How to photograph your car

[RevvdMedia]

There are a million and one things I could put here, but a lot of websites that already explain it in full. Long story short, I'll post up some kickass pictures of my Stang soon.

Sponsored

 

[cbrookre]

I'm definitely getting a 50mm 1.8(or better) lens soon, going to haunt ebay tonight for a deal.

I got one of these a few years back and it was not the magic wand that I was hoping for. Really the best weapon is to have a good full frame sensor and/or good lighting. All of my pictures with the 50mm and 85mm 1.8 lens were not appreciably more clear (sharp) than with my 18-85mm f4-5.6 IS lens in the same light, I was really disappointed. I really hope that your experience is different, maybe I just had bad luck, good thing is that it is a really low cost lens.

My parents just recently bought an EOS 6d Full Frame camera, and the high ISO performance of that camera is simply stunning. At ISO 12,800 it has the approximate noise of my 7D at about ISO 800, I was really shocked. For those of you that do not know what that means, it means that the camera can take pictures with a shutter speed that is 16 times faster with the same image quality. My camera at ISO 3200 is really, really a sea of noise.

Chris

 

[kz]

My parents just recently bought an EOS 6d Full Frame camera, and the high ISO performance of that camera is simply stunning. At ISO 12,800 it has the approximate noise of my 7D at about ISO 800, I was really shocked. For those of you that do not know what that means, it means that the camera can take pictures with a shutter speed that is 16 times faster with the same image quality. My camera at ISO 3200 is really, really a sea of noise.

Chris

Absolutely agree - 6D (especially for its price) absolutely rules. It very plasticky and not very sturdy, but picture quality just plain kicks ass. Especially when I put 300/2.8L IS that I happen to buy when I wasn't married yet (now can't afford ;-) ) and is one of the best lenses Canon ever made.

 

[MagneticA]

Mainly it is because the light is more "soft" and will give you better color saturation, lots of red hues. The mid-day shots are great for fast moving action, but have too much harshness and come off looking more cold by contrast.

Position of the sun morning / afternoon is much more favorable - it is lower on the horizon so you get light coming towards front/back of your car rather than straight from the top.

It is more diffused due to atmosphere, so it is - as above poster said - "softer" - creates less shadows. Generally you should be trying to avoid high contrast scenes - where part of your picture is deep black that you can hardly see any details in it (or none at all), same thing goes for very bright areas.

There's lots of websites that discuss this. I remember reading something about this guy who shot airplanes (luxury jets) for owners to sell and he talked about shooting at dawn or dusk due to lightning conditions (I think the gradients of the sky, softer light at the horizon vs beating down and causing more havoc with the whites/darks), wetting the ground down for reflections, all sorts of stuff. I'll see if I can track down the article later tonight.

Great info. Great photos are all about lighting, pure and simple. Without that component, the rest doesn't even matter. High sunlight can washout some colors and muddy up your shadowed areas. IMO direct sunlight works well with B&W shooting, as those two colors are very striking at high contrast rates. But then you are losing real life replication, and getting something more artsy. Direct sunlight, however, can also get you a nice result when shooting the metallic paint. At low light times it's much more difficult to capture the really interesting variations these paints take on in the sun.

The best take away for me so far on this thread is the 50mm/1.4/1.8 lens. Every time I see a shot by SMDANDB2 I drool in envy. My next move is to invest in one of these lenses and play around. :hail:

 

[smdandb2]

The best take away for me so far on this thread is the 50mm/1.4/1.8 lens. Every time I see a shot by SMDANDB2 I drool in envy. My next move is to invest in one of these lenses and play around. :hail:

Thank you.

I don't want to steer you in the wrong direction at all, but most of my photos are with the 70-200 F/2.8.

There is something magical about that lens.

Personally, I think shorter lenses are hard to shoot cars with. If you ONLY care about shooting cars, a 50 1.8 might not be the best. But if you just want to expand your skillset, I think every photog should have a 50mm.

 

[Tamadrummer88]

Thank you.

I don't want to steer you in the wrong direction at all, but most of my photos are with the 70-200 F/2.8.

There is something magical about that lens.

Personally, I think shorter lenses are hard to shoot cars with. If you ONLY care about shooting cars, a 50 1.8 might not be the best. But if you just want to expand your skillset, I think every photog should have a 50mm.

My 50mm on my 5D is perfect for street shooting (which is majority of my shooting)

The only lens i have to shoot my car properly is a 24-70mm.

 

[smdandb2]

My 50mm on my 5D is perfect for street shooting (which is majority of my shooting)

The only lens i have to shoot my car properly is a 24-70mm.

Yeah, I love everything about my 50s... just not with cars.

But I suspect I am just a prissy bitch, because I have the 70-200 to use.

If my choice was the 18-55 (the only kit lens I have ever owned, came with my 300D) and a 50 1.8, I would use the 50 1.8 for almost everything. Sure the 18-55 is a plenty sharp lens, but the photos just look so drab to me. No bokeh, nothing...

 

[Tamadrummer88]

Yeah, I love everything about my 50s... just not with cars.



