File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
>>312017
Interesting thread going on in /hr/. Very relevant to our interests.
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS-1Ds Mark IIICamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:03:06 16:14:12Exposure Time1/50 secF-Numberf/10.0Exposure ProgramShutter PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/9.9Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length32.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1980Image Height1320RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Anonymous
Nevermind... Mods deleted it. People were fighting over wether or not this was a real photo. Half of /hr/ thought it was a screenshot from Gran Turismo 5. Half thought it was real.
>> Anonymous
lol.
>>139385
>> Anonymous
indeed. i tried explaining how having the right equipment, with the right settings and the right lighting can get a picture like that. i even pointed out that IF it were indeed a fake, that the cars would have advertisements on them saying Polyphony Studios and/or Gran Turismo, or something like that... but of course.... people are stupid.

btw, how did you get the image to show EXIF data? is that something that is automatic only for images posted to this board?
>> Anonymous
>>139388
All images posted here on /p/ have Exif data visible if the image contains it. I copy pasted it from here into /hr/ for my post right before the deletion of the thread if that is what you are asking about.
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
haha omg, don't tell me some thought it was actually GT5.
nothing in this photo looks like a vidya gaem
>> Anonymous
>>139392
It was a pretty big battle. Some of the things they were saying were true, but they were assuming this was shot almost wide open. The exif says it was shot at f/10. That would give a pretty good DOF.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
http://www.povray.org/community/hof/
After looking through those yesterday, I could definitely see this as a render.

However, my guess is that it's a real picture but they photoshopped some motion blur onto the ground and background trees. No way they could have gotten all of the cars (including the hypothetical one containing the photographer) to match speed closely enough that every single one of the cars is sharp while the environment isn't, especially for a 1/50th exposure.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
When i first saw this in /o/ i thought it was GT5 or some other PC sim.

Sony 1, Real life 0.
>> Anonymous
fucking god mode camera
>> Anonymous
they could've used a canon d60 to take this shot, no one needs a 1ds mk 3, am i right
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>139418However, my guess is that it's a real picture but they photoshopped some motion blur onto the ground and background trees. No way they could have gotten all of the cars (including the hypothetical one containing the photographer) to match speed closely enough that every single one of the cars is sharp while the environment isn't, especially for a 1/50th exposure.

I think you underestimate the ability of professional drivers and f/10.0 at 32mm focal length
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>139469
Come on. There's *zero* motion blur on any of those cars, other than the tires. Are you really saying that they could be moving fast enough to get that much motion blur on the background while
1. Not having any vibrations in any of the cars due to imperfections in the road surface, engine vibration, etc
2. Exactly matching the speeds of thirteen cars, going around a curve
3. With no camera shake from the shot being taken in a moving car.

Even if you're willing to grant godlike driving abilities for 1 and 2, are you willing to grant the same godlike driving abilities for the hypothetical camera car driver, keeping in mind that (since this shot doesn't seem to be taken through a rear window and past a spoiler) they wouldn't be driving a professional race car?

I recently picked up a book on photoshop tricks for a couple bucks at a used bookstore. "How to add motion blur to a background to make a car look like it's moving quickly" was one of the tricks in there. It's surprisingly easy. Especially when you compare it to the huge confluence of godlike precision and luck that would be required to get a shot like this on the level.
>> Anonymous
NASCAR documentaries FTW.

Flatbed or pickup truck leading, cameras are there.

Race cars trailing at low speed, something like 30 mph, take picture. Cars are sharp, motion free, background is blurred.
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>139484
Race tracks are much smoother than your average road, and they're probably going 30mph for all you know, in which case it's extremely easy to hold steady in relation to another car for at least a fraction of a second. This would also explain why the cars in the back aren't as blurred as you'd expect them to be if the formation were moving twice or thrice as fast, for example.
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>139496
>>139492
That's some hivemind shit right there.
>> Anonymous
>>139484
I think 1/50 is plenty to freeze the action of the cars while leaving enough to blue the background. those drivers can stay pretty consistent in their speeds.

Also you have to take into account that we're only seeing one picture here. The photographer most likely took hundreds of photos to get one that had all the cars sharp.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>139492
>>139496
>>139499
Hrm. That is a compelling argument.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
Its a trick photos, none of the Aston Martin race teams can last 5seconds, all of the cars are stationary.

Also the lead doesnt look anywhere near as good as i was expecting it too, GT40 > *
>> Anonymous
>>139519
Definately shooped.
look at the leftmost (yellow) one's detail:
driver is shooped, i think. the driver's side reflection shows an *INDOOR SCENE*, and the windshield looks to have a shop light or other flourescent reflection.
>> Anonymous
>>139535

and that's from seeing many shops in your life
>> beethy !HJGkSBB3Ao
>>139535
yellow car is not shooped.
the only thing suspicious about the photo is that the cars in the background would be moving from the left side to the right side of the picture. pretty much not moving at the same speed as the photographer.
at 1/50 there should be slight motion blur on the cars in the background. but there isn't.
this however could have been fixed in photoshop.
>> Anonymous
Don't know about the rest of you, but the splattered bugs on the front of the first car were enough to convince me that they're real cars and not a game render. Whether the cars were moving or not is another question.
>> Anonymous
>>139641

