Re: Is this a real picture or CGI?

Martin wrote:
> yes, you are right, my opinion is exactly the same,
> it's a real photos but burned and dodged with strong color variations,
> I take pictures of cars for catalog and often use similar techniques.

Yes, I see. Some very nice work in there.

> There are a few details which are helpful to recognize is it CGI or
photo
> (eg. front light or wheels)

   Can you elaborate on that a bit...

   I find some of the comments in this thread interesting. The automatic 
assumption has been that it's all CGI and is no longer photography, and 
then a bit of sniffing...

   Photography has a long history of superb lighting. When you look at 
photography from the 20's you can see that lighting was well developed 
by then. I think we've gotten away from the techniques of lighting and 
just assume it was all created digitally.

   I look at this and try to figure out how it is done, not that I will 
be shooting such stuff, but it should be something every photographer 
should do. Craft should be something we all care about.

   Jeff

> 
> Best Regards
> Martin
> www.gorgolewski.com
> 
> 
> Uzytkownik "Jeff" <jeff@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> napisal w wiadomosci
> news:KcOdnZTtUapN87_VnZ2dnUVZ_tPinZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Doc wrote:
>>> Looks to me either like CGI or extremely enhanced by CGI. Seems to
>>> have a sort of "plasic" patina to it. Is an actual photo of a pristine
>>> new car not good enough anymore?
>>>
>>> http://www.toyota.com/matrix/
>>
>> It's a real photo that's been dodged and burned. It looks like the top
>> surfaces have been burned in. The rest is just superb lighting.
>>
>> The way it is lit is just stunning. Take a look at the catch lights and
>> the shadowing and you'll see that the lighting is very simple, but it's
>> some of the best modeling I've ever seen. You can really feel the three
>> curves of it.
>>
>>   It appears to be one longish softbox almost directly overhead. A bit
of
>> fill to soften the shadows.
>>
>>   Jeff
> 
> 
>