snubbr.com

How is a shot like this possible? (1 image)
Funny how owning a DSLR turns websurfing into a totally new experience. Every photo I see makes me wonder how it was taken. For instance, I was lurking in a car forum and see this:.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Pictures of a moving car at night with the car and occupants in sharp focus with fore and background in motion blur. Yet, the fore and background are not significantly out of focus, which means a rather long depth of field, which means a smaller aperture than I would think to use at night. Plus it looks like a wide angle lens of some sort. And if they used flash, how did they keep all the street lighting and neon sign hues intact? It looks like voodoo magic to this noob...

Comments (18)

Looks like it was taken from another car also in motion (hence the motion blur everwhere), traveling the same speed. Wide lenses have larger DOF than teles...

Comment #1

Canon EOS 5D.

1/40s, f/4, ISO 1600focal length 20mmno flash..

Comment #2

Search about the panning technique. Or other option is to take it from another vehicle that travels at the same speed as the subject.I guess it is panning.VictorBucuresti, Romaniahttp://s106.photobucket.com/albums/m268/victor_petcu/http://picasaweb.google.com/teodor.nitica/..

Comment #3

How'd you look up the EXIF? Thanks..

[Edit: Nevermind. I found the Firefox extension that views embedded EXIF data.]..

Comment #4

Looks faked to me..

The lights reflected off the car aren't blurred. There should be some blurring of those if it was moving when the shot was taken. The blurs and other things don't look consistent to me, so I suspect it was a shop of a static vehicle taken with everything stationary and then edited to give an appearance of motion. It's possible the vehicle and background are from different images..

Or maybe I'm just spending too much time in the retouching forum. .

StephenG.

Fuji S3 ProPentax K100DFuji S9600Fuji E900PCLinuxOS..

Comment #5

Sjgcit wrote:.

Looks faked to me..

The lights reflected off the car aren't blurred. There should besome blurring of those if it was moving when the shot was taken. Theblurs and other things don't look consistent to me, so I suspect itwas a shop of a static vehicle taken with everything stationary andthen edited to give an appearance of motion. It's possible thevehicle and background are from different images..

Or maybe I'm just spending too much time in the retouching forum. .

StephenG.

Fuji S3 ProPentax K100DFuji S9600Fuji E900PCLinuxOS.

BA and Baloo are on the right track. Look at it again..

Nothing is enough for the man to whom nothing is enough...

Comment #6

The wheels are clearly in motion and it would be next to impossible to do the reflections on the car. I believe the first poster had it correct and it is taken from another car and/or and it is paned. Based on the EXIF another poster provided I believe it is totally doable..

Here is a paning shot that I took. While it is certainly not of level of the one in the OP it shows getting a sharp shot of the car but blured background. In this case I was stationary and the car was doing about 60 mph here..

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Olympus E-510 and a bunch of stuff to hang on it...

Comment #7

I think it was taken from the back of a pickup or SUV with the window down..

If you look at the road to the right at the bottom the blur is pointed straight toward you..

A person standing and "panning" would create curved blur..

I don't think it was photoshoped either, but I've been fooled before. Or should that be "I've been a fool before"?.

If you think that makes sense, then you must have read someone else's post!..

Comment #8

This info makes sense, plus it's a good example where digital beats film..

I don't think this shot could be taken using ISO 1600 film and look anywhere near as good..

And yes, from one moving vehicle, no flash..

BAK..

Comment #9

AJLee wrote:.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

I am going with photoshop.It could have been done several ways..

One way, it could have been taken in situ, but stationary (or moving VERY slowly, about 5-10mph), and the blur put in afterwards.Secondly, it could have been taken elswhere and put in afterwards..

Look at the wheels. I would expect a lot more blur at 1/40 sec, unless travelling very slowly.The reflections on the car would be blured.What is that shadow from at the bottom right?Should the other cars be in focus if travelling at the same/similar speed?The road looks like motion blur, where the buildings look like camera shake..

Its still a nice photo though.Matt Simpson.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #10

This shot was taken from another car, travelling at the same speed..

Edvinas..

