Which Exposure Better Suits The Image?

Kinja'd!!! "Kake Bake" (kakebake)
01/11/2014 at 22:08 • Filed to: gt6

Kinja'd!!!1 Kinja'd!!! 16
Kinja'd!!!

I futzed up the 24-minute Le Mans race on GT6 tonight, so I figured I'd camp out at the exit of the pit lane for a photo op and some fun blocking the AI. Here's what I shot with a -0.7 exposure.

Kinja'd!!!

And here's the image with a -0.5 exposure.


DISCUSSION (16)


Kinja'd!!! Blondude > Kake Bake
01/11/2014 at 22:12

Kinja'd!!!0

I'd say -0.7.


Kinja'd!!! ttyymmnn > Kake Bake
01/11/2014 at 22:18

Kinja'd!!!1

I'm with Blondude. -0.7.


Kinja'd!!! Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2 > Kake Bake
01/11/2014 at 22:20

Kinja'd!!!0

-0.7 Really puts the focus on the Toyota and Sauber.


Kinja'd!!! lonestranger > Kake Bake
01/11/2014 at 22:21

Kinja'd!!!0

-0.7

I might've played around with a bit slower shutter speed and/or a different panning mode in order to capture a bit more sense of motion, but I can't say if it'd have given any improvement.

I do like that you've focused on the "Premium" Sauber C9, blurring out the "Standard" Toyota Minolta 88C-V's poor quality details.


Kinja'd!!! Kake Bake > Blondude
01/11/2014 at 22:22

Kinja'd!!!0

That's what I was leaning toward.

It's no masterpiece either way, but -0.7 at least looks better.


Kinja'd!!! Kake Bake > ttyymmnn
01/11/2014 at 22:22

Kinja'd!!!0

I'm with ttyymmnn. -0.7.


Kinja'd!!! Jeff-God-of-Biscuits > Kake Bake
01/11/2014 at 22:23

Kinja'd!!!0

You still have detail in the nose of the lead car with the top exposure. You can always blow a little light into the pit area after the fact, but trying to replace the all the sponsor stickers on the nose would be a pain.


Kinja'd!!! Blondude > Kake Bake
01/11/2014 at 22:24

Kinja'd!!!0

Agreed.


Kinja'd!!! Kake Bake > lonestranger
01/11/2014 at 22:26

Kinja'd!!!0

Yeah, I could've spent more time on this. I was just tired of the game by that point and when I finally lined up the shot and snapped it, I thought "looks good enough."

The focus on the C9 was kind of a fluke. I was trying different cars and figured I may as well stick with that since I was also driving one. At least it gives some sense of depth.


Kinja'd!!! Kake Bake > Chuck 2(O=[][]=O)2
01/11/2014 at 22:28

Kinja'd!!!1

It better.

I'm not paying -0.7 $45k/year to lounge around and not focus on Toyotas and Saubers!


Kinja'd!!! Kake Bake > Blondude
01/11/2014 at 22:31

Kinja'd!!!1

Kinja'd!!!

Agreed.


Kinja'd!!! Kake Bake > Jeff-God-of-Biscuits
01/11/2014 at 22:33

Kinja'd!!!0

You're talking over my head.

I'm jis plain folk tryin' to take a picture of some cars.


Kinja'd!!! Jeff-God-of-Biscuits > Kake Bake
01/11/2014 at 22:35

Kinja'd!!!0

Kinja'd!!!

notice, the detail is gone in this one. the version above, you can still read the letters.


Kinja'd!!! Kake Bake > Jeff-God-of-Biscuits
01/12/2014 at 00:31

Kinja'd!!!0

This is true.

I have received your knowledge fully and without protection.


Kinja'd!!! eggmoe > Kake Bake
01/12/2014 at 19:04

Kinja'd!!!0

Basic rule of photography, try to capture as much visual information as possible. If something is washed out or out of focus or improperly exposed, there's not much you can do to fix it post. These pictures look really strange, I'm not sure how GT6 photo options go, but it looks like either the aperture or focus is way off.


Kinja'd!!! Kake Bake > eggmoe
01/12/2014 at 22:23

Kinja'd!!!0

What if the goal is to be purposefully obscurant?

There's a lot of stuff in GT6 that a sharp photographer would want to hide anyway. There're standard car models brought over from older games, poor trackside textures and out-of-place spectators to name a few.

Long story short, I'm a hack and I'll never work in this town again!