Has anyone here ever hired a photographer to take professionally photographed pictures of your car?

I'm interested in perhaps taking this route to get some really REALLY nice pictures of the car but would appreciate hearing from anyone who has done this already.

1. How much did it cost?
2. How long did you hire the protographer for?
3. Who picks the photographing locations? You or the photographer?
4. How long does it take the book the photographer?

5. Were you initially pleased with the outcome?
6. How were you charged? (hourly, per picture? specific locations? camera used [digital/film]?).

Thanks

 

i just took my own iwth my digital camera, sent them to futurshop, got back photgraphs, only got the small ones tho, you can get bigger ones. oh nad my friend had a fancy printer to do the ones in the frames...

 

I too have a very expensive digital camera.. I'm basically looking to see how much it would cost to have the car photographed by a professional. (who knows exactly how to take GREAT pictures and knows how to deal with lighting, use of filters, etc).

 

I believe I sent this one to you camarosource, for the up coming calender....this was just taken with a cheap digital camera...

 

I too can take great photo's but I would just like to know what it costs for a professional to come out and snap a bunch, and what is envolved to have one arrange.

 

Look up pro photographers in the yellow pages, or some other information source and call some up, check them out, who's got better prices, but check out there work too to see who's work as actually worth your money

 

well the photo in my sig was taken by a friend of mine and he always seems to take the coolest pics...

 

price really depends...

the few publications i've had pictures taken they were paid by the photo so it wouldn't really count in your case. use to work for a custom car magazine doing photoshoots every sunday and the best shots always came from studio time which was costly unless your photographer has one. best bet is to call around however the cheapest i've ever seen a "good" person work for was around $100 an hour.

 

I've always taken my own shots.

Although, I do have a *very* expensive digital camera. I dabble somewhat in photography myself. I wouldn't say that they are professional, but I would go on to say they aren't your average shots.

 

Curious, what camera do you use?

I use the following: http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/dx6490.html great camera.

 

when I had my senior pictures done (which I hated but only because I hate being in pictures) I mentioned my car to the photographer and he offerd to do some for free. I don't know if its because he wanted a nice car to show in his pics or if it was because he had already made enough off of me. just my experiance. and no I didn't do it because 1my car was broken at the time and 2 I didn't like the guy

 

If you have a decent digital camera, its not to hard to take some proffessional like pics, they really allow amateurs to take some pretty good pics. Still some of the best pics are still taken with 35mm cameras, personally I think it takes a lot of skill to use them since you don't have an lcd screen to see the pic you have just taken.


There are so many factors that go into taking great pics. So if taking the proffessional route, just look at some sample pics and see if there are any referrals or testamonials from the photographer. The pics the photographer takes would have to far exceed anything I could after a few adjustments .

I also think night pics or things that are dark colored are difficult to take and have everything look right too, so I would look at samples of those to see how good photographer captures the details.

 

WHAT EVER U DO.... don't get a "professional photographer" that uses digital..altho good, it's not professional if u're serious, get someone that uses something other than 35mm. i think it's called medium format. my dad is a professional photographer, he took pics of my car and it looks good. i'll try to get pics uploaded

 

How would a client hire him? Hourly? By the number of pictures? Location? Who sets up the photoshoot location? Would he recommend the best location scenery?

 

SLR digital cameras like the digital rebel can take amazing pictures, and are better for seeing what adjustments make what differences.

 

well the way my dad would do it is u pay for the pics that are made and maybe like a % with it. like if a pic cost $20 to make he might charge like $30 or somethin, i'm not really too sure. as far as where they r shot, if he knows a place good, if u know a place good. it's wherever u'd want it.

1st pic, (link) my dad's pics 5 x 5's (nothing was photochopped) and look to the right of my shoulders. u can see the main flash on the camera
digi, my fav shot
2nd pic, digi, my fav shot

2 5x5's

 

This is what I use.

http://www.steves-digicams.com/qv3000.html

Casio Qv-3000EX. At the time, it was the first consumer 3 megapixel camera. It cost me $1k. It has a 320mb IBM Microdrive in it, so I can take about 250 pics on one card.

