Black GT at Dusk

[Daniel Buck]

Yes, yet another of my GT and sunset. By time I'm tired of shooting this car, I could probably write a book on shooting black cars against sunsets. :cool: haha! I'm learning every shoot, love it :)

Anyway, this one has a little softer contrast than some of my previous work, Hopfully the black areas don't look to lifted.

I had intended to rotate the rear wheel to the same position as the front wheel, but because the car was on slanted ground (notice the grass behind the front end, slanting camera right) the car started to slide on me as I lifted the rear end, so I quickly let it back down and gave up that idea. :eek:

No headlights this time (they weren't looking right) but I left the front signal lights on, I think it was looking a little dead with out them.

I took folks suggestion from the last shoot and shot with more of the side visible, so that the front close wheel doesn't get chopped off by the fender as much, and the far front tire doesn't stick out in front. It doesn't look to bad I think, though I'm used to shooting a bit tighter on the front end with less side visible.

Critiques, comments, or general babblings and thoughts are all welcome :)


(oh, and yes, after all the prep work, the TRUNK was left popped open, I can't believe I left it open. Hard to tell here in the web-sized version, but it's cracked open just a bit. :mad: haha! I'll have to fix that)



http://www.danielbuck.net/wip/gt_dusk_01.jpg

(edit) a new shot with 28mm, same shoot but a few minutes earlier (notice the sun disk still visible), taken with grad filters:
http://www.danielbuck.net/wip/gt_dusk_02.jpg

[John Jovic]

V. nice. I don't like the indicator being left on though.

There's an optimum time to have the headlights turned on, when they balance best with the ambient light.

I would have removed the tall grass behind the car (I carry a few gardening tools for such times).

The car looks a little dark in the front end (grille, bumper bar). The sky is brightest in the vicinity of the sunset so if the sunset was behind you (camera rear) then there's probably not much more you could have done to brighten the front end. On the otherhand if the sunset was behind the car or camera left, then maybe this has contributed to the front end being a little dark.

Did you use a grad filter at all, or add the grad in Pshop?

JJ

[Daniel Buck]

The gradient is actually the sky itself.

http://www.danielbuck.net/wip/gt_dusk_grad_01.jpg




though in the sky of the car, I did ad in a few corrections with grad masks, to add a hint of purple, and control the contrast a bit, that might be giving it that grad filter look. I brought the grad filters with me, but didn't use them. (that second picture was just an exposure check while shooting some MF film shots of the horizon, as I don't have a light meter. It's blurry because my Mamiya was on the tripod, not my canon :) )


The sunset was right behind the car, to the right of the large peak above the hood. The sun disk had already dipped behind the mountains though. I usually shoot into the sunset, to get more colors.

About the plants, if it were my back yard I'd kill them, but it's public land, I won't do that :-) I could probaby take them out in photoshop, I may give that a shot :-) (oh, and if this were my back yard, I'd be in heaven! haha!)

I can surely pull some more detail out of the grill, I'll give that a shot. Think pulling a bit out of just the grill would do it? It's a black car, keep in mind :)

(edit) I pulled a bit more detail out of the grill, that seems to lighten up the front of the car a bit more. You can see a bit more of the shapes in the grill better now.

[Erik Anderson]

Did you pull the photos? I'm not getting them to load.

[Daniel Buck]

no, I haven't pulled them, they should be up. My server might have had a hickup in the night?

[Austin Langley]

I'm not sure how i feel about this. It seems very flat. The black is more of a grey on my screen. Awsome background, i just wish the camera was lower and moved a few steps to the right.

[Daniel Buck]

I'm not sure how i feel about this. It seems very flat. The black is more of a grey on my screen. Awsome background, i just wish the camera was lower and moved a few steps to the right.

yea, it's quite flat, alot less contrast than I usually do. I got alot of comments last time that the car was to dark looking. maybe I should find a happy medium between this shoot and the last? :)

I didn't pull the camera down farther because I would loose the reflection line along the hips/sholder, and also because the mountains would intersect the roof. I like low angles myself as well, but this location didn't really lend itself to it much. I'm not trying to blow off your comment on this, just giving my reason for the medium height angle.

A few steps to the right, do you mean leaving a bit more space on the front side of the car? or in regards to how the mountains in the back are possitioned in frame? This particular location I can go back and shoot again, the sky usually looks like it did in the shot (no clouds) and it's not to far for me to drive to. :) I'll try having more space infront of the car on frame right next time :)

How do folks feel about the 'black levels' of the car? It seems to be a struggle to get them just right, it's usually to dark, or to lifted looking. I'd love more feed back on this from as many folks as possible, as this is a big part of shooting a black vehicle :)

Thanks!

[Mark Delbrueck]

Y(oh, and yes, after all the prep work, the TRUNK was left popped open, I can't believe I left it open. Hard to tell here in the web-sized version, but it's cracked open just a bit. :mad: haha! I'll have to fix that)


Are you sure the trunk is open? I thought that was just typical American panel fit :D Just kidding!

