Obligatory parking garage shots in HDR

[lyonsroar]

Just looking for thoughts on how to improve. I can reshoot anytime, and I just bought a 50mm f1.8, so I'm looking for an excuse...:er:

I cannot decide what is up with the white balance. I shot 90% of my pictures in this WB (I think tungsten but not 100% sure) and I cannot decide if it's right or not. Some weird magenta pink color cast. The thing is, if I switched to the other WB it came out all yellow-ish. I was able to correct the color cast pretty much in post, but I don't have the corrected ones here right now. Anyway here's a few for your consideration.

#1


#2


#3


#4


#5
By far my favorite (this is one that was shot in the other WB:

Opinions appreciated!
:thumbup::hug::

 

[flyin-lowe]

I am not experienced enough to give experty advice but my favorite would be the last one if it was not for the SUV in the background.
PS I really like your choice if gear in your sig.

 

[lyonsroar]

I am not experienced enough to give experty advice but my favorite would be the last one if it was not for the SUV in the background.
PS I really like your choice if gear in your sig.

I know! I waited a half-hour for that SUV to move but he never did.


I darkened it a lot in post, but it's still noticeable.

 

[DerekMellott]

I like them. The only thing I would have done differently is rip that horrendous license plate off of the front of the car. I'm glad I live in an area where we don't need them.

 

[timlair]

Amazing. They look surreal. Like, cartoonish. In a good way. I like 1 and 4 the most.

 

[lyonsroar]

I like them. The only thing I would have done differently is rip that horrendous license plate off of the front of the car. I'm glad I live in an area where we don't need them.

Yeah, it's required. I bought it from a place where they're not required so it didn't have the holes in the bumper and the thought of drilling holes in my bumper just......so I mounted it in the tow hook receiver. And I made the best of the situation by getting a vanity plate. :mrgreen:

 

[Blake.Oney]

I don't know, I think I might actually like the color cast. I mean I know you didn't mean for it to be there, but that doesn't mean it makes the photo look bad.

 

[doziergraphic]

1, 2, 3, and 4 don't do it for me because that's an unnatural purple cast. I've never seen that in a parking garage.

5 is definitely a keeper, love the headlights, but the cherry color cast doesn't seem natural either. Seems like you could use high saturation and neat HDR without giving an unrealistic color (if lights WERE that color, disregard this critique!).

 

[bluetibby1]

I love number 5. Reminds me of something out of a comic book! Very nice work!

blue

 

[lyonsroar]

1, 2, 3, and 4 don't do it for me because that's an unnatural purple cast. I've never seen that in a parking garage.

5 is definitely a keeper, love the headlights, but the cherry color cast doesn't seem natural either. Seems like you could use high saturation and neat HDR without giving an unrealistic color (if lights WERE that color, disregard this critique!).

The lights are a very light pink. It seems when I run it through my HDR editor it multiplies the color? I was able to control it in PP by turning down the pink and red hues. I may go back tonight with my dads loaner car and see what I can see.

Thank you for the critique.

 

[Geaux]

You committed one of the biggest sins when shooting cars .... You parked the car, in the same position, but walked around it composing your shots. When you do this, you have your wheel turned (which is good), but b/c you moved yourself and not the car, the front FACE of the wheel is looking away from you in many shots


When you are going to turn your wheel, you should always have the rim facing the camera.

 

[KmH]

The white balance issue is likely because the lights are sodium or mercury vapor lights and not tungsten lighting.

Why take a photo of a car, obviously intending the car be the main subject, but have the car occupy less than 1/4th of the photo? :scratch:

Like photographers using the horizontal format to make portraits, using the vertical format to shoot cars just doesn't seem to work either.

 

[lyonsroar]

You committed one of the biggest sins when shooting cars .... You parked the car, in the same position, but walked around it composing your shots. When you do this, you have your wheel turned (which is good), but b/c you moved yourself and not the car, the front FACE of the wheel is looking away from you in many shots


When you are going to turn your wheel, you should always have the rim facing the camera.

So in #1 I should have turned the wheel the other way? Or did I just turn it too far?

I should have moved to a different location a few times I agree with that. I started up top to get some of the sunset.

Here's the only one I thought was any good:


I'll just have to reshoot. :greenpbl:

The white balance issue is likely because the lights are sodium or mercury vapor lights and not tungsten lighting.

Why take a photo of a car, obviously intending the car be the main subject, but have the car occupy less than 1/4th of the photo? :scratch:

Like photographers using the horizontal format to make portraits, using the vertical format to shoot cars just doesn't seem to work either.

What WB do you use for vapor lights? Custom?

I would like to attempt to defend my portrait shots. I did some portraits because I wanted to include another point of interest in the scene, the ceiling light. I was also just experimenting.
:blushing:

Thanks for the comments.

 

[FattyMcJ]

# 1-4 seem blown out on the hood and front bumper and the shadows are pure black. The antithesis of what an HDR should achieve. The wheels are all turned the wrong direction for the "normal" car pose...looking at tire tread isn't exactly "stunning", but at least you turned the wheels, so that's good.

#5 is the best of the first batch. Still, get rid of the SUV, the purple color cast and frame it tighter and it'll be better. IMO the vertical orientation on this shot works.

#6 (few posts below the first batch) is the best of the bunch, but you still lost the shadows on the car. Also...why did you choose to include so much of the wall next to it? Is the exit sign and the light really adding anything to the photo? There's more of the wall and sky than there is of the car.

I think if you moved to your right a few feet, included JUST the edge of the wall, framed the car a bit tighter, and turned the wheels in the right direction, this photo would be a keeper.

 

[GeneralBenson]

I thought the idea of HDR was to not have extremely blown out highlights?

As has been addressed, there are some pretty considerable color-cast issues. The over head lights, mized with the tungsten headlights, make for a tough situation.

Also, remember that when shooting subjects that are non-human, many of the rules/guidelines for portraiture still apply. Mainly in this case, things growing out of the head. The rof of the car is now the head, and the concrete columns are now what is usually a telephone pole or tree. The compositions would have been much stronger if you had chosen to put the car in the space between columns, either acting as a framing device or just not even in the photo, rather than having the column behind the vehicle.