Need help achieving this

[speedy5489]

Came across this picture recently and want to venture into the lighting aspect of photography. Curious what settings (about) could be used and what equipment would be needed to achieve this look.

I'm assuming a long shutter speed obviously since the light stream behind the car and a low ISO since there's little noise. Not sure what aperture would be good and I'm completely new to lighting.

Thanks.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jake2k/6712347967/

[Ads]

[HughGuessWho]

Came across this picture recently and want to venture into the lighting aspect of photography. Curious what settings (about) could be used and what equipment would be needed to achieve this look.

I'm assuming a long shutter speed obviously since the light stream behind the car and a low ISO since there's little noise. Not sure what aperture would be good and I'm completely new to lighting.

Thanks.

Not my picture, taken from flickr.

Another one? Dude, you can't post a picture that is not yours. This will get you banned. Just post the link.

[Ernicus]

He says it's not his, using it as an example of a question, and the photographers watermark is in the shot, I don't personally see a problem with it. *shrugs*

[speedy5489]

Hence why credit is given to the photographer in the photo as well as stating is is not mine.

I'd just like to get an idea of what all is needed to get a shot like this. If that's not what this forum is for, please point me in the right direction.

Thanks.

[Dao]

One of the old member got banned few days ago because of posting photo who he do not have copyright. So a high chance OP may be banned as well.

[sm4him]

He says it's not his, using it as an example of a question, and the photographers watermark is in the shot, I don't personally see a problem with it. *shrugs*

Really not a matter of whether any individual sees a problem with it, nor of whether "credit" is given to the photographer, via watermark or whatever. It's a simple matter of forum rules. Don't post photos that aren't yours.

OP: The correct thing to do is remove the photo but provide a link to whatever site you found the photo.

[Ernicus]

I know, just stating my opinion, unless those aren't allowed any longer either.

Seems like lately many folks are jumping on the bandwagon for the flavor of the week. I have not seen so much chastizing over such a thing since becoming a member until the past few days.

Simply an observation.

[speedy5489]

He says it's not his, using it as an example of a question, and the photographers watermark is in the shot, I don't personally see a problem with it. *shrugs*

Really not a matter of whether any individual sees a problem with it, nor of whether "credit" is given to the photographer, via watermark or whatever. It's a simple matter of forum rules. Don't post photos that aren't yours.

OP: The correct thing to do is remove the photo but provide a link to whatever site you found the photo.

Thank you. I've replaced it with a link.

As a user of multiple forums, I just find it easier to view the photo as a link opposed to having to click it to view it.

[HughGuessWho]

He says it's not his, using it as an example of a question, and the photographers watermark is in the shot, I don't personally see a problem with it. *shrugs*

Just like the other post. I don't necessarily agree with the rule either. But it is the rule and they have been banning people for it. What's the arguing all about? I didn't make the rule. Im just trying to inform those that are breaking it.

[HughGuessWho]

Thank you. I've replaced it with a link.

As a user of multiple forums, I just find it easier to view the photo as a link opposed to having to click it to view it.

And you are correct. In addition, a lot of members will not click on links unless they know you. Nonetheless, the rule has recently been informed quite harshly so we are just trying to help you out

[Raian-san]

I would think the car is parked under a light, you know those one that curl on top with white lighting, use a tripod, F/9-11, low ISO, long exposure. If the light stand is in the picture, you can photoshop it out.

[Ernicus]

He says it's not his, using it as an example of a question, and the photographers watermark is in the shot, I don't personally see a problem with it. *shrugs*

Just like the other post. I don't necessarily agree with the rule either. But it is the rule and they have been banning people for it. What's the arguing all about? I didn't make the rule. Im just trying to inform those that are breaking it.

Wasn't aware I was arguing as much as stating my thoughts on the matter.

I'm guessing uploading can imply ownership whereas linking takes all of the possibility of misrepresentation out of the equation. Not that anyone here was misrepresenting, but instead allows for others to use other photos as examples safely.

[speedy5489]

Thank you. I've replaced it with a link.

As a user of multiple forums, I just find it easier to view the photo as a link opposed to having to click it to view it.

And you are correct. In addition, a lot of members will not click on links unless they know you. Nonetheless, the rule has recently been informed quite harshly so we are just trying to help you out

Oh well. It is what it is. Thanks for letting me know

[Ernicus]

I've seen some where they have a large light on a boom overhead. If that was not done, then it was done in photoshop.

[speedy5489]

hmmm. I may have to try something like that in my garage. I've got a large shop light that may do the trick.