Auto ( Car) Shoots (Page 2): Nice car! :)...

Skipaslew

Nice car! :)

lightchime Loc: Somewhere Over The Rainbow

I see over exposure on the rims, not glare.

Metals, to my understanding, do not polarize light; if the light is not polarized, a cpl will will not have glare to effect. A CPL, however, will reduce reduce overall light to both under exposed and over exposed areas in a fairly consistent fashion.

Bottom line is that a polarizing filter, in this situation, will be ineffective. Softer light would result in a better capture. Just because one has good equipment does not mean that every image can be captured at any time. This situation is where skill or not tripping the shutter comes into play.

Bill Houghton Loc: New York area

lightchime wrote:

I see over exposure on the rims, not glare. br br... (show quote)

Well I have to argue on the rims. Over exposure would be white, not the yellow, the same yellow I found in the paint of the car.

Marionsho Loc: Kansas

CaptainC wrote:

The body is paint, not metal and maybe a matter of words but polarizer will not affect REFLECTIONS from metal. Glare is really an catch-all description of too much light. So it may well help with what you describe as glare.

You're saying it [a CPL] may help? I have been thinking about this, and have to wonder if the reflections are from the clear coat that is on the surface? In which case a CPL may have some affect.
Or not.... I need to do some experimenting on my own.
Maybe Cliff will chime in and set me straight.
:D

C250guy Loc: D/FW Texas

Beautiful shot. In a photography class I attended, the instructor had a session on shooting autos. His recommendation was not to shoot from a standing stance. Instead crouch down to the car's level. I try to do so at auto shows. Try it sometime and see if you like the result.

fjrwillie Loc: MA

CaptainC wrote:

Polarizing filters have little or NO effect on reflections from metal. So ignore that advice.

Not sure there is all that much glare off the rims, but your solution is: The angle of reflection is equal to the angle of incidence. A concept every photographer needs to know as it solves all kinds of problems.

The angle of reflection is equal to the angle of incidence.

Can you expand on this a bit. Does this mean the light hitting an object will be reflected off that object at the same angle as it is coming into it. ??

Willie

CaptainC Loc: Colorado, south of Denver

fjrwillie wrote:

The angle of reflection is equal to the angle of incidence.

Can you expand on this a bit. Does this mean the light hitting an object will be reflected off that object at the same angle as it is coming into it. ??

Willie

No need to expand - you got it. Simple physics.

fjrwillie Loc: MA

CaptainC wrote:

No need to expand - you got it. Simple physics.

Ty for the confirmation.:thumbup:

Willie

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

Gomer wrote:

What could I have done to minimize the glare off of the rims on this shot?

Depending on your software you could apply the polarization in PP. Might try taking a stop or two off the exposure, just to see what it does to the glare. Nice set of wheels, play with it and see what you can come up with. Post the results when you tweak it enough. :lol: :lol:

Dan L Loc: Wisconsin

I have shot many cars at GreatLakesDragaway with an adjustable CND filter with good results. I can make reflections darker by adjusting the CND filter as long the adjustment of darkness still can be corrected in PP. I eventually transition to shooting pictures on the shadow side with a filler light and the CND filter for effects. Visit your local race track, loads of fun and great talking with them. Special note: these pictures are "not for sale" per GLD (GreatLakesDragaway.com)

Gomer wrote:

What could I have done to minimize the glare off of the rims on this shot?

(Download)

OonlyBonly

OonlyBonly wrote:

Sorry, have to disagree with that comment. Mine are quite effective at reducing chrome and body glare.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Redron Loc: Fairfield. California

shoot it from the other side?

Redron Loc: Fairfield. California

shoot it from the other side?

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

Gomer wrote:

What could I have done to minimize the glare off of the rims on this shot?

Shoot it entirely in shade, add your lighting to suit your wants and needs. A car such as this needs attention in it's posing for portraits. Glare is removing color and shape from this car and can easily be removed by shading. It is a neat set of wheels and should be treated accordingly. This photo was taken near the end of the "sun day". Had the photographer waited the sun would have been lower and eliminated most of the glare. If cars are your passion lighting is critical for end results. Just parking it and shooting it isn't going to give you the results you want. GL

R.G. Loc: Scotland

fjrwillie wrote:

The angle of reflection is equal to the angle of incidence.

Can you expand on this a bit. Does this mean the light hitting an object will be reflected off that object at the same angle as it is coming into it. ??

Willie

If you can imagine sunlight hitting a mirror, it would be obvious where the light was being reflected to, because it would be reflected in the form of very directional beams. If you replace the mirror with a less shiny surface, there is still a directional concentration of light, but it is less obvious because the reflected light is more diffuse and not in the form of highly directional beams.

Put simply, an un-shiny surface will still produce a directional concentration of light, but won't do it as obviously as a shiny surface would. It looks like you were standing where the reflected sunlight would have been at its strongest. However, it looks like the sunlight was so strong you would probably have had glare no matter where you stood. Avoiding harsh direct sunlight would seem to be the obvious answer :) .