When starting out, don't get frustrated comparing your work to pix on the 'net

[christian900se]

Bunky, if you look around the rims, the top and some edges they are not completely smooth like the point and shoot pics. Look at the trrees in the background also. Also look at the asphalt and parking lines they look natural unlike the car.

That's curb rash lol, go to my flickr album and look at the full size picture. I have curb rash on every rim now unfortunately which is what you are seeing.

 

[ASPHALT ROCKET]

That's curb rash lol, go to my flickr album and look at the full size picture. I have curb rash on every rim now unfortunately which is what you are seeing.

That's not curb rash I am looking at and at that distance you really are not going to see true curb rash. Like I said if you say the pics are not played with than so be it.

 

[Rsurfer]

I think a lot of it comes from the camera you use and your skill level. I always hated how I could never seem to portray what a car looks like in person. However, I thought I could take decent pictures with a point and shoot but once I got a basic DSLR over christmas, it was night and day.

Point and Shoot:

DSLR in the same angle and lighting:

Again, P+S:

DSLR:

The first two pictures are far from being shot with the same angle and lighting. In the first photo there is no tree on the left side and in the second photo the walk way in the first photo is not there in the second. In the second photo there is no sun reflecting off the paint making it a more of a garage shot. I'm not debating that your DSLR will take better pictures than a point and shoot, but don't say they are the same angle and lighting when clearly it was not.

 

[christian900se]

That's not curb rash I am looking at and at that distance you really are not going to see true curb rash. Like I said if you say the pics are not played with than so be it.

Then what do you expect from a 3872x2592 picture compressed to 1024x724? Its not fair to play that "than so be it" line, because maybe I am not the most experienced photographer but there are many variables that can contribute to the detail in the depth of field. If you are talking about the color seperation when you zoom in on the bottom of the rims too, that is colored fringing and comes from the lense and optical elements (I have a Nikkor DX 18-55 that came with the camera). Read this article if you would like to see it in detail in a professional review: Nikkor DX kit lens group test: 18-55mm vs 18-70mm vs 18-135mm vs 18-200mm VR Cameralabs fringe and macro results

If you look at the results when large aperatures are used (which I did), there is a noticeable amount of color fringing which I think I could see at the bottom of the wheels (is this what you are referring too?) and looks very similar to the results of the test.

 

[christian900se]

The first two pictures are far from being shot with the same angle and lighting. In the first photo there is no tree on the left side and in the second photo the walk way in the first photo is not there in the second. In the second photo there is no sun reflecting off the paint making it a more of a garage shot. I'm not debating that your DSLR will take better pictures than a point and shoot, but don't say they are the same angle and lighting when clearly it was not.

Thats true, I apologize for not getting it exactly the same in every aspect. It was taken at different times too, but my main point was to show the difference in the detail when trying to accurately present the in-person condition of a car. I have plenty of full sun shots and have nothing to hide anyway.

 

[ASPHALT ROCKET]

No need to get upset, once again I am saying that the car and the trees look totally different than the asphalt and the lines in the asphalt. I said they are nice pics, and if you are happy with them, so be it. I personally feel something was done to them, thats it. The reason being like I have said several times the car itself looks totally different than the rest of the pic.

I did a car for a professional photographer and he showed me how a very dirty car can look perfect. Also we looked over the forums and he was laughing so hard at the pics saying atleast 90% of them were played with.

I realize a dslr does take alot better pics but alot of them are too nice. Anyway like I have said and I will repeat myself if you are happy with the pics that is all that matters.

 

[Rsurfer]

Thats true, I apologize for not getting it exactly the same in every aspect. It was taken at different times too, but my main point was to show the difference in the detail when trying to accurately present the in-person condition of a car. I have plenty of full sun shots and have nothing to hide anyway.

Was not implying that you were trying to hide anything.:nomore:

 

[christian900se]

I am working on my photography skills, there is no doubt I can improve. I think I may have overexposed these since I was trying to get the best shots possible and the image on the screen looked a little dark in my first few so I adjusted exposure comp. I guess a trained eye can see that there would be things amiss but I can assure you that any would be an error in the original photo, not as a result of photoshop or processing.

It may look a bit fake to you due to the sharpness, and I think that might be a preference since a softer setting yields a more natural look while adding some sharpening allows for sharper detail (which I prefer). I know you know more about this than I do but my main point is that I did not photoshop it and the results were not on purpose.

 

[christian900se]

Was not implying that you were trying to hide anything.:nomore:

I didn't intend that last sentence to be insinuating anything. I was just basing it on the garage shot debate earlier in the thread where indirect light can hide defects and swirls.

 

[DLB]

The only way you are going to gain credibility on shots that are posted on the internet is to show a video of you taking the picture, plugging the pics into your computer, uploading them, and posting them. Otherwise, there isn't a single picture you can take that would totally dissolve the criticism of folks on the message boards.

If you think there's one certain way someone can take pics and it not be doctored, you have never been to Worth1000.com.

Personally, I think that if someone is posting it on the detailing forums, they obviously care about how well their correction came out. Perfect or not - they are at least bold enough to post any picture on the detailing message boards (because they are about to be tried by fire). Your everyday Joe usually doesn't frequent these boards.

By the amount of criticism I often read posted about some details by different people (not like this thread, or here at AG that much at all) there are only like 5 people on earth that can really detail a car correctly, and those 5 people choose who they are. When it becomes a pissing contest of camera skills, head over to the photography boards. I just like seeing people take a car and make it shine - and learning how to do that better myself.

Edit: There are those exceptions where a hack is trying to show off his skills and it is obvious that he is just doing more harm. (Read: Poor Lambo boy...)

DLB