|Cars

Promac

Paddy@CIRL wrote: »

I think the guy is mostly right to be honest.

Car Photography is generally seen as an outlet for people to get involved in motorsport because they either can't drive or can't afford to race. As such, you get a LOT of people who arrive at events that take mostly sh*te photographs with the completely wrong gear, whore the images everywhere then feel great because all their friends tell them they are the best thing since sliced bread. Unfortunately others see this and start out on the same path; take mediocre images and get loads of praise from their immediate circle of friends, none of which have the heart to tell them that actually, they're a bit sh*t.

However, there are guys here who know the difference. They don't care about the status, they just want to combine they're two biggest passions in life. These are the sort of guys we could spend hours talking to, exchanging tips, advice and LEARNING from each other without fear of having your work wholly copied.

You can actually tell the difference between these two sorts of characters by the photographs they take.

Just look for the image with passion.

Phucking spot on - thank you very much.

Promac

For the record - Paddy, you have some great pics. I really like what you're doing.

But as someone who is a car enthusiast AND a photographer you must know what I'm talking about when I say something like a "honda civic in an industrial estate". I wasn't being specific - it was just an example.

Most of the time it's a crap picture of a mediocre car in a boring setting.

I really like your pics - I'll be honest and say I didn't care for the pink body colour on those ones but I phucking love this:



The classic ford escort is, in my opinion, second only to a 350 mustang. Real people could afford this thing and it was gorgeous. It was our first car and I loved it.

m_s_nixon

Promac wrote: »

For the record - Paddy, you have some great pics. I really like what you're doing.

But as someone who is a car enthusiast AND a photographer you must know what I'm talking about when I say something like a "honda civic in an industrial estate". I wasn't being specific - it was just an example.

Most of the time it's a crap picture of a mediocre car in a boring setting.

I really like your pics - I'll be honest and say I didn't care for the pink body colour on those ones but I phucking love this:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4057/4596473916_2a03ce67c8_o.jpg

The classic ford escort is, in my opinion, second only to a 350 mustang. Real people could afford this thing and it was gorgeous. It was our first car and I loved it.

hold the phone, what are you actually giving out about? you didn't like paddy's well composed and processed shots of a nice car because it was "pink"? but you like the one above because you used to own one, if paddy took that shot in an industrial estate would you like it then? and let's say you used to own a honda civic, what if he took a pic of that in an industrial estate?

challengemaster

m_s_nixon wrote: »

hold the phone, what are you actually giving out about? you didn't like paddy's well composed and processed shots of a nice car because it was "pink"? but you like the one above because you used to own one, if paddy took that shot in an industrial estate would you like it then? and let's say you used to own a honda civic, what if he took a pic of that in an industrial estate?

Even better, how about the m3 paddy did a few months back (in an industrial estate IIRC)

Also, you've gone from saying

Yeah, they're not bad photos but they're not amazing either. Still just pictures of a couple of pink cars though.

To

For the record - Paddy, you have some great pics. I really like what you're doing.

...
I really like your pics...

Hilarious tbh.

charybdis

Promac wrote: »

For the record - Paddy, you have some great pics. I really like what you're doing.

But as someone who is a car enthusiast AND a photographer you must know what I'm talking about when I say something like a "honda civic in an industrial estate". I wasn't being specific - it was just an example.

Most of the time it's a crap picture of a mediocre car in a boring setting.

I really like your pics - I'll be honest and say I didn't care for the pink body colour on those ones but I phucking love this:

The classic ford escort is, in my opinion, second only to a 350 mustang. Real people could afford this thing and it was gorgeous. It was our first car and I loved it.

I don't know if you're trying to be satirical, but to go from what you said earlier in the thread to posting a fine but photographically unspectacular image of a Ford Escort that you like and adding that it's preferable because you really like the car depicted and it isn't pink is extremely disingenuous. You've completely obviated your previous argument and assertions, and it's particularly ironic that you've chided other images for depicting pink cars when your own photography was (unfairly) attacked for containing images of a pink guitar.

I certainly wasn't expecting a thread as already strange as this to come to such a resolution.

magicbastarder

there's a chap who lives near me who owns a delorean. i reckon someone keen on car photography should approach him and ask to be able to shoot it. i don't know the chap from adam, so you might be met with a smile or a shotgun, but it's worth a punt.

speaking personally, i think it's a far more interesting car visually than the mitsubishi evos and the like that you see a lot of in photos.

Promac

m_s_nixon wrote: »

hold the phone, what are you actually giving out about? you didn't like paddy's well composed and processed shots of a nice car because it was "pink"? but you like the one above because you used to own one, if paddy took that shot in an industrial estate would you like it then? and let's say you used to own a honda civic, what if he took a pic of that in an industrial estate?

Nope.

I said the pink ones were alright but not amazing. Still have the same opinion. I like the one I linked to - I think it's a great shot.

Just go back and look at the pics nothingman posted - I think that explained it quite well.

