Light, Camera, Action

[wolf sun]

The second one looks 'easier' to me, in a way - the low speed one is much more dramatic, almost as if you could hear the car scream past.

imo

[tatounet]

Originally Posted by wolf sun

This one's not 'frozen'...what about the colours, are they okay?

I have this version (canon camera)
look less orange ?
different light ?

[wolf sun]

Interesting comparison. That is probably where colour-blindness comes into play...

[John Turner]

Cadwell, HSCC, 2009. Shame about the pole, though!

[John Turner]

Silverstone Classic, 2009

[grantp]

Originally Posted by tatounet

I have this version (canon camera)
look less orange ?
different light ?

Viewing these through IE8 on my 'calibrated' (but calibration not checked for a very long time .... ) notebook screen the individual colours all look almost identical. There may be a slight difference for white balance. The number rouundels and helmet on tatounet's quite accurate - the helmet quite white, the roundel a slightly cream coloured white. Wolf sun's shot has, in my screen, slightly 'blue' whites typical of 'shade' of some sort - and example being dull cloudy and wet days. Warming the colour temperature slightly would help the whites.

If the shot was taken using RAW you can adjust the original colour temp selected easily since the balance is an overlay for the RAW data. If it is only avalable as a jpg the colour temp will be embedded in the processing and so it is slightly more difficult sometimes to get a re-balance across the colour ranges available. However the adjust ment here is quite small I would think so should work OK.

Having writen all of that there is absolutely no guarantee that my system and its settings are correct .... I can only report what I see and it may not be anything like what other see!

I meant to say - both shots are excellent captures of moving vehicles especially given the dull light available.

[John Turner]

Yep, they're superb.

[tatounet]

another five set

[John Turner]

The definition is so good on these.

[grantp]

A few from a very sunny Mallory park test day last Wednesday.

The light brings some ready 'punch' to the images but at the same time can overexpose on whites or, if compensating for that, underexpose other areas losing details in the shadows and perhaps oversaturating the colours, especially lighter colours. If the overall balance is not too bad a good photo editor program will permit some adjustment of the whites without making them grey and allow the darler areas to be lifted to recover some detail - though at that end of the light you really need to be looking at a big uncompressed image to see what is there. Reducing the size for web use and using the typical jpg high compression will tend to hide detail especially in the darker areas of an image.

You may spot some differences in the shapes of the images - some of these are quite significant crops from the original file thought without any effort fo obey the 'rules' of proportions that one is supposed to follow to make pictures easy on the eye.

ETA: I meant to draw attention to the two shots with the D-Type.

That said one of the nice things about Mallory is that the on track action is never too far away. Different exposrures and post-processing are evident with the solo D-Type shot being somewhat lighter since the camera and my PP work did not have to expose for all the white on the Williams as is the case in the other shot. However the D-Type colour is light enough that the fin in the solo shot is almost lost against the white section of armco.

Click the images for larger versions. Then click again for screen filling sizes. (However if using a fairly modern browser with built in zoom capabilities it is best to stay at no more than 100% since the resolution available in the original files is not enough to go to 'wall' size ..... amongst other things.)

[tatounet]

[Nick JM]

fabulous pics Grant -as ever. Interesting how the wet shows the different lines. Look atthe last one withthe tracks of the Capri clearly still visible ...and then look at the 911 coming up behind

[grantp]

Originally Posted by Nick JM

fabulous pics Grant -as ever. Interesting how the wet shows the different lines. Look atthe last one withthe tracks of the Capri clearly still visible ...and then look at the 911 coming up behind

The Spa pics are not mine Nick - wish they were though I have many from Spa that I am happy with.

Tatounet gets credit for those.

I agree about the lines but I think that is at the end of the Kemmel Straight where one often sees different lines in the braking zone. It's just possible that the Capri had either been hoping to pass the Healey on a wider line or had been keeping out of the spray - looks like the Healey line was about mid way between the Capri and Porsche lines.

I suspect the the difference between Front engine and rear wheel drive compared to Rear engine and RWD may offer scope for alternative approaches but I will leave that for experts to comment on.

[terence]

Great shots Tatounet,just out of interest,what is the light green car?

[John Turner]

Terry, you're beginning to sound like a two bob watch!

