Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 210 211 [212] 213 214 ... 220 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Recent Professional Works  (Read 989888 times)
K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 650


« Reply #4220 on: January 18, 2013, 11:08:24 PM »
ReplyReply

The idea that overproduced car photography leads to an increase of CGI isn't really accurate.  At least in the US automotive photography is increasing from where it was 3-4 years ago, one reason is it's cheaper in many instances.

I'm the last person that'll claim shooting cars is an over priced market. That's not what I posted and I'll defer to your knowledge of the industry trend here in the U.S.. It's been 25 years since I loaded a 4X5 and shot in a Detroit studio. I was referring to the Germany market, and I don't necessarily know that it's even a trend. I just have two friends who have big studios, and more Broncolor gear than any single human should be allowed to own, that are selling out because they've lost the work to CG. One shot exclusively for Audi and the other for BMW.

Concerning the rear end of the car, it's just a couple of lights bounced into a flat above the vehicle and maybe a little fill on a side wall, certainly nothing out of the ordinary.

Again, I said it "looks" rendered. I didn't think it was. I'm not sure why but it just has a different feel from the rest of the shot.

And believe me I'm glad it's what you do. You're doing a damn fine job of it.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2013, 12:46:20 AM by K.C. » Logged
K.C.
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 650


« Reply #4221 on: January 18, 2013, 11:10:23 PM »
ReplyReply

Probably not a good idea to post right after Jim's amazing shots but since we are on cars now.....

Great images, and I'd agree, the interior shot is outstanding!
Logged
MJSPhoto
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 22


WWW
« Reply #4222 on: January 19, 2013, 12:25:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the compliments! I am mostly a location shooter and it's a [fun] challenge to do studio work, so it means a lot to me to hear that you liked them. Phew!






I'm the last person that'll claim shooting cars is an over priced market. That's not what I posted and I'll defer to your knowledge of the industry trend here in the U.S.. It's been 25 years since I loaded a 4X5 and shot in a Detroit studio. I was referring to the Germany market, and I don't necessarily know that it's even a trend. I just have two friends who have big studios, and more Broncolor gear than any single human should be allowed to own, that are selling out because they've lost the work to CG. One shot exclusively for Audi and the other for BMW.

Again, I said it looks rendered. I'm not sure why but it just has a different feel from the rest of the shot.

And believe me I'm glad it's what you do. You're doing a damn fine job of it.


Perhaps it is a German thing as Mercedes does mostly CGI too. A landscape photographer friend of mine shoots bg plates and domes for a lot of the Mercedes stuff. He has encouraged me to try shooting backgrounds but I am a car nut and cars are the reason I got into this.



I had a discussion with a car designer a little while ago. I brought up the issue of CG car adds and press releases. He said that a large part of the move to CG is the direction car photography and heavy retouching took.

He said that so much of the car photography is so heavily processed that it starts to look CG. In particular he was referring to the HDR sort of look heavy blacks and contrasts that you just don't see in reality.

In his words he's just seen car photography moved so much towards photo/photoshop illustration that the next logical step was CG.

Many watch makers have gone the same way, but there it's different due to the fact that they are making full pages of small objects do you need to go past reality to have an appearance that
would look comparable to real life viewing of a small object.


I may be wrong, but I saw it as being the other way around, the heavy retouching of photos was made in response to CGI
« Last Edit: January 19, 2013, 12:27:38 AM by MJSPhoto » Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #4223 on: January 19, 2013, 04:28:58 AM »
ReplyReply


To a certain extent I see it happening in fashion photography... Skin textures that are more of an illustration rather than photography. HDR type looks, over working the files etc.
What is interesting is that the more important fashion work is more photographic looking and less post produced. Not saying that they don't retouch wrinkles and folds, but they keep
a more photographic look there.

However it's interesting that at the very high end you will still find a more "purist" (less manipulated) photographic look.

For example IWC campaign and book by Peter Lindbergh. http://www.iwc.com/en/experiences/days-portofino/
Also a look at the Bugatti website media and the cars are shot in a less processed looking way. http://www.bugatti.com/en/experience/media.html



Hi Fred

I have a Thames & Hudson tome called Femme Fatale, with photography by Michael Thompson.

Three photographs spring to mind: a b/w portrait of Cindy Crawford, and two colour shots of Christy Turlington and Carmen Kass. In the Cindy image especially, a very large head shot, the skin is skin and it looks fantastic. The colour images too convey the feeling of person and not mannequin.

I simply don’t understand where the idea of plastic people came from. I do appreciate that I left fashion in the late 70s and that lots has happened since, but why did it take this direction to absurdity? Nobody on the street buys into the idea that it’s representational of women; is that perhaps the purpose? To remove the threat of real beauty from the readership’s worry zone?

Rob C




Logged

KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1616



WWW
« Reply #4224 on: January 19, 2013, 05:25:44 AM »
ReplyReply

I simply don’t understand where the idea of plastic people came from.

Or cars.

It seems that even when it's not CGI it's mimicking CGI.
Logged

Kolor-Pikker
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 57


« Reply #4225 on: January 19, 2013, 05:35:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Or cars.

It seems that even when it's not CGI it's mimicking CGI.

