Gallery pics - how I shoot mine

[harti20]

Hi all

In my Under Glass thread to my Benz Patent Motorwagen @peteski asked me if I could make a thread in this forum to show how I take my gallery pics. As I was at the studio today with my latest build, I could take some pics to show my setup.

As I already wrote in my before mentioned thread, I use a large piece of black glass  which used to be part of a coffee table and put the model on top of this glass. The white backdrop gets lit by two flashlights, placed on the left and on the right to get an even illumination. The model itself gets lit by one large flash from the right, slightly tilted downwards and indirect by a second flash that aims to two large pieces of styrofoam placed at an angle, to reflect the light to the model.

Here I tried to make a drawing where you can see the setup from top

The two large black pieces of styrofoam are to prevent light spilling from the flashes which illuminate the background, but I don't always use them.

Here you can see how it looks in reality, looking from the two background flashes to the table

The camera is mounted to a very sturdy column tripod to minimize any movement between the single frames taken.

Every picture that has a certain depth is made using focus stacking. Therefore I take one picture by focusing on the very nearest point of the car. Once this picture is taken I move the focus point very slightly to the back and take the next picture and so on until the focus point reaches the point of the car that is the furthest away. So I end up having between 15 to 20 pictures of the same subject (that's the moment where a sturdy tripod comes in very handy 🙂 ).

Back home, I make adjustments to colors and lighting of the pictures (the same corrections for all the pictures, otherwise the following steps would become more complicated). Then I select all pictures of the same subject (e.g. driverside in a certain angle from the front) and load them as seperate layers in photoshop. When photoshop did load every single picture as a seperate layer I end up with something like this:

 

After that I let photoshop adjust the single layers by selecting all layers and using Edit -> Align layers automatically (or similar, my photoshop is german, so the commands may differ to the english version 🙂 ). After some heavy work done by photoshop I immediately use Edit -> Blend layers automatically and let photoshop do its work. When it's finished it looks something like this

 

Now I reduce everything to one single layer to save some memory and disk storage. Then I use the selection tool and let photoshop select the subject. With this car it did an outstanding job, I didn't have to do one single correction to the selection. As I want to edit the background in the next step, I have to invert the selection made by photohop and then add a levels layer. There I only have to drag the marked slider to the left until the edge disappears (or enter the value in the edit box, if I already made the correction for another picture of the same series).

That's it, after that step I only have to save the picture and upload it 🙂 

I hope this little how to is interesting for some of you, although I know that hardly any of you will have the possibilities to do the same, but maybe it may be some kind of inspiration  
Urs

[ColonelKrypton]

Urs,

Thank you for posting that. Very interesting.

I have played around with photography since the 60's. My father worked as a reporter / photographer for a newspaper so I got an introduction at an early age. I still tinker but the magic of the medium has left me. I think that started with digital cameras. I miss the old medium format, press cameras and film. 

It is all about the lighting whether in a studio or nature outdoors.

cheers, Graham

 

[peteski]

Thanks Urs.  No wonder your photos look professional.  You are using professional equipment in a studio, and you might even be a professional photographer.  Still, it was very educational to see how you do it, and some of your ideas could be used by an average hobby photographer.

[Bainford]

Thank you Urs. Very interesting stuff. I am a photography enthusiast, but all my work is wildlife and landscapes. Studio work is very different (with regard to lighting and staging) and the finer points generally escape me. Your clear explanation is very helpful. Cheers. 

[CabDriver]

I have never used either the focus stacking technique for taking photos OR the trick of auto/blending the layers in Photoshop - great tips Urs, thank you!

Do you have any recommendations on lenses?  I’m using a base-model EOS that I picked up recently, with the standard 18-55 lens that comes with it but getting everything sharp and crisp is tricky…

[peteski]

11 hours ago, CabDriver said:

Do you have any recommendations on lenses?  I’m using a base-model EOS that I picked up recently, with the standard 18-55 lens that comes with it but getting everything sharp and crisp is tricky…

In many instances you can forgo focus stacking if you just use the highest f-stop on the lens. That increases the acceptable depth of field.  That also means the camera should be kept steady (on a tripod) because the photo needs longer exposure. Bright illumination also helps.  Also the wider the lens is (like 18 in your instance), the greater the dept of field.

When I take my club's contest photos, I use my old Nikon CoolPix 8700 with f=8 (that is the smallest aperture it is capable of), the photos are good enough for publication (have been published many times in Model Cars and in SAE Contest Annual magazines.

For some examples of those photos see the show photos at http://classicplastic.org/photos.html  (click on each image to see a larger version).

I have also been using Helicon Focus stacking software for over a decade when I take photos of N scale model trains and layouts.  Those are quite small and focus stacking is the only way to get good sharp photos. Nowadays graphic manipulation apps like Photoshop, or even some cameras or smart phones  have focus stacking capability, making the process easy.

