# RC Car Drift - Photoshoped or not?



## rpompeu (Jul 17, 2009)

Hi all,
I'm not a photographer but I also work with images (architectural visualisations). I saw some photos of RC cars drifting that I think they were edited in Photoshop and some people say that they weren't, so lets just ask the pros.


















I think they were photoshoped because the cars are not as fast as the panning affect makes it looks, here is a video of the event where the photos were taken.




So, wht do you guiys think? Thanks in advance


----------



## Big Mike (Jul 17, 2009)

The amount of blur has as much (or more) to do with the shutter speed as it does with the speed of the cars.


----------



## rpompeu (Jul 17, 2009)

Big Mike said:


> The amount of blur has as much (or more) to do with the shutter speed as it does with the speed of the cars.


Of course, but with the cars slow as they were, the shutter speed should be very slow to achieve this amount of blur and the camera had to be very well focused on the car as it moves because the cars are very sharp in the image.
This is my question, I know it is possible to do this images but it's very hard to achieve this balance between sharpness and blur in such a slow moving object. 
What is your opnion on this, skilled photographer or PP?


----------



## Big Mike (Jul 17, 2009)

> What is your opnion on this, skilled photographer or PP?


Couldn't it be both?


----------



## NateWagner (Jul 17, 2009)

Well, I definitely think that could be done in camera. at least with most of them... however I personally think they were done in post. My reasoning for that is (and I could definitely be wrong, but here is my reasoning) that all of the motion blur is going in the same direction in each shot even though they are going different directions. 

Again I do think this could mostly be done in camera even with the cars moving at a relatively slow speed, the fact that the people taking the pictures are probably quite close to the action makes the perspective speed quite similar to a race with normally sized vehicles. As Big Mike said it's more about the shutter speed than the speed of the vehicles. 

Finally, there was probably some PP done on these anyway for colors and sharpness etc.


----------



## polymoog (Jul 17, 2009)

Well I'm no expert but I take a lot of panning photos, though not of RC cars. But to me they look like the panning was done in real life with the camera, shutter speed can definitely make things look like they were travelling faster than they were. 

Another thing that makes me think they were real, is the soft focus on parts or all of the car, especially the most distant parts. People often have a low F-stop for panning e.g 2.8 - 5.6 and that gives a shallow DOF so some parts of the car can easily get out of that range. Plus you will get soft outlines if you do not follow the car at exactly the right speed and exactly the right trajectory for the entire exposure. 

And as Nate said, the author might have done some PP afterwards anyway, both for that and other adjustments but I think the basic effect was created naturally. That's MHO ;-)


----------



## KmH (Jul 17, 2009)

After watching the photographer in the video I have to vote for in-camera too.


----------



## William Petruzzo (Jul 17, 2009)

Yeah. The cars are definitely going fast enough to pull it off in camera without too much trouble. Especially if he's shooting digital and can take hundreds of pictures. Blur is always going for the same direction because the photographer isn't moving, so naturally that quality of the photos wouldn't change.

I vote for in camera. I think pulling it off convincingly in post is probably more difficult that it would be in camera for a skilled photo enthusiast.


----------



## NateWagner (Jul 17, 2009)

ahh, that makes sense about the blur. I don't do much in the way of panning photos so I was just guessing there. 

other than that if it is done in PS which is possible it would take a heck of a lot of work to do it as well as it was done.


----------



## rpompeu (Jul 18, 2009)

Thanks guys, you've made my mind.
Cheers


----------



## rom4n301 (Aug 17, 2009)

yo.. i used to have one of those lil cars.. ****s expensive as hell.. especially if u have a gas one.. and **** break A LOT... anyways.. those things get up to speeds of 70mph.. sometimes higher... ****s not photoshoped..


----------



## UUilliam (Aug 17, 2009)

rom4n301 said:


> yo.. i used to have one of those lil cars.. ****s expensive as hell.. especially if u have a gas one.. and **** break A LOT... anyways.. those things get up to speeds of 70mph.. sometimes higher... ****s not photoshoped..


Swear much?

I personally think it looks PP but hey, Photographers... you never know they can do anything if they learn to push the right buttons.


----------



## gsgary (Aug 17, 2009)

Easy to do in camera, this shot was taken when i only had a 10D shot at 1/125


----------



## musicaleCA (Aug 17, 2009)

Hmm, just a thought, but wouldn't a flash help increase the sharpness of the little cars? Not that they're soft; they're freaking sharp. Talk about good technique. I'm just saying. >.>


----------

