and help to keep the site free for all
What the heck is going wrong
- Thread starter Liberalis
- Start date
Matt Charlton
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,550
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That does look strange doesn't it.
What camera have you got? 30D? Is it a result of spot metering?!
The car looks completely out of proportion too - are you sure you haven't PS'd it on from another image?
I think its because the nearside of the car is so bright, the front and the top of the car look fine - were you using any lighting?
What camera have you got? 30D? Is it a result of spot metering?!
The car looks completely out of proportion too - are you sure you haven't PS'd it on from another image?
I think its because the nearside of the car is so bright, the front and the top of the car look fine - were you using any lighting?
Matt Charlton
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,550
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Its the flash on the side of the car then thats made it look disproportionate then isn't it?
Because the side of the car is so different lighting wise its given it an almost surreal look.
Because the side of the car is so different lighting wise its given it an almost surreal look.
gibbo
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,120
- Name
- Brian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I liked the shot as it was 
Ive had a bit of a play with your shots in PS7 And you asked how could you fix it ?? As the car stood out so much why not use that to your advantage ??
Im just beginning to dabble in using PS7 so I looked at using the car as is
The first one I just adjusted in PS curves etc
Now Im no expert at all in this selective colouring but maybe ??
maybe with or with out the light house & bollards added. (Its only an idea)
Hope you didnt mind.
Ive had a bit of a play with your shots in PS7 And you asked how could you fix it ?? As the car stood out so much why not use that to your advantage ??
Im just beginning to dabble in using PS7 so I looked at using the car as is
The first one I just adjusted in PS curves etc
Now Im no expert at all in this selective colouring but maybe ??
maybe with or with out the light house & bollards added. (Its only an idea)
Hope you didnt mind.
jamiefsmith
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 130
- Name
- Jamie Smith
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I'll agree with that....I think!!
soupdragon
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 2,644
- Name
- Tony
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I am guessing someone is testing their photoshop skills to see who would be fooled by it.
Having examined the image closer. it appears the original resolution of the car was different to the back drop.
Having examined the image closer. it appears the original resolution of the car was different to the back drop.
- Messages
- 7,625
- Name
- Colin
- Edit My Images
- Yes
If Kris says it is as shot surely we have to take his word on it. I've noticed a couple of his recent shots have included the use of flash and in this instance it doesn't appear quite right.
Kris, I think the main reason for this are because you have underexposed the background too much, I would gues at about 1.5-2 stops. Whilst this can work you usually need good ambient lighting to make it work i.e. late sun or dramatic sunset which leads onto the second point which is that I think the weather conditions were too murky for this type of shot (and the exposure). You might also want to consider dialling down the flash as it does appear a bit bright, I would also turn the front wheel in the opposite direction as the reflected light from it is quite distracting.
I think if you moved nearer the car so it filled the frame a bit more it would work better and wouldn't look so much like a cut and paste job. If you are going to re-do the shot I'd also put a gun on top of the wall to the right of the car to light the roof, I noticed this in your other shots as well.
Kris, I think the main reason for this are because you have underexposed the background too much, I would gues at about 1.5-2 stops. Whilst this can work you usually need good ambient lighting to make it work i.e. late sun or dramatic sunset which leads onto the second point which is that I think the weather conditions were too murky for this type of shot (and the exposure). You might also want to consider dialling down the flash as it does appear a bit bright, I would also turn the front wheel in the opposite direction as the reflected light from it is quite distracting.
I think if you moved nearer the car so it filled the frame a bit more it would work better and wouldn't look so much like a cut and paste job. If you are going to re-do the shot I'd also put a gun on top of the wall to the right of the car to light the roof, I noticed this in your other shots as well.
- Messages
- 8,561
- Name
- See above
- Edit My Images
- No
i'd bet £100 its NOT a photoshop job
its just a freak photo (no offence
)
I think its caused by a number of things
the car has picked up (and reflected) all the flash, whereas the scenery hasnt. Possibly this could be fixed by widening the angle of the flash.
the depth of field as made the car sharp as anything, but nothing else in the photo appears sharp.
it looks like the shadows of the posts are pointing at a different angle, but on closer inspection those arent shadows, they just look like them. There wouldnt be any shadows on an overcast day like that (apart from flash shadows, which would be impossible to get at that angle)
most of all, it think its a combination of the type of paint and the angle of the shot. Kind of like a pearlescant paint looks different colours at different angles, the individual grains in the paint have reflected the flash right back at you, whereas nothing else in the photo is capable of reflecting the light back at you.
