot but also the least creative. Get closer to the car if you want to add dynamism by using wide-angle or get more of the scenery into the shot.

I will try posting examples once am home. Hope this helps to an extent.

Cheers!
Payne

11th June 2009, 23:54	#1322
Torqueguru BHPian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Seattle Posts: 277 Thanked: 165 Times View My Garage	Ok guys. My fault, will work on it next time. Thanks for the critique. The shot was not for motion blur, my friend for whom I shot it, insisted me to add it. So i did the best I could, thats all. I concentrated on getting the blur working more than anything else. By the way, that photo made to Flickr Explore! Critique these: Regards, TG.

13th June 2009, 03:43	#1327
Torqueguru BHPian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Seattle Posts: 277 Thanked: 165 Times View My Garage	@Vivek The goal of the shot was to show case the driver too in it. So taking him off nullifies the whole point. Camera perpendicular to the driver? Err not to my taste actually. And I didnt quite follow the symmetry thingy that you mentioned. Pardon my ignorance, but I really would like to know more of that. Regards, TG.

13th June 2009, 05:30	#1330
Torqueguru BHPian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Seattle Posts: 277 Thanked: 165 Times View My Garage	Vivek, when you said that the legs are pointing away, well isnt that how its supposed to be, you would not want them to point towards you right? It will look rather awkward then i think. Here I applied some distortion correction...but actually, I still would not categorize it as a symmetry issue. Regards, TG.

13th June 2009, 10:19	#1331
Stratos Senior - BHPian Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Belgium Posts: 2,609 Thanked: 1,449 Times View My Garage	Nothing big or fancy here. Just loved its stance! Attached Thumbnails Last edited by Stratos : 13th June 2009 at 10:36.

29th June 2009, 05:49	#1334
lamborghini Distinguished - BHPian Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Mumbai Posts: 6,113 Thanked: 5,760 Times View My Garage	Hey guys, Took some photos of our Galant after her shower. Need some feedback on the following photos. I used a regular Sony Digi-cam, and I know zilch of photoshop. Thanks Attached Thumbnails

11th June 2009, 22:39	#1321
vivekiny2k Senior - BHPian Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: cincinnati, jabalpur,chennai Posts: 1,264 Thanked: 209 Times View My Garage	no TG, Ithink what benni is saying is you have taken the pic when it was sitting close to the curb, motionless. then you have added motion blur giving the illusion of high speed. at that high speed, that close to the curb, I can not visualize that much of steer (or oversteer) unless you are the official photographer of "seconds from disaster"

12th June 2009, 21:59	#1324
Torqueguru BHPian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Seattle Posts: 277 Thanked: 165 Times View My Garage	Hmm, i get you, actually i did a high pass filter and not an unsharp mask...was just playing around. But yeah, I think I too agree with you clevermax

13th June 2009, 04:58	#1329
Torqueguru BHPian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Seattle Posts: 277 Thanked: 165 Times View My Garage	I used a 14-24...yeah u can call it WIDE

13th June 2009, 10:45	#1332
Torqueguru BHPian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Seattle Posts: 277 Thanked: 165 Times View My Garage	Thats BIG and FANCY a car buddy! Nice work!

29th June 2009, 11:04	#1335
d_payne BHPian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Mumbai Posts: 180 Thanked: 210 Times	@lamborghini: Feedback as requested>> Shot #1: I think you were trying to get a creative composition here but it just doesn't work. The leaves are supposed to "frame" the shot but in this case they've just cluttered the foreground and made the shot like a spy-shot or something. Advice - Try to use the leaves to frame the shot; the leaves can appear on the top of the frame thus leaving the bottom half empty for the car or all around the frame, thus leave the center empty for the car. Since the focal point is the hood and front-grille, the shot just looks wrong. Shot #2: If you've intentionally focussed on the leaves, then the shot is IMO wrongly composed. What has happened is that the shot is made up of two very discrete elements - the car to the right and the leaves to the left. They don't make for a very balanced frame. Shot #3: This is the best of the lot but also the least creative. Get closer to the car if you want to add dynamism by using wide-angle or get more of the scenery into the shot. I will try posting examples once am home. Hope this helps to an extent. Cheers! Payne