I find that so odd, modern manufacture pretty much requires them to have a complete 3D rendering of the entire car, which could theoretically be imported into an app like 3dsmax or Maya and then you can do whatever.
If going through the whole trouble of actually having to shoot a car on-location, wouldn't it be because the manufacturer desires an "earthly" feel? Is there any advantage over a render that you can output to any size you like with just a couple mouse clicks?
Logged
uaiomex
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 935


WWW
« Reply #4226 on: January 19, 2013, 11:31:52 AM »
ReplyReply

An editorial designer, good friend of mine says all the time that CGI imitates photography and that now photography imitates CGI. Smiley
Eduardo

Or cars.

It seems that even when it's not CGI it's mimicking CGI.
Logged
HarperPhotos
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1192



WWW
« Reply #4227 on: January 19, 2013, 02:27:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Hello,

One of my car shots  I like cause of its simplicity.

Love the Vette shots Jim.

Cheers

Simon
Logged

Simon Harper
Harper Photographics Ltd
http://www.harperphoto.com
http://www.facebook.com/harper.photographics

Auckland, New Zealand
Scott Hargis
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 190



WWW
« Reply #4228 on: January 19, 2013, 05:19:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Simon, I like that one very much -- CLEAN.
Logged

<a href="http://www.scotthargisphoto.com">Website</a>
Scott Hargis
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 190



WWW
« Reply #4229 on: January 19, 2013, 05:21:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Still digging through stuff from last fall...this for the designer.
Logged

<a href="http://www.scotthargisphoto.com">Website</a>
haefnerphoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 613


WWW
« Reply #4230 on: January 19, 2013, 10:20:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Scott, I think this post is one of the nicest shots I seen of yours.  Great composition and good, defining light.  I would have taken the can lights out of the ceiling and I'm on the fence about the far chairs but it really sets up well, I love the detail in the chairs.

Simon, It's clean I guess and shows the product but I'd prefer something more dynamic.   
Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #4231 on: January 20, 2013, 03:42:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Scott, I think this post is one of the nicest shots I seen of yours.  Great composition and good, defining light.  I would have taken the can lights out of the ceiling and I'm on the fence about the far chairs but it really sets up well, I love the detail in the chairs.

Simon, It's clean I guess and shows the product but I'd prefer something more dynamic.   


Jim, a Focus can't look dynamic; its the epitome of current jelly-mould design. Only the older Civic or perhaps an Auris could match it for lack of dynamic exuberance.

From the company that gave us the GT and the Mustang, it beggars belief where they have sunk. The last vaguely dynamic machine they produced in Europe was the previous Escort RS thing with the high rear spoiler.

They may well go very quickly and safely, these newer cars, but they look like dog turds just dropped.

And to think I still buy their product!

Rob C
Logged

bcooter
Guest
« Reply #4232 on: January 20, 2013, 11:33:12 PM »
ReplyReply



BC
Logged
george2787
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 53


« Reply #4233 on: January 21, 2013, 02:33:12 AM »
ReplyReply

Great image BC, love how everithing just clicks  Smiley
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #4234 on: January 21, 2013, 03:28:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Great image BC, love how everithing just clicks  Smiley


It's those friggin' beads; they never stop clickin'!

Yes, I recognize the girl as one of Coot's favourites, and she'd be one of mine too, had I but the chance. She has no idea what she's missing! (Joke.)

B/white can be so refreshing once in a while; it can remove the falseness of modern 'skin' and takes us more deeply into the imagination, which is where dream-peddlers always reach. Thank God. It could almost be European...

Beautiful combination of elements that go to produce a great image. Love it.

Rob C
Logged

KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1616



WWW
« Reply #4235 on: January 21, 2013, 03:37:02 AM »
ReplyReply



Puts me in mind of Vera Gräfin von Lehndorff-Steinort, AKA Veruschka.
Logged

Hulyss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 454



WWW
« Reply #4236 on: January 21, 2013, 04:11:56 AM »
ReplyReply



BC

I like it a lot. It was on film ?

Some of my last work too : (critics are very welcome !)

« Last Edit: January 21, 2013, 05:04:10 AM by Hulyss » Logged

Kind Regards - www.hulyssbowman.com
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #4237 on: January 21, 2013, 07:32:39 AM »
ReplyReply

Puts me in mind of Vera Gräfin von Lehndorff-Steinort, AKA Veruschka.



Ah Keith, my penultimate penthouse neighbour was a friend of Verushka's family... There were indeed two sides to WW2, but not all of them perfectly clearly defined.

Memories of Blow Up and also of Verushka standing, naked and painted to suit the background, in a forest. Wood for the trees?

Rob C
« Last Edit: January 21, 2013, 07:36:05 AM by Rob C » Logged

Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #4238 on: January 21, 2013, 07:35:04 AM »
ReplyReply

What's also quite intriguing, apart from the girl, is the immediate background: it looks like grain, but also makes me think of a sheet of glass between the subject and background... making one think like this is surely another sign of a successful image. One is driven to thought!

Rob C
Logged

bcooter
Guest
« Reply #4239 on: January 22, 2013, 03:34:39 AM »
ReplyReply

The second image from the previous post that is part of the delivered spread.





BC
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 210 211 [212] 213 214 ... 220 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad