witolda_maruszewska

A Mk2 Escort tackles a tight section during the 2004 Rockingham

Stages rally... This event (held on a very dull, murky and cold day)

was my first attempt at rally photography, so it was a journey into

the unknown - as a result, I'd really appreciate some opinions.

A well executed pan shot - nice work. Maybe it would have been nice to leave some more space on the left of the frame for the car to move in to, but that is perhaps just a matter of taste.

I don't mind angled shots myself - it is a technique I use a lot myself. I tend to shoot mainly on ovals, so it adds variation into the work I produce. I actually do this for panning as well as for head on shots.

 

However this photo could be improved by taking a couple of things into consideration. Firstly, the focus point is on the front bumper (fender) of the car when ideally it should be on the windscreen just below the sponsor's sticker and secondly, the background, even out of focus, is somewhat ugly and distracting. It really does help to pay attention to the background when selecting a vantage point from which to shoot - it is something that can truly make or break a shot.

Now I know Mark Proctor races his Pontiac on a very tight budget,

but surely this is pushing it... Opinions and thoughts welcomed on

this offbeat moment from an SCSA test day at Rockingham.

You've captured a nice moment with the front wheels of this contraption (!?) off the ground, BUT what would have been a reasonable image is really brought down by the strong flare on the left rear mudguard washing out the colour and contrast to a level that is unacceptable. This problem could have been avoided by choosing your vantage point a bit more carefully and maybe using a lens hood and/or a polarising filter to help reduce the flare.

Another expensive repair bill - this time for Steve Hobday. Just

curious to find out whether this shot works - thoughts and views

welcome as always.

I love this! My mum makes bobbin lace and I find this evokes a lot of memories and sentiment. The fact you've only included the person's hands in the shot draws attention to the complexity of the activity and the slight motion blur brings the action to life.

A really nice study - what you've done here works incredibly well. The low key lighting is very effective, as is the catchlight in the sparrow's eye. I also like the way the detail is suggested by the lighting as opposed to being concentrated on as you get in a lot of bird shots.

Lovely composition and good effort to capture the feel of the lighting - this is an image with a lot of potential. However, perhaps it might have been better to underexpose the shot slightly (half a stop perhaps) to reduce the blown highlights on the cat's chin, and the light patch on the top of the frame is easily darkened using the burn tool in photoshop. These small changes would turn a good photo into a great one.

I like the composition / crop of the image as well as the good choice of an uncluttered background. What does bring this shot down a fair bit is that the car looks pretty static and there is no evidence or illusion of speed; a slower shutter speed and better body rotation during the pan would easily remedy this problem.

Not a bad try as fencing isn't the easiest sport to photograph (I've been on both sides of the camera lens in this sport), but this could be a lot better, I'm afraid. The person standing at the end of the piste is very distracting and the exposive action that one can associate with the sport isn't in evidence as the image looks very static - you could have slowed the shutter speed down to convey movement, especially in the bladework, through the means of blur. Also, the focusing could be better.

This is nice, Rob - probably the best one you've posted so far. Focusing is where it should be and the amount of blur and spray is just enough to convey the feeling of speed. If I had to nit-pick here, it is that the driver's head is turned to look over to his left - it means we can't see his face nor do we know what he's looking at. Good try nonetheless. ;-)

This is a lot better than the other shot in terms of focusing and I do like the composition with the fence in the foreground and the car exiting the frame with the spray trailing behind. BUT - the person in the left of frame is very distracting. You've got the right idea about how to shoot, but when selecting a trackside vantage point, you must look around you for objects that could creep into the frame unintentionally and spoil a good shot.

You've done a pretty good job of conveying the feeling of racing in the wet here. What does bring this shot down unfortunately - which otherwise would have been a real cracker - is the fact that the focus is off... Seems to be behind the car as opposed to on the driver's head, where ideally it should be.

A very shaken Phil White being given a helping hand by a marshal

after a big hit involving two other trucks. I think this conveys the

moment well, but would be very interested in hearing some opinions

on this shot...

Spent an afternoon wandering around in my local park with my camera -

this was one that I liked. What I'd like to know is what you

experienced landscape photographers think of this and whether the

square crop works. N.B. I am a motorsport photographer by trade,

this isn't my usual line of photography...