I've seen bug splatter in games too.
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>139614
That's also not so suspicious. If all the cars are driving around a nice circular turn and maintaining the same relative position, then even the cars in the back should not move relative to the camera's field of view. I think this picture is genuine.
>> Anonymous
>>140041
it's clearly a render
a very good render, but a render
look at the fucking road for fuck's sake
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
Where was this photo taken? Looks like it might be Miller Motorsports park, Utah. Google maps shows red/white corners and blue/white on the outside of some turns.
1/50th would signifigantly blur the road, note the wheels are blurred also. These guys drive in close quarters for a living, no reason they can't drive slow enough relative to eachother for a pic. This appears to be the ALMS GT cars.
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
>>140069
Err... I dunno what series, the Jetalliance cars are FIA GT, hexis car is GT4 I think. No idea on the other cars. shit this isn't /o/
Anyways, the pic is real, all these cars exist. Google Aston Martin DBR9.
>> Anonymous
Look at the race track. It's a render.
>> Anonymous
ITT: Amateurs. It is a computer render.
>> Anonymous !SDPEsPMnww
>>140083
>>140082
>>140060
Same person. Unless you can prove that this is a render, I won't believe you.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
?

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:03:13 07:04:38Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width990Image Height660
>> Anonymous
>>140072
whether or not the cars exist doesnt mean its not a render.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>140117
Signals for lower class drivers to GTFO when this thing comes up behind them.
>> Anonymous
>>140128

I like to drive at least 10mph below the limit when I see a car like that and I block them all the way. It really pisses them off. ^___^
>> Anonymous
Clearly not a shoop or a render. About what you'd expect from a wideangle on FF at f/10 1/50".
>> Anonymous
For the fag saying it's a render...do you really think they would go so far as to doctor the EXIF data on the image? No. I don't think so.
>> Doitle
Perhaps the render was hanging on the walls at Polyphony Digital and someone with a EOS-1DS Happened to be walking by and thought I need to take a picture of that. Then it was just some shooping away and bam. :P
>> Anonymous
>>140182

BLAST! I thought I had you fooled! I would've gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for you pesky kids!
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
>>140183
It's pretty trivial to doctor EXIF data.

(Pic related. Taken with a Canon SureShot 80 Tele on Kodak Portra 160VC)

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeCanonCamera ModelCanon EOS-1Ds Mark IIICamera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:03:06 16:14:12Exposure Time1/50 secF-Numberf/10.0Exposure ProgramShutter PriorityISO Speed Rating100Lens Aperturef/9.9Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternFlashNo FlashFocal Length32.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width1980Image Height1320RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceManualScene Capture TypeStandard
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
>>140186
Nope looks likt a typical shitty canon pic. Try again with a Nikon.
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
     File :-(, x)
>>140189
It was really hard to get the framing exactly the same with this 400mm lens on my D3, but I think I did a reasonably good job.

Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeNIKON CORPORATIONCamera ModelNIKON D3Camera SoftwareVer.0.25Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaColor Filter Array Pattern984Focal Length (35mm Equiv)400 mmImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution300 dpiVertical Resolution300 dpiImage Created2007:08:26 13:38:43White Point Chromaticity0.3Exposure Time1/400 secF-Numberf/4.0Exposure ProgramShutter PriorityISO Speed Rating3200Exposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo FlashFocal Length400.00 mmColor Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width4256Image Height2832RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoScene Capture TypeStandardGain ControlHigh Gain UpContrastNormalSaturationNormalSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownISO Speed Used3200Image QualityFINEWhite BalanceAUTOFocus ModeAF-CFlash SettingNORMALISO Speed Requested3200Flash Bracket Compensation0.0 EVAE Bracket Compensation0.0 EVLens TypeNikon G SeriesLens Range400.0 mm; f/2.8Shooting/Bracketing ModeSingle Frame/OffLighting TypeNATURALNoise ReductionOFFCamera Actuations3424
>> heavyweather !4AIf7oXcbA
>>140192
Clearly the Nikon has a superior image quality. Just look at the two. Once again, Nikon prevails. SO SAY WE ALL
>> Anonymous
why the fuck dont you go to the source..
http://www.astonmartinracing.com/eng/downloads/wallpapers

this is the cancer that is killing /p/oo
Render my fucking ass
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>140194
>Render my fucking ass
I'll need detailed specs and some time to learn PovRay for that.
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>140198
considering how _OLD_ PovRay is you should have learnt it already!
>> Anonymous
>>140194
Yeah, i'm sure they've got the money to get the most expensive photographer in the world anyway.
>> Anonymous
It's pretty incredible that video games look so much like the actual thing that we get this confused. haha.
>> Lynx !!KY+lVSl0s2m
>>140223
>It's pretty incredible that you idiots thought this was a render.

fix'd
>> Anonymous
similar pic from 2007
http://www.worldcarfans.com/2070212.006/photo1/aston-martin-range-test-at-paul-ricard
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
if it were rendered, they'd throw in some bloom, some hdr, motion blur even on the cars and reflections

make everything shiny, because shiny = real life

Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop 7.0Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution276 dpiVertical Resolution276 dpiImage Created2007:01:19 23:48:21Color Space InformationUncalibratedImage Width692Image Height1317
>> Anonymous
>>140186

my point wasn't that it was hard to doctor exif data, my point was that would someone really take the time to change it when less than 1% of the population even gives a shit to look at it in the first place?
>> Anonymous
>>140233

4chan is that 1%