CGI - whats your take on automotive CGI?

[scotty]

Personally I feel that it is a threat to photography.
I want to become an automotive photographer, but when your'e competing with images such as the one in the link it can be a bit depressing

http://www.flickr.com/photos/35815253@N07/3606584799/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/35815253@N07/3873432463/

I mean this guy has real talent and is doing a fantastic job, dont get me wrong. But I got excited when I saw the rig shot drift style image, only to find out it was CGI.

I dont know.... I guess I have to go out and do better with a real car and a real photograph.

But that then brings me to what defines a 'real' photograph. can a real photograph have some post processing, and how far can you go with PP?

People can add in things to a photograph that were not there when the photograph was taken, they can remove out distractions and clean the image up aswell.
You can use multiple photographs of the same composition, just with different lighting setups and composite them together in photoshop to get the perfect lighting... etc.

Now what I find difficult is when you have a photograph that is not a composite such as this one
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2584/3879872608_7cfd11a854_b.jpg

I have to explain to people that this is a real photograph, I captured this in one frame.. and im sure some people who dont ask assume its a composite.



I just want to know ho people feel about this and what their thoughts are around this issue..

Something to talk about i guess

[The Mad Hatter Project]

Very interesting topic, had to write an essay on this last year actually. It's a very fine line.

[tomberkley]

You Know what you mean its def a fine line...
How about photos of skateboarding, I hear stories of the tricks in the mags not actually been landed, but the photo was a real good one, so it gets posted in the mag... for instance the guy doing the trick may have previously landed the trick but the photo of the one he didn't land and roll, away was a better one. so that's the one that get put in the mag...
Im prity iffy on all the pp too, I rekon that if you are inhancing your image in photoshop, outside of the limatations of your camera thats all good, eg changing colour, sharpining (cos your lens is rubbish and cant afford a new one...) croping stuff out (power lines etc). I rekn that stuff isnt too bad, but when you are fixing all the stuff you go wrong the actually took the photo, I rekon that is lame.

[scotty]

You Know what you mean its def a fine line...
How about photos of skateboarding, I hear stories of the tricks in the mags not actually been landed, but the photo was a real good one, so it gets posted in the mag... for instance the guy doing the trick may have previously landed the trick but the photo of the one he didn't land and roll, away was a better one. so that's the one that get put in the mag...
Im prity iffy on all the pp too, I rekon that if you are inhancing your image in photoshop, outside of the limatations of your camera thats all good, eg changing colour, sharpining (cos your lens is rubbish and cant afford a new one...) croping stuff out (power lines etc). I rekn that stuff isnt too bad, but when you are fixing all the stuff you go wrong the actually took the photo, I rekon that is lame.



Interesting one about the skateboarding .. never thought about that. Ive never done any skate photography but when I do try my hand at it I will have to make a note of the photos of tricks that wern't landed..

I agree on enhancin contrast, alternative processing etc.. maybe removing small blemishes.. but not adding in things unless its a surealist photograph or the likes. as removing objects is concerned I understand that product and automotive photography has to look flawless so removing small blemishes is OK, but I guess thats up to my own discression.


Another thing is advertising a new camera... now when Canon for example advertise a new camera - the photos that they use for their advertising brochures would have to be straight from the camera with no post processing I assume.. for example if Canon was advertising the 400D would they have to photograph using the standard kit lens or could they use a L serries lens??

maybe im starting too many conversations at onece

i dont know

[Cory Varcoe]

Just a quick reply for now but that shot of the drift is still possible to do without CG. Check out Easton Chang's website. I believe he's got some shots of a Jag drifting around a corner and a Holden. Would love to get a sneak peck at his rig though :cool: Its just a matter of taking two shots and combining, but that might constitute CG...
Sorry if what this has been said before, didnt have time to read all the replies

[NikonF4s]

in an ideal world every pic would be a land, however it isn't an ideal world, and the vetting of ugly frames is common practice. No big deal, so long as the trick has been landed and caught on Vid in the same session.
Everyone knows it, and its quite acceptable.

[slotmedia]

Just a quick reply for now

Would love to get a sneak peck at his rig though

Your wish is possible, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQ927f0h0S0

CGI is pretty amazing stuff if it has been done corecty.

[Cory Varcoe]

Your wish is possible, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQ927f0h0S0

Whoa cant wait to get home and check that out!!

I think what is acceptable and isnt is up to the viewer. If you look at one end of the scale you have manipulated images with added objects increased colour etc etc and then you have the true un manipulated images taken with slide cameras which allow to nothing to be changed.
From what i've heard etc most digital camera manipulate the output slightly anyway. So i guess its up to the viewer.
Personally i try to make my images be the most they can be. ( which is tending to be less and less now days due too changing tastes lol)

[talan]

Hmm mixed feelings about this topic. I reckon if you're good at it, and it looks good, then it's all good (Y)

[scotty]

there are some great replys to this..

CGI can look good, and it can give me the challenge to create something just as good in camera. with some PP..

[Cory Varcoe]

Easton's rig is EPIC! :eek:

[TroyWitte]

Hey Scotty,

Just checked out your Flickr Photostream. You've got some great photos on there. Sorry to disappoint you with my Virtual Drift shot. I created it the other day just for a bit of fun! It’s been really interesting reading all the comments to your post. I feel kind of honoured that you linked to some of my work.

Suppose I should give you a little background info. I'm from Australia and work at GM Holden Design in the Visualisation department. We're a small group of 5 guys that create computer generated automotive images. We act as a kind of inhouse CG Design Studio. My primary role is to create Marketing based images used to sell our vehicles and well as creating internal future product design images.