Colin isn't the easiest person to get a natural, relaxed portrait

of, so I'm really quite pleased with this candid. I'd be really

interested in hearing some informed opinions regarding this image

from people who are experienced portrait photographers. Any thoughts

and tips are always welcome.

Sorry I should have replied to this earlier, but work and thesis kind of got in the way a little. I'm not sure how useful these tips will be for non-Canon users but anyway...

 

I tend to use flash mainly when shooting manual, that way it is easier to control the level of fill. Basically, the slower the shutter speed, the more ambient light contributes to the exposure and the less flash-y the photos look. Shoot with ambient light in mind (get a baseline meter reading) and use the flash as an additional source of light just to lift the shadows - I find my 550EX is pretty predictable in terms of exposure. However, I do tend to manually set the zoom head for wider than the lens focal length I am using so that the light isn't quite so direct and concentrated, but then again it only zooms up to 105mm (off the top of my head) and I do a lot of work at 400mm... You can also vary the brightness by adjusting the FEC if you need to.

 

Have attached a portrait shot using fill flash. This was taken inside the garage, strongly backlit through the open roller door, and exposed for ambient indoor light. The lens was a 100-400L at 400mm and f5.6 (wide open), shutter speed 1/200 and ISO 400. No FEC was used, image just sharpened and resized.

 

I know this isn't a technically perfect - it is at best a grab shot

in a pretty freaky sequence but I'd still be interested in hearing

some opinions. Basically what happened is that one of the side

panels shattered (made from glass fibre) and let air into the car

causing the whole bodywork to just blow straight off the chassis at

over 170 mph. Even worse, it was a mate of mine driving the car...

Comments and critique welcome as always.

Tim, a flash gun is invaluable for pit & paddock work - I don't know how I'd be able to live without mine... As the other poster points out, it is great for helping to lighten the shadow cast by the peak of a baseball cap - or any shadows cast in harsh lighting conditions. Then there's the plus of being able to "add" light on a dull / overcast day - if properly done, it doesn't even look like you've used a flashgun. Other than the shadow issue, the photo isn't half bad - as a candid it works well IMHO ;-)

I'm normally not a portrait shooter per se - my primary subject is

motorsports, but I do like taking candid portraits when the

opportunity arises. This particular shot was taken inside a garage

but strongly backlit through the open roller door. Fill flash was

used to lighten the shadow under the cap peak and the resulting

digital file was converted to B&W in Photoshop. I'd really appreciate

some comments and tips from dedicated portrait shooters on how I

could improve my techniques - but please bear in mind that I shoot on

the fly with no pre-arranged set-ups.

No, this was a seperate incident much later in the race when one driver got a bit loose in Turn 4, over-corrected and became a victim to the pendulum effect. He ended up hitting the wall halfway down the pit straight - in backwards and then forwards.

 

This shot was taken just before the safety crew turned up to clear the mess - the radiator was damaged hence the steam, and as a result the field had to file through the pit lane under caution. I just thought it would be a nice shot to get a close-up of the damage - this car used to be driven by a close friend so I was a bit disappointed to see it being somewhat shortened at both ends...

Agree with you, Norman. Not much choice in the matter though, because the crash happened at the exit of T3 and I was in T4. The start of the crash sequence is fine as it was up on the banking on the outside, but Mike's car was rolling straight towards the wall on the inside. Luck of the draw I guess, but better that than not getting the shot at all! :-)

Nice shot, great piece of timing! Looks like the back end got loose and he just "Mickeled" it into the wall - must have been a pretty hard hit as the wheels are off the ground!

 

BTW, in ASCAR Days of Thunder (UK equivalent of NASCAR) we have a driver called John Mickel who makes a habit of thumping the wall in this manner - hence the description! :-)

It was pretty surreal - Verge looked pretty rattled when he climbed out of what was left of the car, but by lunchtime he was back in the West-Tec garage signing autographs for the fans!

 

This shot (and several others from the sequence) appeared in last week's Autosport and Motorsport News. Guess the fee will help ease the pain of my camera going crunch...