# pictures - magazine style



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

OK,
So these shots are large (and I shrank them 60% and reduced the density 70%) but they are still not so small. Anyway I do have the full size if anyone wants one for a backdrop or something. (Ha ha...)
I took about 24 shots, but I liked these the best.

Seth


----------



## Psch91 (May 18, 2002)

Nice man, those pics are sweet looking, and portraying a good looking car. Did you cause all those tire marks?


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

Thanks.
Nah, it looks like it was a semi (tractor trailor).

Seth

P.S. The images shot WERE NOT taken with a professional camera. It was not even 35mm. I used my HP photosmart 812 point and shoot 4MP digicam that I use for taking pics of my writeups. It was set at full auto on 75% image quality. So anyone can do stuff like this. No custom settings, no tripods or flash reflectors or anything. Just scope out a good location, and wait for the sun to set. Then get adventurous with the composing. Take more shots than less and pick the better ones.


----------



## RedSER93 (Apr 11, 2003)

your pics look good and you car looks great


----------



## Ninety-Nine SE-L (May 5, 2002)

DROP IT!!!!! 2" OR SO!!!!!!


----------



## Guest (May 20, 2003)

How bright are all those lights??? I bet HID is still brighter.


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

1997 GA16DE said:


> *DROP IT!!!!! 2" OR SO!!!!!!  *


Yeah yeah...I knew someone would say that sooner or later.

HID is 'brighter' yes, but doesn't have the range that I do. I can see farther theoretically.

Seth


----------



## samo (Apr 30, 2002)

A couple suggestions from a fellow photography fiend:

Are you spot metering or eval metering? Because of the darkness of the car, I think spot metering might be your best bet.

Are you running any filters on the photos in Photoshop? I'm a big fan of the Auto Levels function and a conservative Unsharp Mask. I've found that by running these two over a resized image, the color and clarity are much, much better.

I especially like the last picture you posted. Something about that angle jumps out at me. I also really like the angle on #2, but the backdrop is a little 'meh.'

Outstanding shots, man. It's nice to see some more creative photography  !


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

samo said:


> -Are you spot metering or eval metering?
> :I doubt this digicam has spot metering, most point and shoots don't. Its most likely eval.
> 
> -Because of the darkness of the car, I think spot metering might be your best bet.
> ...


----------



## samo (Apr 30, 2002)

Send me an e-mail with the full version of #4 - [email protected] .

I played around with the last one a bit. Auto Levels didn't do much, since it's already pretty balanced. But Unsharp Mask brought out the lines quite well... as well as the JPEG "chunks" from compression  . I also ran "despeckle" on it, which nuked the chunks, but removed the detail from the grille - so it's a tradeoff.

I'm not a big fan of running gobs of filters on images, though. Ideally, your camera skills should be the primary thing making the shots great and Photoshop should only be used as a polish.

Odd that your camera only has eval metering. My Canon A40 has selectable spot/eval (as well as 75% manual mode  ) and it was only circa-$300. You're lucky, however, that you can take such massive shots as 4MP. I'm limited to 2MP (1600x1200) which seriously limits the flexibility of the uses of my shots. Somewhere along the line I would really like to pick up a digital SLR and do some _really_ cool stuff  .

Composition-wise, I think I like the shots without strong yellow hues in them better. The tan or reddish backgrouds highlight the lines of your car and draw the eyes toward it. The ones with the bright yellows in them draw your eye away from the mellow colors of the car. For instance,on #5, the large cement blocks to either side of the front of your car immediately catch my eye. On #6, the yellow block to the right causes some conflict with the car - I'm not quite sure what to look at.

The more I look at #1, the more I like it. The tan and green background is mellow enough to highlight the car, and all the lines point in towards the body of the car. One thing I noticed that really caught my eye is the reflection on the car. There's a light arc traveling from the bumper to the beltline of the car that really highlights the curvature of the side of the car. Plus, with the car so dominant in the picture, your eyes can't help but traverse the lines of the car. Compositionally this is the best one, I think.

