Car Museum Visit

Cortian

No longer a newbie, moving up!
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
503
Reaction score
209
Location
S.E. Michigan, USA
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Visited Stahl's Automotive Collection yesterday. Almost didn't bring the 20D, but then thought "You learn more from mistakes...," so...

Luckily I ran across a gentleman that actually knew what he was doing who gave me a couple pointers. Right off "The light here is all over the place. Best just to leave it on Auto WB and cross your fingers." (Or words to that effect.) (In that one from alone there was fluorescent, mercury, incandescent and daylight.) The other recommendation he made was to go for close-ups of interesting features, so that's what I mostly did.

Here are the two photos my wife felt were the best and most interesting. (I agree with her on the first. Not so certain about the second.)

IMG_2063.JPG

This one was part of a display of an old, un-reconditioned International Harvester farm truck. The back was full of stuff they said was typical of travelling Okies during the depression. I found this bag fascinating.

IMG_2055.JPG

I must apologize. I could have at least made a note of what make and model car this hood ornament was on :(. (Goes to show where my focus was.)

Personally, I liked this one better:
IMG_2057.JPG


I really liked this one:
IMG_2087.JPG

As you'll see, I really strugged with DOF in that lighting.

The rest of the photos remaining after culling-out the truly poor ones can be seen at Stahl's Car Museum 20180106, if anyone's interested.

The eighth photo in that directory, #2040, was taken by the gentleman I met, with my camera, to demonstrate what he was trying to tell me. I wish I could take credit for it.
 
I'm going to side with your wife on the first hood ornament, because it occupies more of the frame, and the angle of the figure kind of disappears in the second. I might crop a little off the right side of that one, or try an 8x10 vertical.

that one's my favorite, but they're all neat. That hood ornament in the last one is way too cool!
 
I think these could benefit from a wider angle.
 
Very nice shots. :05.18-flustered:
Thanks, Rick!

I'm going to side with your wife on the first hood ornament, because it occupies more of the frame, and the angle of the figure kind of disappears in the second.
Can't argue with that.

I think I like the second better because they'd done a better polishing job on the ornament and because of the increased red background.

I might crop a little off the right side of that one, or try an 8x10 vertical.
I'll play with that. Thanks.

that one's my favorite, but they're all neat. That hood ornament in the last one is way too cool!
Thanks! I think that last ornament is my favourite ornament.

I was idly looking at it last night, on my tablet, while my wife and I were watching TV, and it occurred to me that, looked at a certain way, part of it looks like a woman's high-heeled shoe. I wonder if that was intentional?

I think these could benefit from a wider angle.
Thanks for the critique, but I'm not certain I'm following you. Do you mean pull back a bit? Get a bit more foreground in them?
 
Some I think have more background than you need. I mean, you may want pictures of the room and displays etc. but some could have been shot a little tighter or maybe a slight change of vantage point would have been better.

The one done by your new found friend seems to bring the viewer in to the subject well. I think it takes practice to get used to moving around and varying the distance from the subject or the angle or the perspective. Sometimes I scrunch down or lean at some odd angle to get a better vantage point on something. This place is the type that's tricky to have room to maneuver.

You seem to have done well with the weirdo lighting! I forget how new you are to this but you got some nice photos.
 
Some I think have more background than you need. I mean, you may want pictures of the room and displays etc. but some could have been shot a little tighter or maybe a slight change of vantage point would have been better.
It was tricky (as you might imagine). It was clear they didn't want people touching the cars. (There were signs and placards everywhere to that effect.) Sometimes I'd put the back of a hand or an arm on a bumper, but I was loath to so much as touch paint.

The one done by your new found friend seems to bring the viewer in to the subject well.
Yup. He just took the camera, looked at the settings, leaned over and *snap*.

Composed it perfectly. That takes practice.

I think it takes practice to get used to moving around and varying the distance from the subject or the angle or the perspective. Sometimes I scrunch down or lean at some odd angle to get a better vantage point on something. This place is the type that's tricky to have room to maneuver.
It was.

Part of the problem was getting closer, either physically or via zoom, would run the exposure time up. I was already running 1600 and 3200 ISO much of the time (you can see the noise.), and exceedingly long exposure times, even at that (thank God for IS!). Never mind the DOF issues.

This is where a camera with more pixels (e.g.: a 50D) would've come in handy. I could have backed off, got lower ISO and/or faster shutter and/or smaller aperture, got better/easier angles, then cropped it in post.

If I stick with this I think a used 50D is in my future. (There's a LNIB photog's "spare," with nearly zero clicks, on eBay, right now, I wish I could snag. My wife would kill me!)

Then again: Look what that guy did with the very same camera I was using. This gets back to "It's more skill/experience than hardware."

You seem to have done well with the weirdo lighting!
Heh. Credit to Canon engineers for that. As my new acquaintance suggested: I just put it on auto WB and crossed my fingers.

I forget how new you are to this but you got some nice photos.
Thanks for the compliment!

I'm very new to that camera and DSLRs. Just started fooling with the thing Christmas Day. But I had a Minolta 110 Zoom (a 110 format SLR) years ago, and, more recently, a non-SLR Pentax 35mm (film), then an Olympus C-4000Z (digicam). Each of those had varying degrees of semi-automatic and manual control available, and I played with them.

Plus I learned the photography adage long ago: The secret to good photography is take lots of photos ;) That last ornament, for example: I think I took six exposures of that. Kept two.

Thanks for your comments, Sharon!

Jim
 
Last edited:

Most reactions

Back
Top