But I suspect I am just a prissy bitch, because I have the 70-200 to use.



If my choice was the 18-55 (the only kit lens I have ever owned, came with my 300D) and a 50 1.8, I would use the 50 1.8 for almost everything. Sure the 18-55 is a plenty sharp lens, but the photos just look so drab to me. No bokeh, nothing...

With my T5 I actually got decent bokeh out of the 18-55 kit lens. But the 50 1.8 just made everything better. Much sharper. Looking for a 50mm 1.4 now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MagneticA]

Tried a shoot during "the magic hour". Any thoughts, tips to make it better? I feel like it's sorta pixelated and not silky smooth...

Canon T5i
75-300 zoom
1/125
5.6
ISO 1000

 

[GoBlues38]

Tried a shoot during "the magic hour". Any thoughts, tips to make it better? I feel like it's sorta pixelated and not silky smooth...

Canon T5i
75-300 zoom
1/125
5.6
ISO 1000

It looks ok.

What's your post process? Were you on a tripod? Was anti shake on or off?

So many different things to do different. I prefer to shoot my car with my Nikon 50mm 1.4. I always shoot in raw and edit in Light Room. If you are using that long 75-300 lens, you should been on a tripod and have anti shake (don't know what cannon calls it) turned off.

With the composition you have, you don't really have any for or background items you are wanting to blur with bokeh, so I would bump the aperture up to 9 or so, and lengthen the exposure. That will pull out the colors and give you a nice trip image.

Just things to try. you can't go wrong. Keep shooting till you get what you want.

 

[cbrookre]

Tried a shoot during "the magic hour". Any thoughts, tips to make it better? I feel like it's sorta pixelated and not silky smooth...

Canon T5i
75-300 zoom
1/125
5.6
ISO 1000

I am not an expert here, but I would probably go back to ISO 400, ~12 Fstop (Aperture Priority) and use a good tripod with a remote trigger. Even with a tripod just pushing the shutter button will induce shake, and ISO 1000 will be noisy even in the light of day. Would be interested to see what some of the bigger experts think.

Chris

 

[GoBlues38]

Keep it at ISO 100 where ever possible to keep noise down. Use shutter release, remote, or timer to stop shake.

Long exposures rock when done correct.

 

[smdandb2]

I would say longer exposure for sure, but I don't know if I would go cranking the F/stop higher. That just means you have to have the shutter open longer, increasing the chances of wind or anything else causing a slight shake.

For me, what I would do is bracket the shot. 3 images, 1 normal exposure and 1 up and 1 down. I would use spot metering on the car. Then combine the 3 into a suedo-hdr type image to give a better dynamic range.

 

[MagneticA]

I would say longer exposure for sure, but I don't know if I would go cranking the F/stop higher. That just means you have to have the shutter open longer, increasing the chances of wind or anything else causing a slight shake.

For me, what I would do is bracket the shot. 3 images, 1 normal exposure and 1 up and 1 down. I would use spot metering on the car. Then combine the 3 into a suedo-hdr type image to give a better dynamic range.

Keep it at ISO 100 where ever possible to keep noise down. Use shutter release, remote, or timer to stop shake.

Long exposures rock when done correct.

I am not an expert here, but I would probably go back to ISO 400, ~12 Fstop (Aperture Priority) and use a good tripod with a remote trigger. Even with a tripod just pushing the shutter button will induce shake, and ISO 1000 will be noisy even in the light of day. Would be interested to see what some of the bigger experts think.

Chris

It looks ok.

What's your post process? Were you on a tripod? Was anti shake on or off?

So many different things to do different. I prefer to shoot my car with my Nikon 50mm 1.4. I always shoot in raw and edit in Light Room. If you are using that long 75-300 lens, you should been on a tripod and have anti shake (don't know what cannon calls it) turned off.

With the composition you have, you don't really have any for or background items you are wanting to blur with bokeh, so I would bump the aperture up to 9 or so, and lengthen the exposure. That will pull out the colors and give you a nice trip image.

Just things to try. you can't go wrong. Keep shooting till you get what you want.

Thanks everyone! I can't believe I didn't even consider using my tripod :doh: That'll allow me to make quite a few changes. The bracketed shots is a good idea, too. As for post-editing, I don't do that much. I'll bring it into Photoshop and do an auto adjustment on the levels, maybe crop here and there. As far as using a RAW image, I've never done that. I usually shoot the photos as jpg. Wouldn't really know what to do with a RAW image in Photoshop. I think my camera came with some editing software, but I haven't dabbled around with those programs.

 

[Fox9350]

I'm not a photographer but a few rules of thumb I think make sense are: cars are meant to be on roads, so don't take pictures of them siting in a field for example. Also, I'm not sure what the name of the rule is, but this one drives me nuts and I see a lot, when taking a picture of the front fender on either side from an angle, turn the front tires away from the camera so you can see the wheel itself, too many people turn the front tires towards the camera and instead of seeing a nice wheel you see the awkward turned wheel and the tire tread.

Sponsored