Just my thoughts
its just a freak photo (no offence
)I think its caused by a number of things
the car has picked up (and reflected) all the flash, whereas the scenery hasnt. Possibly this could be fixed by widening the angle of the flash.
the depth of field as made the car sharp as anything, but nothing else in the photo appears sharp.
it looks like the shadows of the posts are pointing at a different angle, but on closer inspection those arent shadows, they just look like them. There wouldnt be any shadows on an overcast day like that (apart from flash shadows, which would be impossible to get at that angle)
most of all, it think its a combination of the type of paint and the angle of the shot. Kind of like a pearlescant paint looks different colours at different angles, the individual grains in the paint have reflected the flash right back at you, whereas nothing else in the photo is capable of reflecting the light back at you.
Just my thoughts
OP
Liberalis
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,172
- Name
- Kris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
What would be the point of trying to trick anyone ? If you know me, I have always been honest and open about any image, even explaining and sharing methods and cheaper alternatives to expensive equipment problems. Maybe I should stop trying to be helpful.
THis is the original shot, All I had done was remove the actual flash heads, and try to lighten the background and this is where the problem was noticed.
I did get non flashed versions too, maybe I should stick to this one.
I have been chatting to Gary a bit recently about how the written word can be taken the wrong way on forums, I would like to think that this is one of those moments.
Thanks to the guys with helpful advice.
Matt Charlton
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,550
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Ahhhh I see now
The non-flashed one is more balanced but seeing the one without the flashheads edited out explains the light sources now
I think by removing the flashheads as well as the illuminated parts of floor you've made it look a little unrealistic. I'd have removed the flashheads but left the spotlight effects on the floor intact.
If you could selectively lighten the background or maybe even superimpose the car from your first shot into the shot without the flash to see what that looked like you could see the effect of balancing the background whilst keeping the light effect you have on the car....if that makes sense.
Hope you're finding some of this helpful.
The non-flashed one is more balanced but seeing the one without the flashheads edited out explains the light sources now
I think by removing the flashheads as well as the illuminated parts of floor you've made it look a little unrealistic. I'd have removed the flashheads but left the spotlight effects on the floor intact.
If you could selectively lighten the background or maybe even superimpose the car from your first shot into the shot without the flash to see what that looked like you could see the effect of balancing the background whilst keeping the light effect you have on the car....if that makes sense.
Hope you're finding some of this helpful.
madferrit
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 502
- Name
- Imran
- Edit My Images
- Yes
jamiefsmith
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 130
- Name
- Jamie Smith
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I get it now, hadn't realised you had used flash heads right next to it, thought it was another cars beam or something
Freester
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,602
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I see why the flash one looks wrong now...
With the flash heads removed the lighting doesn't look right as it doesn't match with the background and so as you say it looks like you've Photoshopped the car onto the background.
With the flash heads there, you can see the source of the 'artificial' light and it all makes sense.
Go with the non flash or leave the heads in the image (or at least the light on the floor), IMO.
[edit] Oops having just read the thread again I see I have repeated what MattCharlton has posted, apologies!
With the flash heads removed the lighting doesn't look right as it doesn't match with the background and so as you say it looks like you've Photoshopped the car onto the background.
With the flash heads there, you can see the source of the 'artificial' light and it all makes sense.
Go with the non flash or leave the heads in the image (or at least the light on the floor), IMO.
[edit] Oops having just read the thread again I see I have repeated what MattCharlton has posted, apologies!
pxl8
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 5,288
- Name
- Andy Jones
- Edit My Images
- Yes
To answer the original question - the images looks like a comp because the lighting for the car doesn't match the background. You need to get a much better balance between available light and fill flash for it to work. The unprocessed original shows that you were way out with that and even after editing the car has much more light than the rest of the scene.
You'll probably have more luck editing the non-flash shot to get the result you want
You'll probably have more luck editing the non-flash shot to get the result you want
mho
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,134
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- No
What would be the point of trying to trick anyone ? If you know me, I have always been honest and open about any image, even explaining and sharing methods and cheaper alternatives to expensive equipment problems. Maybe I should stop trying to be helpful.
THis is the original shot, All I had done was remove the actual flash heads, and try to lighten the background and this is where the problem was noticed.
I did get non flashed versions too, maybe I should stick to this one.
I have been chatting to Gary a bit recently about how the written word can be taken the wrong way on forums, I would like to think that this is one of those moments.
Thanks to the guys with helpful advice.
So i was right you had messed with the image, like i said shadows and light on car are not right. I never said you had cut and pasted, just that it was a photoshop job. The second image is much better imho
Helium_Junkie
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 133
- Name
- Matt
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I honest to god mean no offense, but I found the first really funny looking 
The light on the car just made it look so out of place.
The un-flashed looks a lot more realistic.
I think when using flash, you would need some of the light to have spilled onto the background for the effect to have blended better...
The light on the car just made it look so out of place.The un-flashed looks a lot more realistic.
I think when using flash, you would need some of the light to have spilled onto the background for the effect to have blended better...