Good stuff.


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

Well,
I agree with you and the yellow objects in the picture. The color clash does draw the eye away.
My camera wasn't my choice. It was a gift. I do 90% (now anyway, it used to be 100%) of my shooting on a Nikon N60 SLR with a Tamron 38-200 lens. Its like 4.5-5.6 at its biggest depending on zoom. My inlaws didn't like the hulk of a camera I would lug around, but I said nothing else compares (except maybe an F100 or N80..._) so they got me a small digicam from staples (bureau en gros, office max, office depot, etc.) The tiny size does have its advantages. It fints in a jacket pocket and can be hidden in the palm of my hand. If only its startup sequence wasn't so long or the zoom didn't make so much noise, or its delay in cycluing between writing the current shot and taking the next, or its propensity to eat batteries...but I digress. It has served me well. But I've used better. However this is mine and it was a gift.
Anyway,
I use primarily Kodak Royal Gold 200 and 400 and am now experimenting with the Portra Ultra Color. Its like the Royal gold but softer in texture and a tad more vivid in contrasting tones. 
If I had my say in a digicam I would have gotten a 'ZLR" which is basically a non-removable lens SLR that is digital and 5MP+. The truth is for most shooting 4-6MP is fine. THe key is color accuracy, and read/write time on the camera and its recycle rate (how long between shots). On my HP both are low, but its color accuracy is better than cameras in a class above. However it is fully automatic and you can't adjust anything except auto flash and red-eye.
Normally if I was going to do a 'real' shoot I would scope out locations, bring my tripod, bracket (which those digishots needed. They needed to be opened up about a full stop), and wait for the right kind of sunset. Unfortunately there aren't many open areas where a building will block the sun or there is some clutter. 
Still though for 20 minutes on a monday evening on my way home I'm satisfied. I shot on digital just for the 'learning' experience. It was free. Otherwise I would have had to pay for a roll of film and developing, and this cost me nothing. Even the batteries were re-chargeable.
Now at least I know what angles I like.

Seth


----------



## andre (Apr 30, 2002)

I like the third shot.....looks best to me....


----------



## samo (Apr 30, 2002)

sethwas said:


> *Normally if I was going to do a 'real' shoot I would scope out locations, bring my tripod, bracket (which those digishots needed. They needed to be opened up about a full stop), and wait for the right kind of sunset. Unfortunately there aren't many open areas where a building will block the sun or there is some clutter.
> Still though for 20 minutes on a monday evening on my way home I'm satisfied. I shot on digital just for the 'learning' experience. It was free. Otherwise I would have had to pay for a roll of film and developing, and this cost me nothing. Even the batteries were re-chargeable.
> Now at least I know what angles I like.
> *


Finding the right combination of light, angle, and location is an amazingly difficult proposition, I've found. For simply crusing over to a lot and snapping some, your shots look fantastic. Hell, some of the magazine photos I've seen (first issue of HCI...) have less planning into them than your shots.

I got the large version of 6 today, and you're right, it is about 1,000,000 times clearer... damn JPEG compression  .

Good work, man.


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

:blush:
All in a days work.

Seth


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

1997 GA16DE said:


> *DROP IT!!!!! 2" OR SO!!!!!!  *













Hmm,
Kinda goofy looking with this photoshop quickie, must be the lopsided background...

Seth

P.S. Anyone else think I need some really clean skirts. Not quite SE-L. Maybe M3? There aren't any other choices for a 4 door except the GTR which aint 'clean'.


----------



## 98 nizmo200sx se (Apr 10, 2003)

one time in Illinois i got pulled over for having to many lights on my car and i got a ticket i never paid for and its been 5yrs ago


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

Well,
Considering that a mazda 6, subaru WRX, land rover discovery, and an infiniti Q45 all have more lights than I do from the factory, I don't think I'll have a problem.

Seth


----------



## Ninety-Nine SE-L (May 5, 2002)

hehe, I still think back to that photoshop I did with all those lights on ur car, .


