Pearl White 370Z
 

Here are some new shots. I decided to give these a more natural look as compared to my last set. I shot these in RAW, so the quality is much better. Very little post processing also, just a few tweaks and airbrushing out crap. I made a few little mistakes here and there, but anyway...

These were all shot with a Canon T2i, RAW, full manual mode, custom white balance, CPL filter and anti-glare filter.

http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/f..._5187small.jpg

http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/f..._5193small.jpg

http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/f..._5195small.jpg

http://i236.photobucket.com/albums/f..._5199small.jpg

:tup:

Ive got the last pic in HD on the monitor, glorious PW!

shots look good, background leaves a little to be desired but it's not distracting (which is a good thing). keep it up!

thanks. ive always preferred shots of the car without distracting backgrounds.

don't we all...................... oh wait, nvm lol

:iagree:

BTW, great pics. Love the car and color.

thanks!

beautiful photos! great job!

thank you!

Nice. What did you set your custom white balance with? The third shot appears a little blue.

I dont remember exactly, but I believe the camera setting for the shot was the same as the other shots, but the darkness of the angle made it more blue. I think i had everything turned down one notch except blue. Ive always used a cooler setting for my shots, im not a warm kinda person.

one of my favorite tricks in photoshop (if you have it) is to go to "Hue/Saturation..." and take blue and cyan down about -30 or -40 on saturation if it's not a blue vehicle. if i've got a nice blue sky in the picture, i'll hit it with the history brush immediately after to bring it back and leave the car without the blue. works great on black cars

yeah I do that to, but for these I didnt do much PP at all. This set isnt nearly as good as my other previous set because of this, I think anyway.

If you shoot a white card (search for whibal, expo disc or x-rite white card) prior to shooting your image then select custom white balance you will get a totally neutral image. If you shoot raw and render the file with the DPP software that came free with your camera (this software will result in the cleanest rendering, it is a little clunky to use at first but the results are worth it) and adjust the color to your liking, the results will be awesome. If you shoot jpg then go into the color balance settings (PS) and do a slight shift there. Hue and saturation will also allow you to control this but in a different way. Adding cyan saturation is very different from shifting color balance. If you over saturate too much you can make the file difficult to print. Out of gamut color resulting from too much saturation adjustments (particularly on a jpg file) can be problematic. Also, if you shoot raw the original raw file is never changed. If you screw up the final file you always have the original raw. When you adjust the jpg the changes are final. Also, jpg compression is very destructive. Multipe saves can really destroy the file. If you shoot jpg I advise to save the file first (before any changes are made) as a tiff and work on that.

yea i always shoot RAW on AWB (though i would use a custom WB if i had a white card, i've used a friend's before), much to the dismay of my desktop lol. i recently bought a 1 TB internal hard drive dedicated just to having the various versions of photoshop and all of my image files. i hope to get a 1 TB external soon to back up those files as well.

I always shoot RAW now, jpeg just destroys pics, especially after processing.

agree

can you recommend a decent ext. flash/umbrella setup for shooting cars? I may start up a weekend business doing this, but I need to get some equipment needs in order first.

i would focus on lenses first. pick up a 50 f/1.8 (they're cheap) and start figuring out what L-glass lenses you want to have. i've currently got the 17-40 f/4 L, 28-70 f/2.8 L and the 70-200 f/4 L and they are all excellent lenses. anytime you get an L-glass lens it's going to be really good. the only one i've ever had that i didn't like was the older Mk I version of the 16-35 f/2.8 L. the 17-40 is soooo much better, thought i heard the Mk II version fixed a lot of the issues

I'll probably get the 70-200, even if I only use it at 70, I love that length for the real deep background blur and longer foreground. I always got compliments on my older pics with my d40 because people loved the blur. I appreciate the advise!

200mm @ f/4 is FTW too...

350Z Photoshoot - 6/6/10 - JPMcG Photography

Porsche Photoshoot 3-7-10 - JPMcG Photography

Wow, is that just a solid 200mm?

yup both of them iirc @ f/4, shows you what different focal lengths can look like. i like the decent bokeh but while also getting the 200mm compression in the frame. here's my list of lenses i want in my bag:

1) 70-200 f/2.8 L (one of the various ones)
2) 135mm f/2 L aka "the cream machine"
3) 200mm f/2.8 L
4) 85 f/1.2 L <--- amazing on full frame: Savannah, GA Photowalk - 4/24/10 - JPMcG Photography
5) 35 f/1.4 L

maybe later on 200 f/2 L and 300 f/2.8 L, i could probably just get a 100-400 and get what i need (for track photo's) but primes are better/baller :)

jeez, that quite a gold mine you've got there. I need to find something more... modest, if you know what I mean!

If you want an inexpensive 70-200 the best one in our (Canon's) line is the old 70-200f4 L. You can pick one up pretty cheap. The new 70-200f2.8L IS II is the sharpest 70-200 we have ever made. I disagree about buying the 50f1.8. The 50f1.4 is a MUCH better lens and still quite reasonable. The 1.8 is very fragile. The glass is good but it doesn't take much to break it.

Regarding lighting, umbrellas are not the best way to go for highly reflective objects. The highlights thy cast are ugly. You should buy some straight lights and bounce them off show cards. You can find show cards at the set shop . For lights I use Profoto and Elinchrome. These are rather expensive but the light is really beautiful. For a starter at lower cost, I know quite a few people who use Alien Bees. There is no sync socket on the Rebel so you will need a hot shoe sync adaptor in order to sync your strobes. Do not use an optical slave to fire the strobes form your built in flash as the ETTL system emits a series of pre-flashes which will cause the strobes to fire too early. You can also use a radio slave, I use and love the Pocket Wizard but they are costly.

1) the 70-200f2.8 L IS II is a great lens. The older 70-200f2.8 is no where as sharp

2) I use the 135f2 and the 200f2 for my beauty work. Both great lenses. The 135 is not too expensive and, as it has been around for a while, is available used at decent prices.

135f2.0
http://www.pbase.com/dsphoto/image/83423343.jpg

200f2.0
http://www.pbase.com/dsphoto/image/110933401.jpg

3) 200f2.8 is a sleeper. Not too popular (we don't sell very many) but a great lightweight lens. I don't use this as the new 70-200 is almost as sharp and has great IS. Also, I use the 200f2 a lot.

4) 85f1.2 is also a great lens. If you can find a used original model buy it. The glass is exactly the same as in the mk II version. The main difference is a faster focus motor (it is still a rather slow focusing lens)

5) 35f1.4 is a great lens but you should look at the new 24f1.4L It's sharper with better image quality at the edge

good to know^^

yeah, thank you for the advise!

You're welcome. I work for Canon, head of pro product development. Happy to answer tech questions

you probably can't say yet but can we expect to see a 5D3 hit the market anytime soon? also, my friend (who i'm looking to buy a 5D2 off of) mentioned something about a 3D body to fit between the 1D and 5D series... anything?

While I cannot say what is coming I can say...no. No more new DSLR cameras this year. Everything else is rumors. Some day the 5DII will be replaced. the 3D rumor has existed for about 4 years. It isn't going to happen anytime in the next few years and there are no plans for a 3D.

good to know sir :)