I must admit that I like the 350Z alot more today than I did yesterday, but I never thought it was a beautyqueen. Those Volk GT-S rims helps alot though, in my opinion those rims and the stance makes it look awesome.
I was worried it was getting too dark to produce anything good, but I'm satisfyed with the result myself.
Ask away if you've got any questions
1.
[IMG]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c289/Ferosso/IMG_8682.jpg[/IMG]
2.
[IMG]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c289/Ferosso/IMG_8626.jpg[/IMG]
3.
[IMG]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c289/Ferosso/IMG_8531.jpg[/IMG]
4.
[IMG]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c289/Ferosso/IMG_8516.jpg[/IMG]
5.
[IMG]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c289/Ferosso/IMG_8475.jpg[/IMG]
5½.
[IMG]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c289/Ferosso/IMG_8482.jpg[/IMG]
6.
[IMG]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c289/Ferosso/IMG_8470.jpg[/IMG]
7.
[IMG]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c289/Ferosso/IMG_8459.jpg[/IMG]
8.
[IMG]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c289/Ferosso/IMG_8443.jpg[/IMG]
9.
[IMG]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c289/Ferosso/IMG_8428.jpg[/IMG]
3 4 and 5 are the best. The rest seem cluttered with background stuff.
3 is awesome
oh 6 is good too
3 is fucking godly.
like the good Doc said, 3 is intense. Love the session, the water reflection shots were nifty as well. :D
Lovin' 7 and 8.
Hey, thanks everyone.
I used the Canon 70-200L EF F/4.0 USM on 5½.
[QUOTE=Ferosso;18632710]Hey, thanks everyone.
I used the Canon 70-200L EF F/4.0 USM on 5½.[/QUOTE]
What shutter speed did you use to capture the car moving?
Uh I don't remember, check the exif you'd like. But it doesn't really matter does it? It all depends on the light conditions, car color, how fast it's going etc.
Edit:
Just checked the exif myself anyways. The driving pic from the side was taken at 1/10th, handheld. Pretty lucky it even got sharp, lol.
In 3 and 4 I think the container stands out more than the car, and I found myself looking at it instead.
[QUOTE=Skwee;18638168]In 3 and 4 I think the container stands out more than the car, and I found myself looking at it instead.[/QUOTE]
Yeah well, if I wanted you to only look at the car, I wouldn't have included the container in the picture :smile:
Great photos there. Number 1 is great, the only thing annoying me about it is the fact the guy was looking at the camera.
nice done:D danish people is so artistic
For number 2, it would make an awesome 'TiltShift' photo. Google tilt shift photography for more info. Nice photos.
[QUOTE=Ferosso;18622834][IMG_thumb]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c289/Ferosso/IMG_8459.jpg[/IMG_thumb][/QUOTE]
dat ass :sharpton:
[QUOTE=M23;18661358]For number 2, it would make an awesome 'TiltShift' photo. Google tilt shift photography for more info. Nice photos.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I know what tiltshift is, but I disagree on that. Thanks though.
For a few seconds I thought the pictures were from Forza Motorsport 3 or something.
These seem like they have come off the nissan website as wallpapers or something.
Nice work
V. nice, I would def like to know how you post processed some of them.
Say which, and I'll see if I can remember.
#6 in wallpaper size would be godly.
[QUOTE=Ferosso;18696528]Say which, and I'll see if I can remember.[/QUOTE]
3 or 7
Pref. both
[QUOTE=Perfumly;18698281]3 or 7
Pref. both[/QUOTE]
3 was a merge between three pics with different exposures. NOT HDR, I hate HDR to death. I took 3 pics with different exposures and manually cut out the well exposed parts and put them together in photoshop.
7 is almost unedited, just did some colors etc. Here's how it looks unedited:
Before:
[img]http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/7576/img8459.jpg[/img]
After:
[IMG]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c289/Ferosso/IMG_8459.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=TinyTank;18698233]#6 in wallpaper size would be godly.[/QUOTE]
:q:
[IMG]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c289/Ferosso/dafafafs.jpg[/IMG]
HDR is good but nobody uses it right.
[editline]06:24PM[/editline]
Not referring to you, I know you didn't do hdrs
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;18704254]HDR is good but nobody uses it right.
[editline]06:24PM[/editline]
Not referring to you, I know you didn't do hdrs[/QUOTE]
its great.
but it usually requires more then 3 exposures to look good.
I've got a book on it :3:
[QUOTE=DOG-GY;18704319]I've got a book on it :3:[/QUOTE]
It's a pain in the ass.
I'd rather have a real shot anyways lol
Usually HDR Looks bad even when done correctly.
What I do is something that ALMOST looks like HDR, but really all I'm doing is correcting underexposure on the ground when I do a properly exposed sky shot.
[QUOTE=Perfumly;18705708]Usually HDR Looks bad even when done correctly.
What I do is something that ALMOST looks like HDR, but really all I'm doing is correcting underexposure on the ground when I do a properly exposed sky shot.[/QUOTE]
Topaz filter right in Photoshop ?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.