Recent photographs of the car

Soldato
Joined
21 Oct 2004
Posts
6,146
Location
Los Angeles
I went for a little drive this evening to scout out some locations for possible photoshoots I have coming up.

IMG_4607_sm.jpg


IMG_4610_sm.jpg


IMG_4638_sm.jpg
 
Booner! said:
Those are fantastic photos mate! Are you planning on modding it any further??

Have you been detailing your paint? its real deep red!

The paintwork is in a real bad state at the moment, it looks MUCH deeper when it's been polished and waxed (will do that this week).
I'm not going to mod it any more now, unless I get a good deal on a set of coilovers. It's not worth modding massively as it's only a 1.6 and i'll be getting rid of it in a few years.

Dreadi said:
nice photo mrsix! what wheels are they ?

They're team dynamic "Something-or-others" - I bought them second for £70 with brand new Michelin Pilot Sport tyres. It was a complete steal as they're not marked at all. I really liked the fact that they're only 16", so they're great for handling and also they've got a little bit of dish which looks really nice up close.


Booner! said:
Makes me want to lower my car now, his sits so perfectly on those rims... mine looks like a 4x4!

Hehe, it's not been lowered at all ;)

[TW]Fox said:
You are a great photographer MrSix, they look spot on!

Cheers Fox :)
 
Nope, it's filthy actually, covered in dust and grit from the rain. Trust me, it looks like a new penny when I've cleaned it :)

I'll gladly take some photos for you if you're local.

*EDIT*

Look at the last three pics, it's filthy on the lower door!
 
Booner! said:
Snap - my first mod was to change the "tango" lights :p Then the wheels (hubs = eewwwww)

You got rid of your hubs :o

.Andy said:
Agree 100% they are fanatstic photos - I wish I could take photos like that, I'm your average think the shot I'm taking should be good but then looks carp!!!

:) Thanks.
You could take photos like that with the right equipment and technical know-how...this shoot took me literally 5 minutes. I used two flashes mounted off camera and a couple of wireless receivers...that simple :)
 
Yeah, only two.
You need to change your order too....

2x Manual controlled strobes
2x light stands + adaptors
2x Wireless receivers
1x Wireless sender
1x SLR with manual control

Job done :)
 
Booner! said:
I am a camera Noob/nub so can you explain how much that would cost? and i assume that an "average person" would not carry that kind of kit?

No, the average person would probably carry an SLR and an on camera flashgun.
The advantage of using the flashes off of the camera is that I can control the light much more accurately and thus make my subject "pop" from the frame due to the 3D effect that the shadows create.

Phil W said:
Dude, take some pictures of my car :D
Okay :D

laissez-faire said:
What lens did you use to take that photo? Looks like quite a wide angle or am I talking pie?

All of the photographs were taken using a Canon 24-70L at around f/4 to f/8.0 and at varying focal lengths. That photograph in particular was taken at 43mm which isn't that wide.

This one however, was taken at 24mm:
IMG_4638_sm.jpg


You can clearly see the two pools of light to the left and right of the frame created by the flashes.
 
Personally under the bumper where it goes from red to black, i would paint it all red. My sisters bf has a mk4 golf, 3 door red and he painted all the bumper red, looks really nice.

I was going to, but it can go against you when selling the car.
When I sell the car it will have the steelies back on and the tooti-frooti lights back in and be sold as a "standard" Mk4 Golf 1.6 SE.
 
[TW]Fox;10015986 said:
Of course you do, becuase you are a photography enthusiast whereas I am not - so I don't notice the things you do.

In much the same way that 9/10 people will walk past a freshly washed car and think 'thats nice' whereas you or me would think 'my god.. those swirlmarks are awful'.

Fair one.

How come you beleive that photo looks awesome?
I really really think I'm over critical of my own work now, because I would never send that shot to print because I think it's dreadful, however it clealy isn't perceived that way by your "average" reader.
 
It might not be the best photo in the world, but come on, it's being overly harsh to call it 'dreadful'

Not really - It's badly composed, badly/boringly lit and not particularly sharp.
From a technical and (personally) aesthetical point of view it's a dreadful photograph.
 
Back
Top Bottom