POTM [02/08] Yellow Mini

Updated version:
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y66/Firehed/IMG_8537copy.jpg
Original:
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y66/Firehed/ZZ28F10D5C.jpg

ISO100 f/18 @ 1/200s 41mm (28-135 IS), gobo'd 580EXII w/ 3/4CTO 105mm zoom 1/16 power lighting the car, 285HV hanging by a rubber band upside down at medium zoom 1/2 power with a funky assortment of blue and red gels. Only PP was to raise the black levels a tiny bit, crop, straighten, and add the border.
ISO100 f/11 @ 1/200s 135mm (28-135 IS). Snooted 580EXII with 3/4CTO gel ~1/16 lighting the car, backlit with a grid-spotted 285HV at 1/16 with red and ND gels, white balanced to 3200k. Tried it with a few different backlight spot colors as well as just black and ended up liking red the best. Tweaked the levels a tiny bit in PS and added a weak unsharp mask.

Feedback much appreciated.

 

I really like the reflection off what I assume is a granite counter top? Also the red/yellow/black is a really nice color combo that gives a soft feeling. Two things I would have to say is the shadow of the mirror sloping down, or maybe it being there at all doesn't feel right. Also the of the car is out of focus a bit, not sure if you tired that or not but the whole them would look good to me. Besides that nice image I like model car shots.
-aaron

 

Great shot. I see you've been experimenting. Read strobist too by any chance?

 

...got a purple background/gel? The image is nice and all, but the red and yellow don't do it for me (no offense...just the whole ketchup and mustard thing). Also, I noticed past the sv mirror & roof top is a bit OOF for f/11. OTOH I do like the comp. and reflection

 

You betcha. It's getting expensive :/

I'll look into purple, Vers. I tried blue and green and preferred the blue but thought the red worked better. No reason I can't throw on both gels. Oh, and thanks for that PM - I tried to respond but you seem to have yours turned off

Re: focusing - yeah, I thought so too. But focusing closer to the middle of the car (on the mirror for instance) wasn't sharp enough at the front. Maybe I'll try with my 50/1.8 a lot closer up.

 

Yea...even blue. Just figured complimentary colors and all. How'd that all go btw, with the 70-200? and how the hell do I turn it on? I couldn't find an option for that...

As for the focusing issue, shoot a little wider (50-85mm at or around) with the 28-135...as you know the image becomes more compressed as FL increases...generally the DOF wouldn't be affected all that much but its the only thing I can think of.

Edit: I also find it strange that the rear of the model is OOF compared to the center at f/11 when the MTF shows equal if not better edge sharpness...weird. Next time try to MF on the front right (your left) headlight at 70mm f/8 or f/11.

 

Not sure how you managed to turn PMs off as they're on by default. I'm holding off on the 70-200 right now... a) weather is abysmal and we were probably going to do a pick-up b) he doesn't have a canon body to send me any recent samples with and c) I want to get some opinions on f/4 IS vs the f/2.8 non, since the f/4 has supposedly sharper images, is lighter (but no included tripod ring) and has four-stop IS, as compared to one stop of extra shutter speed (for action rather than just handholding), better bokeh, and better AF on many bodies that take advantage of f/2.8 lenses.

Anyways, the blue worked pretty well, I may post up some others from the shoot later. There's about a metric crapton of photos that I ended up taking. The green didn't really work, but then again I was using a window green gel and had forgotten to readjust my white balance and take the CTO off the 580exII so it was coming out bluer than normally (I'd originally shot that way so I could get an even bluer blue on the 285HV though left it that way for the red since it didn't seem to cause any weird looks and I was being a bit lazy). I've never exactly been one that's good with color theory, complementary stuff, etc... which is why I now hire someone else for design when I build websites for people

I was seeing reasonably similar DOF shallowness even at the wider FLs, but I may give it another try. You're certainly right about the compression, but OTOH at longer lengths the width of the car relative to the distance the lens can reach is less so... I dunno. I'll play around more tomorrow since I'm way too tired tonight. Loooong week at work (they finally started making me do my job )

 

I like Will add more constructive reasons and nitpicks in a bit. Consider this a placeholder to remind me to show the love.

