GTO Rolling Shot

[wagner]

I've never done the rolling shot thing from another moving car. For one of the GTOs I was shooting this weekend. I would love to do some more of these.

 

I took a bunch more but I have not edited those yet.

 

 

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d178/lt1wagner/IMG_4313_zpsd7b5ceb2.jpg

[Miller]

I like

[Littleguy]

Looks great.

[PGH STEELERS]

Very Nice!

[POS VETT]

I have done this before for some of my cars. It's quite a production since it needs a minimum of two cars and three people. Then there is the coordinating, speed regulation, and a slew of other things requiring perfect timing and communication. At one time several years ago, the in-motion photography was performed on 3 cars (all carriage forms of teknoviolett 1998 E36 M3), so there were 4 cars and 5 people on radios. It took a couple laps of I-270 in order to take a perfect shot of multiple poses.

[Mr. Jones]

That's cool, hope to get some wags shots this year.

[Dr. Pomade]

Really like.

 

When I get a car worthy of Wagner's camera, I'm sending him a PM and some cash.

[Not Brian]

I'm down for a rolling shot day

[Turbotrio]

I have done this before for some of my cars. It's quite a production since it needs a minimum of two cars and three people. Then there is the coordinating, speed regulation, and a slew of other things requiring perfect timing and communication. At one time several years ago, the in-motion photography was performed on 3 cars (all carriage forms of teknoviolett 1998 E36 M3), so there were 4 cars and 5 people on radios. It took a couple laps of I-270 in order to take a perfect shot of multiple poses.

 

Or you can just buy a rig and let them roll a few feet and get the same / better results

 

I am still on the fence about purchasing a kit but they certainly make life easier as explained above.

Jeff

 

PS -- For those not familiar: http://www.slrlounge.com/long-exposure-auto-photography-using-rig

[wagner]

We got the shots in about 10 miles with me shooting out of a Challenger pacing the GTO. Pissed a lot of people off only going 45-50 mph, but oh well.

 

Shooting out of the bed of a truck would be best in the future.

[Littleguy]

Or you can just buy a rig and let them roll a few feet and get the same / better results

 

I am still on the fence about purchasing a kit but they certainly make life easier as explained above.

Jeff

 

PS -- For those not familiar: http://www.slrlounge.com/long-exposure-auto-photography-using-rig

 

Agreed, every "rolling" shot of my car has been done with a rig.

[Turbotrio]

Agreed, every "rolling" shot of my car has been done with a rig.

 

How much did you pay for yours (Pics)? If you don't want to say shoot me a PM.

 

Most decent kits are minimally a grand and even though I could see it lasting forever I am not convinced that there is enough of a market to justify the cost. The results look great though so I dunno. Been kicking it around for awhile.

Jeff

[wagner]

So I guess this image and the others I took are "to soft" and can't be saved.

 

Whatever, I'm over it and about to say fuck it. Trying to nail down what is "print quailty" is impossible...

[Littleguy]

How much did you pay for yours (Pics)? If you don't want to say shoot me a PM.

 

Most decent kits are minimally a grand and even though I could see it lasting forever I am not convinced that there is enough of a market to justify the cost. The results look great though so I dunno. Been kicking it around for awhile.

Jeff

 

I don't have my own rig. I've just been lucky enough to have photo sessions done with my car by people down here like Mayday Garage, Proper Garage, Etc. and they always have rigs and awesome cameras and lights.

[wagner]

Well since the editor hated these and said they were all "soft" I uploaded them all. I sent him the raw images that were not edited, all of these were touched up in light room.

 

I talked with another editor about my pictures and he saw nothing wrong with my work. He thinks that the "soft" reference is that my stuff does not look sharp enough.

 

http://waggz.smugmug.com/Other/Rolling-Shots-2014/i-bxqXKmt/0/L/IMG_4308-L.jpg

 

 

http://waggz.smugmug.com/Other/Rolling-Shots-2014/i-DKr8dd7/0/L/IMG_4309-L.jpg

 

full gallery

 

[jevans]

Nice Work...

[Mitch]

damn, you can tell this last shot was hard to get. had to be all awkward hanging out of the window.

[wagner]

damn, you can tell this last shot was hard to get. had to be all awkward hanging out of the window.

 

Yeah, never shooting out of a Challenger again. That was a tight window to shoot out of to say the least.

 

Next time I want to shoot out of a truck bed to give me a lot more range of motion.

[Turbotrio]

Well since the editor hated these and said they were all "soft" I uploaded them all. I sent him the raw images that were not edited, all of these were touched up in light room.

 

I talked with another editor about my pictures and he saw nothing wrong with my work. He thinks that the "soft" reference is that my stuff does not look sharp enough.

 

I personally don't see them as "Soft" but to be honest in this size on the web you would have to be noticeably out of focus for that to jump out IMO.

 

From a framing stand-point the first image you posted jumps out as being way too tight (Crop) with nothing helping it at all in the back-ground. Obviously you want the back-ground blurred but if you look at the pics in the "Rig" link I posted it always adds to it if you can get a sun-flare or lights or something that just makes the image "Pop" a bit more. With so many rolling shots done on rigs now, I think your higher angle and tighter crop make it look a little odd as compared to a low and wide-angle rig shot "Look" that is such the norm now.

 

To do this type of shot w/o a rig IMO you need a golf cart, a wide-angle lens, a slow shutter speed, and as good a background as possible. You don't have to go fast at all to get the sense of motion (Technically speaking if you are good at PS you can make the car look like its moving while sitting 100% still) but it's more of the wide-angle "Look" that I typically see a lot.

Jeff

 

Disclaimer: This is based around submitting them to a magazine and not what would pass as being perfectly fine for many other purposes.

[wagner]

I personally don't see them as "Soft" but to be honest in this size on the web you would have to be noticeably out of focus for that to jump out IMO.

 

From a framing stand-point the first image you posted jumps out as being way too tight (Crop) with nothing helping it at all in the back-ground. Obviously you want the back-ground blurred but if you look at the pics in the "Rig" link I posted it always adds to it if you can get a sun-flare or lights or something that just makes the image "Pop" a bit more. With so many rolling shots done on rigs now, I think your higher angle and tighter crop make it look a little odd as compared to a low and wide-angle rig shot "Look" that is such the norm now.

 

To do this type of shot w/o a rig IMO you need a golf cart, a wide-angle lens, a slow shutter speed, and as good a background as possible. You don't have to go fast at all to get the sense of motion (Technically speaking if you are good at PS you can make the car look like its moving while sitting 100% still) but it's more of the wide-angle "Look" that I typically see a lot.

Jeff

 

Disclaimer: This is based around submitting them to a magazine and not what would pass as being perfectly fine for many other purposes.

 

I did crop the first one tight, that is just how I felt like doing it. I'm not worried about doing what everybody else is doing, unless I'm told it has to be done that way by the person who pays me.

 

The one thing that does make me feel a bit better is the owner of the car loved the pictures, even if they did not make the print.

 

I am learning more and more, if I was doing this to pay my bills I might think about buying one of those one trick kind of rigs, but the cost does not really make sense for me.