Promac

challengemaster wrote: »

blah blah

I never said I thought Paddy was a crap photographer. I said those specific pics of pink cars were alright but not amazing - I stand by that too. Paddy is a good photographer and I never implied otherwise. I think the one I linked to is a good shot from a photographic perspective. It's well composed, well shot and well presented. I linked to it because I didn't like how Paddy was being set up as my alleged target.

As I said in that post, "Most of the time it's a crap picture of a mediocre car in a boring setting".

But this is just getting silly now. You have to say everything 5 times to get any kind of point across and specific people still refuse to believe it.

Paddy@CIRL

Guys relax !

@Promac I know exactly what you mean by the Civic in an Industrial estate statement, it conjurs up images of tarted up, underpowered, hatchbacks with ill-fitting kits, poor wheel choice and stance with a cheap respray.

Unfortunately, car photography in Ireland has been cheapened by the plastic fantastic brigade and there are only a handful of Irish photographers who understand proper automotive photography and it's power.

As for the photos of the two Nexen cars. First off they are not Pink, they are TVR Paradise Purple. I 100% understand why you might not like the cars as they are so bloody loud and visually intrusive. Then again, you need to be aware they're both competition cars designed to attract attention and they have the power and build quality to match the image.

I do think your letting your idea of modified cars (which I think you believe is all show, no go) affect your ability to objectively look at the photographs.

Whats the difference between this :


and this :


They're both processed images of two different cars but your going to be more drawn to the image of the Escort because of your history with the car. From a purely technical point of view, the image of the S15 is probably better. It's sharper, no blown areas, less CA, better composition, full detail in the sky.

If you swapped the cars in each image which would you then prefer ?

OREGATO

Promac, I'm seriously trying to understand where you're coming from on this.

I'd fall under the beginner category of photography and would have, in the past, taken photos of other cars at shows etc. But at no point would I be turning around on this forum and going, look at these pictures of cars I took at a show, isn't that M3 amazing.. Has someone somewhere done this and is that what you're unhappy with? The only thread, I saw about cars on this forum was Paddys, hence why I thought you were having an indirect go at him and his work.

I am however, still confused as to where your problem lies, like paddy said there are a lot of people out there who would say they're into photography and take crap pictures of cars, I would probably be ****e at it (as I'm learning still) but that doesn't mean I'm not going to try. And if I do (and do take **** shots and keep them to myself) then whats the problem?

The same way you quoted the escort in Paddy's album, would you not say that that would be more interesting in the motoring forum rather than photography? as, like you said, it's more about whats in the picture (the car) than the way the picture was taken?

AnCatDubh

I am mostly seeing sense in what Promac's point is but i'd have to add that car photography isn't an awful lot different than most other forms of photography in this respect.

I have come to a personal conclusion and its only my very humble opinion but every genre of photography; car, swan, wedding, fashion, glamour, landscape, food, gig, sports are inhabited by 90% mediocre people, 9% idiots, and 1% of people who actually know what they are at and produce fantastic stuff. (ok, i've no scientific evidence to support this )

That being said, if you enjoy it, then you enjoy it - nuff said really.

m_s_nixon

Promac initially was giving out about people liking photos because it was of a car that they like and that they weren't looking at it from a photographic point of view. He then went on to say he didn't particularly like a photo because the car was "pink" and that he liked another photo because he used to own one. His argument has fallen flat on it's face imo.

homer simpson

Right....

I'm an owner of a DSLR since before christmas last year an i got one because i loved taking photos (mainly at rallies) with a P&S and as time went by was liking the results less and less, so decided to buy a DSLR, i asked on here for advise before i bought the camera.

I dont know what the OP means when he says there are loads of people who buy the wrong gear and take bad photos because they cannot afford to take part in the rally / race? My family is steaped in history when it come to rallying (3 uncles who rally, coultless other relatives involved in some way, a cousin who has won prob the biggest rally in this country twice) if i could rally i would, as i cant i take photos!

I also love taking landscape photos, i never claim to be a great photographer but 1 in every 100 photos i take are decent and i sometimes post up here, should that be a photo of a car or a photo of some scenery. Above all most people post photos up here to get thanks on their photos, because it makes them feel good!

Its like you said earlier on in the thread, if you dont like it dont look at it, that way it wont annoy you, and as has been said a few times before its down to what the person who takes the photo thinks if they think its good thats all that matters really, if they like i say feel free to post in here and get some thanks for it, whats wrong with that?????


P.S. im off to find the pic of the M3 posted a few days ago, in random photo thread, to thank it just to annoy the OP

woop

my 2 cents

the best photography connects with you, most people are awed by nature(say a sunset) hence have an appreciation for it. If you have a liking for cars you will like it, you just "get it" bit like any art how it effects you is based on who you are. Then as pointed out previously theres the technical side of it, I mighnt appreciate the subject of a guitar photo but I can see what the photographers trying to do, technical aspects and the failings.