[rogerwills]

Catching up on 10/10 after several weeks absenteeism. Bravo Grant on your posts here. I was about to skip this thread as my camera skills end at point and shoot. But this is all quite interesting and very informative. Thanks Grant!

[grantp]

Originally Posted by grantp

Hmm.

If I had one I would Colin.

The best option seems to be to keep the camera in a dark environment. Leaving it in the bag seems to avoid the problem ....

On the other hand ....

The light at Mallory last weekend was quite similar to the 'problem' meeting back in the Summer although the sun was a little lower in the sky and less intense I suppose. But I was expecting some challenges with the dark blue cars as usual.

Didn't get any challenges. They snapped quite well.

Variables between the two days?

Slightly different sun due to time of year.
The MotoX track was muddy rather than dusty ....
Different camera and lens.

Beyond that ..... nothing I can think of.

Hmmm.

[grantp]

Originally Posted by grantp

ETA: I meant to draw attention to the two shots with the D-Type.

Erm, an update.

I saw this D Type racing at Mallory and the weekend and it was a pale yellow, not the beige is see on the shots posted. (At least as seen on my screens ....)

Puzzled I looked into this and realised that the new editor software I have been using has a subtle colour adjustment feature that had made the shift without obviously affecting anything else. And I had then 'copied' that to a number of other images by selecting the settings from one shot, with the spurious adjustment I had not noticed at the time, and applying it to a lof of similar shots. For most of them there wouold be no visible change but the yellow of the Jag was changed in every one of them.

All I have to do now is work out how to remove this particular inappropriate adjustment. For all the other features in the software the method of removal or reversal is obvious - but not for this one. What fun we do have with modern technology!

That said the D-Type does look OK in Beige .... or at least I think it does.

[Alan Raine]

Originally Posted by grantp

The light at Mallory last weekend was quite similar to the 'problem' meeting back in the Summer although the sun was a little lower in the sky and less intense I suppose. But I was expecting some challenges with the dark blue cars as usual.

I had a go at shooting towards the sun, trying to get some sort of silhouette of the car. I'm not sure it really worked but I quite like the reflection at the back.

[grantp]

Originally Posted by rogerwills

Catching up on 10/10 after several weeks absenteeism. Bravo Grant on your posts here. I was about to skip this thread as my camera skills end at point and shoot. But this is all quite interesting and very informative. Thanks Grant!

Thank you Roger.

Getting into the nitty gritty of photography is not for everyone and nor should it be but a little background appreciation of what is going in the technology is something that I find can help with getting the images we think we are taking to be closer to what we expected from them

Visually people are attracted to different things so there is no real 'right' and 'wrong'. What is nice for personal use is to know how to get close to the results you hoped to achieve by understanding what influences are most important. Action shots tend to offer a few more variables than static shots - but also more varied opinions about what works and what doesn't work.

I'm begining to formulate another post as I type this - but other things to do for the next few hours.

[wolf sun]

Originally Posted by rogerwills

Bravo Grant on your posts here.

... this is all quite interesting and very informative. Thanks Grant!

Indeed, seconded!

[grantp]

Originally Posted by Alan Raine

I had a go at shooting towards the sun, trying to get some sort of silhouette of the car. I'm not sure it really worked but I quite like the reflection at the back.

It looks like a good sharp pan shot but with the background 'fill' from the paddock a silhouette will be a challenge.

Plan B would be to lighten the car a little to bring some detail back into the side facing the camera but still retain the the rest of the exposure as it is retaining the silhouette that you captured.

Or, if you are into photoshop, you cut out the car part of the frame, make it a pure silhouette and then paste it over a different photo showing a sunset with a plain hillside backdrop - probably something taken somewhere in Spain ....

[Nick JM]

Gentlemen, I lack the photographic knowledge of you chaps and therefore I cannot joinin your discussion but I can appreciate the result.

Fabulous pics, all. Please keep them coming.

[rogerwills]

Originally Posted by tatounet

[/IMG]

Off topic sorry, but there is a ride height test for HTP etc I believe. Surely this doesn't pass?

[terence]

The photo certainly gives that appearance Roger, doesn't look like 100mm ground clearance under the sump,also tends to make the w/screen look wider as well!