Comment #11

Look at the wheels. I would expect a lot more blur at 1/40 sec,unless travelling very slowly.The reflections on the car would be blured.What is that shadow from at the bottom right?Should the other cars be in focus if travelling at the same/similarspeed?The road looks like motion blur, where the buildings look like camerashake..

Its still a nice photo though..

I'd agree with you. It would be easier to take a shot of the stationary car and blur the background in PP. The reflections would be at least a bit blurred if not to the same extent as the rest of the image. Could be an amalgam of two or three photos..

Androohttp://Androo.smugmug.com..

Comment #12

As others have stated this was more than likely taken from another moving car. You can get a SIMILAR but not exactly the same effect using a lensbaby (to my understanding that is, I don't actually have one...)Justin DiPierroFort Ann, New York - 12827-http://www.JDiPierro.com..

Comment #13

Seems like this would be fun to try to recreate, just to prove your theories correct. Time to bust out that nice fast wide prime and do some drive-bys tonight....

Comment #14

Guys, do a search in Google about automotive camera rigs. That's how it was done. A rig is basically a hardmounted camera stand that holds the camera out from the vehicle while it's being driven, then the camera's remote fired to take the shot. Post-processing is then done to remove the visible parts of the rig from the final photo. Since the camera is mounted to the car directly, the car stays perfectly in focus due to it's not moving in relation to the camera (aside from maybe camera shake and the like). Here's a quick photo I found just now:.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #15

My thought was to look for a reflection in the red car and I think I can see the shape of a pickup in the front corner panel when magnified. I would go with the "taken from a moving car" theory. Catherine..

Comment #16

Again, it's not from another car, it's a rig. Rigs are standard items in automotive photography and used quite a bit. Here's a link to a discussion about rigs in an pro auto photographers forum: http://community.automotivephoto.net/forums/showthread.php?t=1590.

And some more shots of rigs and sample photos:.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window.

Image control:Zoom outZoom 100%Zoom inExpand AllOpen in new window..

Comment #17

Hi,.

Open the window, than with the camera set up for "A" mode take several shots as the car starts to overtake slowly (meaning keeping to more or less the same speed and the camera photographer's car)..

Back ground will be blurred (slight camera shake and OOF) and the car will be in focus (that's why "A" mode was chosen). Shadow of the mirror on the road isn't blurred, btw, a good pointer..

The winning shot take a fraction of a second and is picked from a dozen or so..

Messing around with pp afterwards would take a lot longer. Remember that pro's usually get it right first time and every time, which is why they are pro's..

Regards, David..

Comment #18

Click Here to View All...

Sponsored Amazon Deals:

1. Get big savings on Amazon warehouse deals.
2. Save up to 70% on Amazon Products.


This question was taken from a support group/message board and re-posted here so others can learn from it.

 

Categories: Home | Diet & Weight Management | Vitamins & Supplements | Herbs & Cleansing |

Sexual Health | Medifast Support | Nutrisystem Support | Medifast Questions |

Web Hosting | Web Hosts | Website Hosting | Hosting |

Web Hosting | GoDaddy | Digital Cameras | Best WebHosts |

Web Hosting FAQ | Web Hosts FAQ | Hosting FAQ | Hosting Group |

Hosting Questions | Camera Tips | Best Cameras To Buy | Best Cameras This Year |

Camera Q-A | Digital Cameras Q-A | Camera Forum | Nov 2010 - Cameras |

Oct 2010 - Cameras | Oct 2010 - DSLRs | Oct 2010 - Camera Tips | Sep 2010 - Cameras |

Sep 2010 - DSLRS | Sep 2010 - Camera Tips | Aug 2010 - Cameras | Aug 2010 - DSLR Tips |

Aug 2010 - Camera Tips | July 2010 - Cameras | July 2010 - Nikon Cameras | July 2010 - Canon Cameras |

July 2010 - Pentax Cameras | Medifast Recipes | Medifast Recipes Tips | Medifast Recipes Strategies |

Medifast Recipes Experiences | Medifast Recipes Group | Medifast Recipes Forum | Medifast Support Strategies |

Medifast Support Experiences |

 

(C) Copyright 2010 All rights reserved.