EDIT:
Ok. On looking at it, I like the picture itself, but there's one technical flaw to me and one "intent" flaw to me.

Technical: The DoF anomaly is very, very strange. I'm not sure how big a car this actually is, but I feel like there should be something you can do to correct that. If you go to a shorter focal length, it may even exacerbate the problem - from my (limited) understanding, the DoF moves backward relative to the subject at longer lengths (aperture held constant) whereas it's more centered at shorter lengths (hence the 'compressed' look of longer lenses). Therefore, you should get a better focal range by shooting a longer zoom if you're focusing on the front headlight, as that will be more towards the front of your focal range instead of putting the headlight in the middle of it.

Either way, it feels like it needs to be corrected.

Intent: I'm having a hard time with the theme in this. I look at it as a shot of a model car on a pretty countertop. The reflection doesn't jump at me and I don't feel like that's the idea behind your shot. Instead, it feels like you wanted to take a picture of a car, and the reflection was tacked on by just changing the ground you shot it on.


Good notes: Your lighting work is superb. I love the red color and think it matches very well with the yellow. That being said, I could see the idea Vers had with using purple - could look just as stunning. You're really coming a long way in "studio" style - the colors are rich and warm without looking the slightest bit post-processed.

I think that's your big achievement with this shot - as far as lighting goes, you get an A+++++.

 

Yea...the funny part is that PM's are ON...
He doesn't have a canon body...? whats he doing with a canon lens? (I'm going to assume that he sold the body recently and had the lens left over, seems iffy though) I can tell you from personal experience that the f/4 IS version IS the sharpest of the 70-200's and is much lighter than the f/2.8's but the bokeh is not as good as f/2.8 (so if portraits are your thing, consider that). OTOH, the f/2.8 version is more versatile...being able to shoot handheld in low light is extremely important (f/2.8 IS even more so). In the end it comes down to what you shoot...if you shoot low light, sports, stage or events its best to sacrifice the small IQ difference and go with the faster glass. If you shoot primarily outdoors or in sufficient lighting the f/4 IS is your best bet. Like I said with my last PM...DEEPLY consider the 135L f/2, which is regarded by many to be the best stage photography lens, it fits your budget perfectly, excellent IQ and handholdability (best of both worlds b/t 70-200 f/4 IS and f/2.8 non), and best of all its NEW and under warranty. If you are concerned about it being too short on your body think of its crop factor (216mm FF equiv). Just remember what I said about the softness issues associated with the 70-200's...I had to send mine in for calibration a month after I got it.

Do you have an FM account? if so I can recommend setting up a post in the Canon mount DSLR board with your quarry and ask them what they think you should do...sometimes they can be relatively informative (expect rude comments).

Anyways, back to the OP...be sure to tack up some images from your last shoot.

 

Took into account the feedback from your posts, and updated the image (haven't yet submitted to the potm site so it shouldn't be a problem ) I changed up the background by tweaking my gels a bit, and addressed the DOF issue as best I could. Still not quite as sharp as I'd like, but much better IMO.


Brett - the car has about the same footprint of a large computer mouse. I see where you could get the feeling with regards to intent. I went out and got the tile (and several others though I liked this one the best) specifically for the reflective surface. The subject was more the afterthought than the reflection, but I won't argue semantics.

In case anyone's interested:

 

Much better IMO as well, Nice microwave riser. One last C&C...check the levels, the yellow seems much less vibrant than the first shot. Bring it up to give the mini some pop.

 

I like the second one much more than the first - good idea, Vers! (what a shock.) I also agree to hype up your yellow channel. You can either adjust the level individually via curves in photoshop or right in lightroom (though to some much lower degree of control). It needs to pop - the purple light dulls it down a bit.

I love the setup, by the by.

 

Bumped the yellow up in Lightroom for that version, otherwise no changes. I think the main flash was off by about a third of a stop causing the slightly duller color... but in any case, a five-second fix.

 

Firehed that version is muchos better, great work!
I must must must, get some flashes.

 

I like the shot, but it looks a shade underexposed from over here.

 

Yea, the flash definitely missed...SHOOT IT AGAIN!