Blair Bunting covers the lighting and photo manipulation techniques he used when Photographing the brand new Lamborghini Aventador in the studio.
Blair Bunting covers the lighting and photo manipulation techniques he used when Photographing the brand new Lamborghini Aventador in the studio.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Back when I started shooting I worked as an assistant to literally dozens of car shooters. We used to spend a couple days lighting and shooting a car in studio using fresnil lights, a suspended reflector panel and a horizon line wall. The first thing we did when the vehicle was in place is rotate the wheels to match, ideally with the logo and valve stems matching too. Easy to do now in post. Wonder why they didn’t?
the “retouched” photo looks like an HDR toning done by a wanna-be who just discovered HDR! It looks too fake and just takes away the elegance of the car. The initial low contrast shot with soft shadows looked perfect to me. They made the car look like what it’s not.
Hello, are you familiar with “PhotoSFXart” (just search on Google for it …)? There you can watch a nice free video demonstrating the best way to take awesome photographs. This made it possible for Joe to take pictures which have a wow-effect any time you take a look at them. It might work for you also.
As an ex-professional photographer, I dislike pot-image processing. If you cannot do it in-camera, don’t do it. A photographer should concentrate on getting it all right in the camera. If you need post-processing, you’re not getting something right.
The retoucher made it look like a shitty HDR photograph.
I was watching his light setup and noticing the spillover from the spots oh the front grille and wheels. Ugly. Oh, yeah, we’ll fix it in photoshop – no need for a gobo.
The retoucher’s portfolio scared me. Images that are “popped” past the point of credibility. You may as well just do an airbrushed image and not bother with the camera.
Beautiful car… Ugly photograph.
Yuck the end result isn’t as good as I was led on to believe. How could that retoucher even consider that the one with messy background with the tents would work. It looks like a 3D render and kinda defeats the point of trying to see a photograph of this beautiful car.
Incorrect. It’s impossible to get it 100% right “in the camera” on a consistent basis, because an image sensor & film do not have the same latitude or dynamic range that we see at. Remember back in the film days being in a darkroom and processing photos? Same premise, except now we can do more with digital and it takes much less time, and doesn’t involve chemicals.
I agree on the composite image stuff though…..I hate that aspect of digital, because then you can literally take a photo of nothing and make it into something, which isn’t photography, it’s graphic design. My previous comment was geared more toward color balancing and contrast.
“It’s impossible to get it 100% right “in the camera” on a consistent basis”
That’s false. Professional advertising photograhers have been doping it right in-camera without computers for decades prior to digital image processing and ignores the history and methods of still image photography. It takes more time, equipment, and technique to get it right in-camera. Digital editing just makes it easier and faster to get the look you want. Film latitude has always been compensated for with light!
I know, and also they still did a lot of work in the darkroom, but it pales in comparison to what is possible today. Even with film, you could screw up the exposure slightly and still pull a stop or two out of it (not so much with transparencies). I miss black and white in the darkroom, shot mostly Velvia back in they day, but prefer digital. And I use strobes a lot in my work.
And all that paper you had to waste dodging and burning to get it just right, if you were perfectionist. PC editing seems like cheating to an old schooler like me. But, ^sigh^ it’s so much cheaper and typically faster. I remember wasting a whole pack of paper to get a portrait of Miss Mississippi looking perfect – ethereal and other-worldy. She had a glow all around her. The editor complained, but he sure smiled his butt off at the picture that was going to glorify his paper. He was stunned.
05:37 i like the way this looks – with a few retouching, no need to have harsh edges like at the end, this one (if retouched) will look clean and great – I think.
HATS OFFF…..
So basically it’s a manually created selective HDR image. too cool 😀
cool.
im gonna try this at home!
Holy crap that final image was awful! And the retouchers portfolio… Can’t belive someone could make a living with that!
I liked the bodywork at 05:36. Your ‘retoucher’ respectfully has bastardised your hard work. You are a good photographer. Trust yourself enough to know you can pull out amazing images with minimal P/shop. The retoucher is not very good. Just my opinion you understand. I agree with CaseyOCasey
All the photo’s shown looked like drawings due to the HDR effect. that’s no photography anymore.