I hear so much about poles growing out of cars, but what's the deal. In some cases it looks just plain nasty, but sometimes people are saying it to me just because they read it on the web while it doesn't make any sense.
It's about being aware of what's happening in your shot. Granted that it's hard to see what's happening when you're shooting a moving car, but there's no reason not to shoot extra shots & throw out the "Pole shots"? It's not as if you had to pay for film?
For example, take this shot.
I don't mind the trees in that one. They lead into the car. I think you might have cropped it better, though. Is the car the subject, or the landscape with the car in it?
He told me he actually LIKE the pole! He said to him it added more to the sense of motion. (the pole was blurry but you could still tell it was a pole!
Hard to say without seeing the shot.
someone else will say that the brown viaduct thing is irritating,
I don't mind it in that particular shot.
So what I want to say is that it looks awful in some cases, but people choose the wrong backgrounds most of the time. With a good background it doesn't care if theres something growing out of the car.
IMO, with a good background, there's nothing growing out of the car.