I like the shot, the background is stunning! I agree that it could use a bump in contrast, but maybe only the car, not the background. I'm willing to bet there are some funn driving roads up that way!

[John Jovic]

Any comments regarding black levels are going to be biased by how each persons monitor is calibrated. I think you'll find that many people don't even regularly calibrate their monitor so be carefull about feedback about such things.

I recently sent a few images to a full time PhotoShop artist to compare the calibration of our monitors. He said mine was about 3/4 to 1 stop too bright. Upon further investigation it truns out that mine is in fact correct and his was out, yet his livelihood depends (do a degree) on the accuracy of his monitor! You can calibrate correctly, but to the wrong gamma, or possibly a luminance which is too high or low. I'm not an expert in the field, but I've found that you do have to be careful when calibrating a monitor.

JJ

[Daniel Buck]

yea, here at work even after we calibrate two machines (2 monitors per machine) they aren't always perfect, same video cards, and same monitors. haha! Thats why I like prints, prints look the same no matter who is looking at them :-)

[Mike Ditz]

Daniel-
I hardly ever shootinto the sunset (you really have about 1 minute of sweet light when you do that) I use the sun at an angle or setting behind the camera. You get better color and contrast in the sheet metal that way.
Shooting into the sunset can give you a more colorful sky but you often run into the car suffering. This shot certainly isn't as 'juicy' as you other shots of the car in a similar location. It's pretty flat and looks like there was some Shadow/Highlight recovery going on. There isn't much d-max except for inside the wheel wells.
You might also be running into some lens flare issue bit I can't rally tell from this image.

Especially in the Santa Monica Mountins you really don't want the ranger to catch you cutting any weeds without an official weed clearing permit (I have been on jobs where a weed cutter guy was hired just for this purpose) .
Good way to get a ticket.

MD

[Daniel Buck]

What is d-max? Thats a new term for me.

Yes, I'm boosting the shadows a bit on the car after all of my collor corrections in a colapsed file, thats probably the shadow/highlight look you are referring to? I'll put a bit more contrast back into the car tonight and see if that helps. Here at work on calibrated monitors the car does look a bit lifted.

I like shooting into the sunset, and usually don't have any problems, accept for dark cars. I 'm not shooting directly where the sundisk was, the sun disk (if it were to have been still above the mountains in this shot) would have been off camera.

I'll put a bit more contrast in the car and the background and see if that brings back some of that 'juicy' look :)

[Mike Ditz]

d-max is a film term. It refers to the maximum density (darkest black) possible from a particular film.

[Daniel Buck]

I have updated the image, here they are for a comparison though, The difference is pretty slight, I monkeyed with the contrast with several different methods, and also made the gradient on the background not look quite so obvious, the mountains don't get quite as light at their base anymore, and the grass behind the car is a bit darker.

I was a little bummed to find out that after I popped my revised image over the original, the car didn't change much at all when I flipped between them, just a bit darker in the darks really, along with an extra hint of contrast in the foglights. To my eyes It's looking pretty good, I'm quite happy with the results, but I know when I have been staring at an image for a while I can sometimes be fooled :D

A step forward, or backward? Might be hard to tell, I didn't realize the difference would be so slight. I think I I add to much more contrast to the car, the highlights start to look fake (making the car look seperated from the background) and the darks get muddy. I checked at work on calibrated monitors, I think it's ready to print, as far as the dark values on the car are conserned.



original on top, revised on bottom:

http://www.danielbuck.net/wip/gt_dusk_01a.jpg

http://www.danielbuck.net/wip/gt_dusk_01.jpg

[Mike Ditz]

Just for kicks I took a look at your shot in PS and it looks better than it does on APN. I also reset the black point in curves, clicking in the darkest part of the wheel well and it got back some of the juicyness that was lacking. Don't be afraid of shadows and contrast.

[Daniel Buck]

I'm not afraid of contrast :D My aim this time was to rectify the critiques on the car from previous posts with the black car. One of which was 'to dark'.

I don't mind folks posting up photoshopped critiques, makes things easier to visualize. If you got one, post it :-)

I updated the bottom image. A bit more contrast, though I feel I'm getting back to the look that I had on my previous thread, alot of black on the bottom reflection of the car. Personally I don't mind this, is it getting to much here?

[John Thawley]

I like the bottom one from a color standpoint. What troubles me with this shot, Daniel, is the position of the car... the tilt looks like a dog about to lift his hind leg. I just want this car to get low... with an agressive stance... I'm quite sure in personl this car looks totally pissed off. In photos it continually reminds me of a trailer queen. I like the location, I like the color tones.... I just haven't seen a composition yet where the car looks like a cobra about to strike.

