Seeking Advice On Camera & Settings to Achieve Professional Grade Photos of Vehicles

[dvh]

Greetings... I'm new to the forum and looking forward to spending time on here.

I take digital photos of highline cars for an auto dealership with an EOS XT. I'm hoping to get some advice on whether I have the right equipment to achieve the quality of pictures I'm seeking and possibly some tips on settings, etc.

My Equipment consits of an EOS XT, Canon 420EX Flash, and a Tamaron A05E Lens (SP AF 17-35 Di LD). I have always been satifsfied with the quality of my photos, until recently I have seen some professional shots that made me realize I still have a lot of opportunity.

Here are a few samples of my Photos:
My Sample 1 (http://pages.prodigy.net/frederickvh1/Photos/001.jpg)
My Sample 2 (http://pages.prodigy.net/frederickvh1/Photos/005.jpg)
My Sample 3 (http://pages.prodigy.net/frederickvh1/Photos/008.jpg)

Here is an example of the quaity of photos I'd like to be able to take:
Pro Sample 1 (http://pages.prodigy.net/frederickvh1/Photos/M3_Pro.jpg)
Pro Sample 2 (http://pages.prodigy.net/frederickvh1/Photos/M3_Pro2.jpg)
Pro Sample 3 (http://pages.prodigy.net/frederickvh1/Photos/M3_Pro4.jpg)

My current pictures are taken without the flash, on a tripod and using the
automatic setting. I've tried playing with some of the manual settings but never saw much improvement.

Assuming the time of day, light, background are all controlled to be optimum, is my current equipment capable of taking the quality of pictures I'm seeking? Any feedback, including recommendations to improve the pictures would be greatly appreciated.

[SkipD]

What do you see that is dramatically different between your shots and the "pro" shots?

I am not particularly impressed with the three "pro" shots that you linked to. My opinion is not based on any technical detail or lack thereof, but basically the composition.

If you can explain what you see as differences, maybe folks can help you figure out how to achieve them.

[crn3371]

As far as photo quality is concerned, I don't really see much,if any, difference between yours and the pro. What I do see is that the pro shots are composed better. Better angles, better, cleaner backgrounds.

[Citizen_Insane]

#1 is that you're shooting in bad lighting conditions. To get really great car pictures, shoot on an overcast day. You should also use a circular polarizing filter to remove unwanted reflections from the cars. Hope this helps.

[Skrim17]

If you had similar backgrounds to the pro photos your shots would look worlds better. Your shots are at closer angles than the pros. Do you do any post processing?

[dvh]

Thanks for the comments and suggestions. Rather than respond individually, below is a general response to all posts thus far:

The comments about the light, background, and how the shots are composed, are accurate and I should have selected sample photos that were a closer match to the Pro shots. Here is an example of one of my pictures that is a better match and about as good a picture as I've been able to take:
Sample Pic (http://pages.prodigy.net/frederickvh1/Photos/Z06.jpg)

There is an integrity and honesty issue in this business that I always try to take the high road on. Since the purpose of the photos is to demonstrate the actual condition of the vehicles for the purpose of making a purchase, I try not to cross the line when it comes to post processing and filters. There are a lot of things you can do in photoshop to improve the photos, but often times you are actually changing the photo's original form, which the customer is using to base his decision to buy from.

What is the sentiment on Polarizing filters? I wonder if they would be construed as falsely depicting the actual cars. Seems like as long as it isn't color tinted, it would not be a problem. I did receive polarizing filters for my regular Digital rebel, but the filters are for the standard lens that comes with it. I'll have to find out where to obtain the filters for the Tamron.

Is there any feedback on whether my lens is optimal for the task at hand. How about Automatic mode versus Manual settings?

[SkipD]

I would suggest using a polarizing filter to control reflections of things that are NOT the car. Your last photo shows a horrible reflection of the sky above the horizontal midline of the car. You could have toned that down so that it didn't blow out the highlights using a polarizing filter.

I would also recommend an additional lens that will take you out to as much as 70mm to 100mm. The reason is so that you can get away from the car a little to change the perspective but still frame tighter even at the further distance. Distance between the viewer (or camera in this case) and the subject is what changes perspective.

You can also control the apparent size of distant background objects relative to the main subject by changing your distance to the main subject and choosing an appropriate focal length.

[dvh]

Thanks Skip! You are correct about the lens as many times I've noticed the need to get further away from the vehicles when shooting the pictures. The other thought I have contemplated is choosing a location that is free of things causing shadows (trees, wires, etc.).

Can you recommend a specific lens that would be best suited for this purpose?

What about the use of a flash? I did some research and the use of "fill flash" was highly encouraged. I never had that great of luck. If fill flash is a good idea, will the new lens get me too far away for the flash?

[Skrim17]

the other shots showed cars in their 'natural ' surroundings, on a street (albeit deserted) and looked to be ether very early in the morning or just before sunset.

I agree that you need to be further from your subject and your subject further from whatever is behind it. The PP I would suggest is just general levels and sharpening, nothing to mask the condition of a car.

[SkipD]

Can you recommend a specific lens that would be best suited for this purpose?

What about the use of a flash? I did some research and the use of "fill flash" was highly encouraged. I never had that great of luck. If fill flash is a good idea, will the new lens get me too far away for the flash?Unfortunately, I only have personal experience with the three Canon lenses that I own - all rather expensive L zooms - and thus cannot recommend specific lenses. However, I feel that you need something that overlaps the existing lens that you have and goes longer. A decent quality zoom lens that starts in the 24mm to 28mm range and goes out to at least 70mm or 85mm and possibly even out to 105mm or so would be a great start. As to maximum aperture requirement, you would be able to best judge your needs based on the lighting levels you normally work with. Keeping your ISO settings low is always a good thing, so a really slow lens might not be something you would want to put up with.

A lens hood (designed for the particular lens and a rigid design as opposed to flexible rubber) would be a must-have item in my book to help prevent flare as well as provide mechanical protection.

As far as flash is concerned, I don't think that an on-camera flash (as in a Speedlite) would do much good. My reasoning is simple - the highly reflective surfaces that you'd be aiming it at would be likely to directly reflect the flash back at the camera in places where you would not want it to.

A good handheld light meter would be a wise investment. I find it much easier to measure complex lighting situations with a handheld meter than with a meter built into a camera. I would tend to work in manual exposure mode using a handheld meter mostly in incident mode to measure the light falling on the subject.

In addition, I would be carefully observing and attempting to control (with a polarizing filter among other tools/methods) any possible wild reflections of objects or light sources that would be seen in the paint, glass, or chrome. Obviously, part of this can be done by careful placement of the car in a surrounding scene.