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

/\/\/\
Thats exactly what I was thinking.

Seth


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2003)

www.cardomain.com/id/godspeed240sx


----------



## Ninety-Nine SE-L (May 5, 2002)

nice car godspeed, but please start a new thread.


----------



## Guest (May 23, 2003)

thanks. . . not trying to go on your stomping grounds CHILL! lol im new so u gotta respect!


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

Woh,
Yeah his car definately needs a new thread. It'll outshine mine 

Seth


----------



## SweetRideNAz (May 16, 2003)

the only thing i would do is put some tint on the windows


----------



## SweetRideNAz (May 16, 2003)

but otherwise it looks great


----------



## Gimp (Jun 9, 2002)

godspeed said:


> *im new so u gotta respect! *


Not to sound like TOO much of an ass, but....YOU'RE new so YOU need to respect!


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

samo said:


> * I also really like the angle on #2, but the backdrop is a little 'meh.'
> *


Better?:










Seth




P.S. I guess the only things to fix now are the sunlight color in the windows. Needs to be a tad darker, and of course the reflection in the door panels.


----------



## Ninety-Nine SE-L (May 5, 2002)

/\/\/\/\
That's a good pic. Well placed, good backdrop.


----------



## krylonkoopaa (Sep 13, 2002)

sethwas said:


> *Better?:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



way nice pics seth


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

P.S. I got the backround from here:

http://www.nismo.org/2003/

Seth


----------



## Token Moron (Mar 28, 2003)

i dont know crap about taking pics, but i think your car would look nice with the backround from the site u provided(second pic), i think it'll contrast well with the color of your car....but thats just me


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

tHe iLleSt RiCe said:


> *but i think your car would look nice with the backround from the site u provided(second pic), i think it'll contrast well with the color of your car....but thats just me *


You mean like this:










Seth

P.S. Please excuse the windows.


----------



## Rama (Mar 8, 2003)

I like that

The windows remind of South Park. Cartman's sunglasses when he was a cop on the big wheel and always had the same desert horizon in his sunglasses even though they lived in a snow ridden mountainous area pretty funny. Did you drop your car or is that a photoshop?


----------



## Token Moron (Mar 28, 2003)

Rama said:


> *I like that
> 
> The windows remind of South Park. Cartman's sunglasses when he was a cop on the big wheel and always had the same desert horizon in his sunglasses even though they lived in a snow ridden mountainous area pretty funny. Did you drop your car or is that a photoshop? *


youre a southpark freak huh? 


ya, that drop on his car is a photoshop,



> You mean like this:


thats exactly what i mean.......looks real good


----------



## Rama (Mar 8, 2003)

> youre a southpark freak huh?


guilty as charged 

ahh ok I wasn't for sure if seth suddenly upgraded his suspension out of the blue my bad


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

Well,
Its sort of a wishful thinking. I'd like the tein SS but I know I will never touch the dampeners. So I'm shooting for the basics (and I get to save a few bucks). I am sorta in the market for a new suspension anyway, but it won't be for at least 8 weeks.
Have to admit it does look nice though...the stance from the rear defies a $9,000 car.

Seth


----------



## Nostrodomas (Jun 15, 2002)

Hey seth dont get mad but, I was really bored. So I shaved and molded a few things on that pic.


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

Mad?
Why would I get mad?
I like other interpretations of my 'creation'.
I can see you did the bumpers to the fenders, the bump strips on the door, and the handles. Anything else?

Seth


----------



## Nostrodomas (Jun 15, 2002)

Good eye... Yea you pointed out most of it but the headlights, pin striping, and the front bumper. I just tinted the heads a lil bit, and removed the pin striping. Then shaved out the license plate indention, on the bumper.


----------



## sethwas (Apr 30, 2002)

The pinstriping I saw but forgot to mention. I figured the headlights was just a compression thing from your PC. But I would have never caught the license plate unles you told me.

Seth


----------