There is a fine line between appreciating what the subject of the picture is and the picture itself, although both can be enjoyed to equal amounts good photography isnt neccesarily involved in the former. I think thats what distinguishes the "industrial estate"* photos from the likes of Paddies work which feels like it would be great even if the car wasnt there. I think the problem is were mixing two passions and unless you have an interest in both youre unlikely to "get" either of the two outlined above subject or photographic talent. I definitely understand both whether I have it or not is another question


*Im running with this term although theres been great shots taken in industrial estates

magicbastarder

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfTrdO7BqV0

Promac

m_s_nixon wrote: »

Promac initially was giving out about people liking photos because it was of a car that they like and that they weren't looking at it from a photographic point of view. He then went on to say he didn't particularly like a photo because the car was "pink" and that he liked another photo because he used to own one. His argument has fallen flat on it's face imo.

I'm not going to explain this again - just go back and re-read the thread. This is just fcuking stupid.

I love TVR's. My favourite car in the world is a TVR tuscan. The pink cars in the photo were TVR's.

I - no, actually, I'm not going any further with this. If you're too stupid to understand something that has been explained over and over in 1 thread then I can't help you, so goodbye, have a nice life and please don't bother me again.

Promac

AnCatDubh wrote: »

I am mostly seeing sense in what Promac's point is but i'd have to add that car photography isn't an awful lot different than most other forms of photography in this respect.

I have come to a personal conclusion and its only my very humble opinion but every genre of photography; car, swan, wedding, fashion, glamour, landscape, food, gig, sports are inhabited by 90% mediocre people, 9% idiots, and 1% of people who actually know what they are at and produce fantastic stuff. (ok, i've no scientific evidence to support this )

That being said, if you enjoy it, then you enjoy it - nuff said really.

Can you see the distinction I'm trying to make between people who are taking photos of cars because of the cars and people who are taking photos of whatever, because of the photos?

charybdis

Promac wrote: »

I'm not going to explain this again - just go back and re-read the thread. This is just fcuking stupid.

I love TVR's. My favourite car in the world is a TVR tuscan. The pink cars in the photo were TVR's.

I - no, actually, I'm not going any further with this. If you're too stupid to understand something that has been explained over and over in 1 thread then I can't help you, so goodbye, have a nice life and please don't bother me again.

You really, really like dramatically dismissing people who have pointed out problems with what you are saying and announcing that addressing them is somehow beneath you and that they are some kind of mild irritant. If you really felt this way, you wouldn't bother hitting the submit button, so the only possible reality is that this persona of the intellectual-too-mired-in-thought-to-explain-things-to-the-underlings is a calculated affectation.

It's pathetic.

Stop doing it.

challengemaster

Promac wrote: »

I love TVR's. My favourite car in the world is a TVR tuscan. The pink cars in the photo were TVR's.

If you loved them so much, you'd think you'd be able to spot one.

The two cars paddy took pics of are a mazda RX-7 (with a nissan SR20 engine transplant) and a nissan sylvia S15.

They are PAINTED a TVR colour.

:facepalm:

Promac

Paddy@CIRL wrote: »

Guys relax !

@Promac I know exactly what you mean by the Civic in an Industrial estate statement, it conjurs up images of tarted up, underpowered, hatchbacks with ill-fitting kits, poor wheel choice and stance with a cheap respray.

Unfortunately, car photography in Ireland has been cheapened by the plastic fantastic brigade and there are only a handful of Irish photographers who understand proper automotive photography and it's power.

As for the photos of the two Nexen cars. First off they are not Pink, they are TVR Paradise Purple. I 100% understand why you might not like the cars as they are so bloody loud and visually intrusive. Then again, you need to be aware they're both competition cars designed to attract attention and they have the power and build quality to match the image.

I do think your letting your idea of modified cars (which I think you believe is all show, no go) affect your ability to objectively look at the photographs.

Whats the difference between this :


and this :


They're both processed images of two different cars but your going to be more drawn to the image of the Escort because of your history with the car. From a purely technical point of view, the image of the S15 is probably better. It's sharper, no blown areas, less CA, better composition, full detail in the sky.

If you swapped the cars in each image which would you then prefer ?

Paddy - I like the second picture more. It's a lot more natural. The first one is a selective colour in a drab setting and I'm not, personally, a fan of selective colour. The second one is a lot more interesting in a better setting. The second one looks a lot more natural.

The first one has a big horrible gray sky and some horrible gray background. I'm sorry if that one is yours. I hope they're both yours cause the second one is cool. It's not overly processed and it looks interesting from a photographic point of view.

m_s_nixon

Promac wrote: »

I'm not going to explain this again - just go back and re-read the thread. This is just fcuking stupid.

I love TVR's. My favourite car in the world is a TVR tuscan. The pink cars in the photo were TVR's.

I - no, actually, I'm not going any further with this. If you're too stupid to understand something that has been explained over and over in 1 thread then I can't help you, so goodbye, have a nice life and please don't bother me again.

sorry for being stupid, i didn't mean to upset you. I kind of assumed that you didn't like paddy's picture of the pink car because you didn't like the type of car it was, but as you say, you like tvr's.

sorry again :rolleyes:

m_s_nixon

Tallon wrote: »

yup