[CabDriver]

Good tips, @peteski, thank you!  

For clarity; when you say the “highest F stop”, that refers to the lowest NUMBER, correct (5.6, in the case of my camera)?

[Straightliner59]

6 hours ago, CabDriver said:

Good tips, @peteski, thank you!  

For clarity; when you say the “highest F stop”, that refers to the lowest NUMBER, correct (5.6, in the case of my camera)?

Generally, it's recommended to use an f-stop of 18 or higher. That's (18) what I use for my workbench shots, for those, I just use the camera's flash, so I don't have to get the tripod, every time I want to shoot WIP.  When I set up for glamor shots 😁, I use f-24, and the tripod, and a longer exposure. The higher that f-stop number, the greater the depth-of-field. And that exhausts my knowledge of model photography!😅

[Bainford]

20 hours ago, CabDriver said:

Good tips, @peteski, thank you!  

For clarity; when you say the “highest F stop”, that refers to the lowest NUMBER, correct (5.6, in the case of my camera)?

Daniel has it right. 'Highest f stop' refers to the highest number, which means the smallest aperture.

[CabDriver]

Good tips, thanks fellas!  Just picked up a tripod today so I can experiment some more…

[Straightliner59]

2 hours ago, CabDriver said:

Good tips, thanks fellas!  Just picked up a tripod today so I can experiment some more…

You'll love the photographs you'll be able to shoot!

[CabDriver]

Double post 

Edited January 8 by CabDriver

[peteski]

On 1/6/2024 at 7:28 PM, CabDriver said:

For clarity; when you say the “highest F stop”, that refers to the lowest NUMBER, correct (5.6, in the case of my camera)?

Yes, as others confirmed, the numerically highest f-stop indicates the smallest lens aperture.  If you ever heard of pinhole cameras, those use very, very small (pinhole size) apertures, resulting in a very wide depth of field.  If you are interested in more details, I'm sure there is plenty of info about it on the Interwebs.    But pinhole cameras due to the small apertures required very strong light source or very long exposure time.  They also have other shortcomings. Of course this was back in the day with photographic film.

Another thing I forgot to mention is not to use the camera flash.  It produces very harsh contrast and uneven illumination.  Either use natural lighting (outdoors), or some sort of diffused artificial lighting.  Professional setups can use flash, but those are special free-standing flash units, placed away from the camera and often cast indirect light on the subject.  That is why if your camera is capable of aperture priority, use the highest f-stop and have the camera mounted on a tripod. Also use either remote shutter triggering or timer (so it remains perfectly steady on the tripod).

Edited January 16 by peteski

[harti20]

Hi all

Thank you for all your comments. Glad that my description was of some use to some of you

On 1/5/2024 at 9:14 PM, peteski said:

You are using professional equipment in a studio, and you might even be a professional photographer.

I'm only an amateur photographer who is in the lucky situation that I can use the studio and some of the equipment of a professional photographer 🙂

On 1/6/2024 at 6:18 AM, CabDriver said:

Do you have any recommendations on lenses?  I’m using a base-model EOS that I picked up recently, with the standard 18-55 lens that comes with it but getting everything sharp and crisp is tricky…

Sorry I didn't reply sooner, but I think the most important points have been mentioned already by @peteski, @Straightliner59 and @Bainford. Thank you guys for sharing your knowledge 👍 Regarding your question about a lens recommendation I'm afraid I can't really help you as I don't know the Canon system at all. I used to use Minolta cameras back in the film days, started my digital experience with KonicaMinolta and stayed in the system when Sony took over

[bill-e-boy]

Doug Whyte has a good tutorial on his Model Car Muse Youtube channel

 

[BDSchindler]

Your studio setup is very similar to one I used in my basement when I wrote for the ill-fated The Car Room Magazine some 15 years ago.  The biggest difference was that I used continuous lighting as opposed to flash photography.  I just never got the knack for Flash Photography (nor, as an amateur, did I want the expense!)

The subject matter was 1/24th Diecast from primarily Danbury Mint and Franklyn Mint but the process was the same.  I used an Olympus E500 digital with a macro lense on a tripod and battery operated remote shutter to prevent camera shake.  I also would take numerous shots set at f22 focusing on various aspects of what was in front of the camera.

This 53 Buick Estate Wagon is made up of 12 different photo each focusing on various points and then stitching them altogether in Adobe Photoshop

One of the benefits of using a macro lens is in extreme closeup shots.  This shot demonstrates the intense detail in a 1/24th scale head lamp lense of the 1958 Pontiac Bonneville...mind you, this lense is less than .25" in diameter...

and then there is the associated rear taillight...

The Macro also allows for some implied drama...

The engine of Danbury's Little Deuce Coupe was also taken using several shots stitched together

I also played with various backgrounds like metallics

and using a good translucent photography table allowed for lighting from below for a dramatic effect also

I think I actually had more fun taking pictures than I did the writing aspect.