The prints are EXCELLENT. Nicer than ANY 35mm i've EVER seen.

 

You and your dad don't know what you are talking about. He is probably 60 years old and is to stuborn to learn about digital photography. This digital Camera is better than 99% of the 35mm cams out there: Nikon d70

Want more proof? The D70, a digital camera, won the most prestigious award in the Japanese photo industry. News Brief

You can't argue with the hard information "79% of professional photographers use digital cameras, Nearly half of the remaining 21% plan to purchase one in 2004." Your Dad is in the minority if he believes Digital pictures aren't professional. In fact, I would call your statement and his beliefs down right ignorant.

Digital photography is proffessional, in fact, I would be standing on firm ground to say that film camera's are outdated in the proffesional photography world. Anyone still using strictly film camera's isn't up to par with the industry.

I HATE when people post biased misinformation.

 

then u should know that the D1x is better than the D70, and the D70 is a stripped down version of the D1x to make it a better cost to the consumer, and i DO know that digital is better than 35mm...but then i again i'm not talking about 35mm, i'm talking medium format....Hasselblad. oooo...it's just a tad bit better than just about all the digital cameras out there.

Those #'s r bcuz of a bunch of people buying digital cameras and calling themself's pro photographers. "hey i got a digital SLR...i'm a pro now " <<< it's sad how it's getting now. and that "award" the D70 got, they have to look at it for a consumer and how it will be used, it's an easy to use for the common man, camera not the BEST camera.

just as an ex: give someone who doesn't know **** about cars, all the parts to build an engine. they wouldn't know what to do. then give them a creat motor and it makes things alot easier...he might be able to do it with the creat motor but it doesn't make them a mechanic.

sry if i come off as a 8===D but he happens to sell alllll the stuff your talking about and knows all about it. if u're in the photo business at all then u would also know about stuff not out yet that is even better than the D70

 

no matter what the resolutioon of film will always surpass the resolution and quality of digital. there is always some loss when you trander mediqa as well. when you transfer from a higher quality media, the loss is less.

however to say one is more professional than the other is ridiculas..

 

to a certain extent...altho i was just trying to get to the point that about 75% of the people that use digital cameras for photography do so bcuz they don't know what they're doing, like lighting, light meters, speed settings, filters, lenes, ect. it takes alot more then just taking pictures to be a photographer. the pics my dad took of my car were about as low as quailty as it would get, bcuz we were rushing and i was learing the stuff too, the normal stuff he takes (and other people with the equipment and knowledge he has) is just amazing.

 

You dont have to be a PRO to take awesome pic's.

Look at my buddy Tommys Pic's
http://www.iroczdesigns.com/Links/IROC-Z%20Pics.htm


Sony 505v digicam

 

ya i know, the other part of getting it pro taken is the lab work. the pics. like if u were to print out a digital pic it wouldn't last like a pro picture would.


awww screw it... this isn't the point of the main post and i got carried away.

camarosource, just go look at there stuff and check the quality of it.

 

Most of the places now will take digital media and print you pic's right off the cards. So paper quality shouldnt be a issue.

 

Most of the professional industry now uses digital. That's a fact.
...but they most not know what they're talking about.

by the way, my dad can beat up your dad.

 

Thats it punk! Flag pole at 3 o'clock.

 

 

there's a big difference between a lab (like filmet) and ritz camera.

lol, o well this has gotten really stupid anyway. this is like an argument between ford and chevy and who's better? ofcoruse chevy is better

 

I take my own photo's, its alittle hobby of mine, heres one of my favorites

 

definately not something you would pay for though....look at those trees coming through the roof!

 

:rockon:

 

Photography is a hobby of mine. IMO, it is not worth hiring a professional.
Anyway, if you live close to me, I can do it for free.
Here is a sample of a picture:

<img src="http://www.iroczdesigns.com/Links/DSC00041.JPG">

Tommy

 

that's a very nice picture, most pictures that are paid for are things that could be printed in magazines. you want to avoid having anything in the back ground that looks like its growing out of the car though. trees, buildings, etc. unless you can see the base of these items in the background as well.

good reason why open freeways, brickwalls and empty fields are used so much.



i don't know how many pictures we use to reject just because of such a fact. car could look awesome in every way but there would be a bush growing out of the hood.