JT

[Daniel Buck]

I like the bottom one from a color standpoint. What troubles me with this shot, Daniel, is the position of the car... the tilt looks like a dog about to lift his hind leg. I just want this car to get low... with an agressive stance... I'm quite sure in personl this car looks totally pissed off. In photos it continually reminds me of a trailer queen. I like the location, I like the color tones.... I just haven't seen a composition yet where the car looks like a cobra about to strike.

JT


I'll work on that the weekend after next. This particular location didn't lend itself to that, I don't like having the horizon line intersect the car, and because this whole location was on a hill (pretty much) I wasn't able to dip down lower. I know of a few other locations that might let me get lower :)

And actually, in person it never really looks pissed off, the suspension is stock (4x4! lol!) but I understand what you are saying. I think I can get something a bit more aggressive :)

on second though, I haven't really tried any other focal length than 135mm on the mustang. I'm just so used to grabbing that lens when I shoot a car. Maybe I'll try 85mm, or even 50mm, get the front end to be a bit larger and not as compressed looking. I'll give a different focal length a shot as well, next weekend I have off. Think that might help?

[John Thawley]

It might. I usually look for a slight incline that I can perch the car on and then go downhill to shoot back up....

JT

[Daniel Buck]

It might. I usually look for a slight incline that I can perch the car on and then go downhill to shoot back up....

JT

thats how most of the locations I shoot are setup, so that I don't have to get on my belly to shoot :)

[Mark Delbrueck]

I really like the second edit, exactly what I had in mind.

Regarding JT's comment, I agree to some degree. I think this shot is walking the line between being a total car shot, and a "lifestyle" type of shot. I think you either need to make the car the main focal point, filling it into the frame more, or make the rolling hills the focal point, with the car less filling in the frame. An off center composition would help the balance as well. Just my .02 cents :)

[Daniel Buck]

I really like the second edit, exactly what I had in mind.

Regarding JT's comment, I agree to some degree. I think this shot is walking the line between being a total car shot, and a "lifestyle" type of shot. I think you either need to make the car the main focal point, filling it into the frame more, or make the rolling hills the focal point, with the car less filling in the frame. An off center composition would help the balance as well. Just my .02 cents :)
Thanks :)

What is a 'lifestyle' type shot? I like mixing the landscapes into the cars, as landscapes have been somewhat of a new passion for me :)

[Daniel Buck]

Actually, it looks like I lied twice. I did both take a shot with a wider lens, AND with grad filters. 28mm (cropped, I had alot more scenery visible in the original, so it probalby doesn't look like 28mm), and with two grad filters. Haven't taken care of the headlight flares. Thats one reason I don't like using these grad filters often, because of the flares. :(



http://www.danielbuck.net/wip/gt_dusk_02.jpg

[Austin Langley]

I really love the second edit. I think the problem is the direction the car is facing. I like how the mountain peaks to the driver side of the car. I think if the car was facing the camera slightly more directly, it would really help make the shot pop. I guess when you get down to it, more of the front and less of the side, I think it might be nicer to see both of the headlights nicely, say the driver side headlight's black surround. You can usually get away without showing more of the side because not as much is happening, the front is much busier.

[Daniel Buck]

I really love the second edit. I think the problem is the direction the car is facing. I like how the mountain peaks to the driver side of the car. I think if the car was facing the camera slightly more directly, it would really help make the shot pop. I guess when you get down to it, more of the front and less of the side, I think it might be nicer to see both of the headlights nicely, say the driver side headlight's black surround. You can usually get away without showing more of the side because not as much is happening, the front is much busier.

thanks :)

I completely agree with you comment about more front and less side. This is usually how I shoot my "car portraits" , with a more front orientated angle.

see my previous critique post, first image has more front, and less side http://community.automotivephoto.net/forums/showthread.php?t=72 the angle in this thread (not the one I posted the link to) was to address the issue of the front wheel being covered up by the fender, and the front tire of the far wheel sticking out from the car as mentioned by a few folks. Personally I like the other angle better, with more front.

say the driver side headlight's black surround. what do you mean by this?

[Austin Langley]

thanks :)

I completely agree with you comment about more front and less side. This is usually how I shoot my "car portraits" , with a more front orientated angle.

see my previous critique post, first image has more front, and less side http://community.automotivephoto.net/forums/showthread.php?t=72 the angle in this thread (not the one I posted the link to) was to address the issue of the front wheel being covered up by the fender, and the front tire of the far wheel sticking out from the car as mentioned by a few folks. Personally I like the other angle better, with more front.

what do you mean by this?

I definately like that angle alot more. I don't have a problem if the wheel's cutoff like it was. You still see 80% of it and you can imagine the rest.

Much more aggressive. By the headlight surround, I mean the headlight housing. You can see the black around the light behind the plastic in the pasenger side light, but I'd like to see some of that in the driver's side ligiht as well.