As you can see from the rest of my Flickr page I'm a photographer as well! I was lucky enough to visit NZ a few years ago to shoot our Holden Sportwagon Brochure. The place just blew me away. It was hard to take a bad shot!! My favourite one was taken up at Deer Park looking over Queenstown. It’s on my photostream as well. Hopefully I’ll be heading back there for a holiday at the end of the year. Sorry getting off topic a bit!

This issue has come up numerous times both internally and also within the professional photographers that I work with. Like I say to them we're not here to replace photographers but to work with them and compliment their work and skills. I think both skills are valued and have their place. One benefit we have over conventional photography is that we can create realistic images of vehicles up to 2 years before a real one even rolls off the production line. We are also able to place our vehicles in locations that may not be possible to place a real one! This allows us to create some very interesting shots and give us greater creative control. One negative to our job is it takes a lot longer and is a lot harder to create a good looking image.

I must say one of my main goals in my job is to produce images that are as good as a photographers. I’m constantly researching new photographic techniques and examples from other professional photographers and I’m always striving to get to their level. One person posted a link to Easton Chang’s site. This guy is an awesome automotive photograph and I constantly use his work as inspiration! Flickr has been great too. Even though not everyone on the site are professional photographers, there are some seriously talented photographers out there!!!

For us it really comes down to whether the image looks good. If a real photo looks hot then we’ve got no problem in using it, alternatively if a CG images looks great and its going to help sell our cars, then go for it. As photography get better it just pushes me to get better in my work and vice-versa it then makes photographers push themselves. Everyone gets better feeding off each other’s work and everyone wins really!

This is just my opinion and hope it helps to give a bit of understanding from the dark side!!!

Cheers
Troy.:D

[scotty]

Hey, good to hear about the Author of the photographs I was using as examples..

your work is fantastic.. and im sure the topic has come up a few times..

I bet it takes alot of time to create these images, they sure are cool. and great example about the pre design of advertising material before the car even gets produced.. It has its place.

By the way I love the latest creations on your flicker page. very creative .. It must have been hard making the reflections in the car.

I must admit they are inspiring images and they make me want to go and photograph cars no matter what time it is..

how did you find out about this post by the way?


Hey Scotty,

Just checked out your Flickr Photostream. You've got some great photos on there. Sorry to disappoint you with my Virtual Drift shot. I created it the other day just for a bit of fun! It’s been really interesting reading all the comments to your post. I feel kind of honoured that you linked to some of my work.

Suppose I should give you a little background info. I'm from Australia and work at GM Holden Design in the Visualisation department. We're a small group of 5 guys that create computer generated automotive images. We act as a kind of inhouse CG Design Studio. My primary role is to create Marketing based images used to sell our vehicles and well as creating internal future product design images.

As you can see from the rest of my Flickr page I'm a photographer as well! I was lucky enough to visit NZ a few years ago to shoot our Holden Sportwagon Brochure. The place just blew me away. It was hard to take a bad shot!! My favourite one was taken up at Deer Park looking over Queenstown. It’s on my photostream as well. Hopefully I’ll be heading back there for a holiday at the end of the year. Sorry getting off topic a bit!

This issue has come up numerous times both internally and also within the professional photographers that I work with. Like I say to them we're not here to replace photographers but to work with them and compliment their work and skills. I think both skills are valued and have their place. One benefit we have over conventional photography is that we can create realistic images of vehicles up to 2 years before a real one even rolls off the production line. We are also able to place our vehicles in locations that may not be possible to place a real one! This allows us to create some very interesting shots and give us greater creative control. One negative to our job is it takes a lot longer and is a lot harder to create a good looking image.

I must say one of my main goals in my job is to produce images that are as good as a photographers. I’m constantly researching new photographic techniques and examples from other professional photographers and I’m always striving to get to their level. One person posted a link to Easton Chang’s site. This guy is an awesome automotive photograph and I constantly use his work as inspiration! Flickr has been great too. Even though not everyone on the site are professional photographers, there are some seriously talented photographers out there!!!

For us it really comes down to whether the image looks good. If a real photo looks hot then we’ve got no problem in using it, alternatively if a CG images looks great and its going to help sell our cars, then go for it. As photography get better it just pushes me to get better in my work and vice-versa it then makes photographers push themselves. Everyone gets better feeding off each other’s work and everyone wins really!

This is just my opinion and hope it helps to give a bit of understanding from the dark side!!!

Cheers
Troy.:D

[TroyWitte]

Thanks Scotty

Found your post through a link in Flickr!
Totally agree with Cory, Easton's rig is insane!!! How they connect that to the vehicle astounds me!

Troy.

[Cory Varcoe]

I'd love to be a fly on the wall at one if his shoots lol

[stic]

I think, in the end, it's the image that counts. Not how it was made.

If you start to point the finger (in a purist manner) at CGI, or even photoshop tweaks, you’re just opening up a can of worms.

I remember, not TOO long ago, DSLR users were frowned upon by 'filmies', and if you go back a little ways, you'll find some of the re-touching the film guys used to do was as much a bastardization of the image process as any digital rendering.

Every form of filter, artificial light etc is impinging on the basic photograph, so PC post production is just another tool, no more.

It takes as much talent, if not more, to produce an image with a PC as it does with a Camera...

Let the image speak for itself.

[Cory Varcoe]

Going back even further, the current 'purests' were once the radicals compared to the slide photographers :p