 

Chio- you crack me up bro, you say your dad is a pro photographer but you, being his son & thus growing up around his work cannot even remember what medium format is!

Ok, I just HAD to poke at that issue. done.

Anyways, the best still pictures taken BEFORE 3.0 megapixels came out were either on low speed 35mm(45-100 speed) or medium format.
The reason why most photo studios use medium format, is due to the strip of film which gets exposed, being bigger in size than a 35mm frame of film. This means that any picture taken can be enlarged much more than a 35mm negative can be enlarged, which obviously results in the ability to provide more detail at close range as well as exellent detail at far ranges. The only problem(for most of us!) or set back with medium format is price...a decent MF camera starts at around the $3-4,000.00 mark!

In terms of digital photography, IMO, the Nikon D70, Nikon CoolPix 5700 & Nikon 8700 are the best cameras in terms of resolution and pricing. Yes, the D1x is a GREAT camera too, but for less, now you can get 8.7mp with the CoolPix 8700.
Also, Kodak has some great digital cameras such as the DX7630:
6.1 mp for resolution and 3x analog zoom + 4x digital zoom.
Personally, i've found that Kodak supplies the best bang for your dollar in their products. I also use a Kodak DX3500 which has 2.2 mp(hey, it was a consumer reports best buy....4 years ago!) which I love, except now I'd love to have a good 5.0 mp camera!
For 35mm, I use a Nikon FM10 SLR....while I dream about a D100!

Just for the red ink, I'm not a pro & dont consider myself a pro photographer, but I've been taking pictures for the past 6 years(I'm the guy at the family events who'se always pissing everyone else off with the flash!). I've also been doing low-end comercial photography work for the past three years(Walgreens & Meijer photo lab tech.) Oh, just for laughs: Customer- Do you work here sir?
Me(what I think) - No you dumb bitch, I'm screwing around with your pictures and wearing this ****ing ugly *** shirt because I WANT to??!!!!!!?!?!?!?!?!
-G

 

This is the camera I use

http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/dx6490.html

 

Tommy You have WAY better vert pic's then that one.


this is the digi I use.
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2003_reviews/v1.html

 

shudda got one with a swivel lcd screen so you can have your camera on the ground n still see the lcd screen from straight on, or from in the air.

i regret not buying one like that.

oh. and my uncle has a 8MP camera!
winner.

 

Ya I wanted a 717 but they didnt have one in stock. 5mp is way more then I need. Ive had this one for about a year so time to trade it in on a 717 or what eves new come next year. gota love a extended 4yr No questions asked warrenty. walk in trade it in on the new modle line and no charge.

 

Im gonna Take a Picture of my car, and theny bring it to a Artist, so they can draw it, i think it be pretty cool..

 

LOL ya i know. like i know that the neg is larger than 35 for those reasons. and it's 2.25in x 2.25in. i don't really like it due to the fact that i don't have the patience to learn. i'll stay with cars it's fun tho when he brings home the newest of the best cameras home, ya when the D1 came out i was playing with it b4 anyone knew what it was. and with the cost of medium format...man i could get a ZZ383 and a built tranny and any rear end. plus pay someone to put it all in (that wouldn't be fun tho)

 

I was just thinking about this thread and thought i would bring it back up. As far as hiring a professional photographer id definitly say dont waste your money. If you have a steady hand and a good eye for edjusting the focus on a camera you can be taught to take pictures with an slr camera just as good as any professional (thank you built in light meter). The focus is the only semi difficult part and most newer cameras have an auto focus feature anyways so it shouldnt matter.

The point to this rambling is what makes a good picture isnt necessarily whos taking it, its where its being taken. When doing photography on my own the most difficult thing is just finding something to take a picture of not actually snapping a pic. So search around a bit in your area and see if there are any spots that you think the car would look really cool sitting in. Then just grab a buddy who has a descent camera and take a few shots you might just be surprised.