One event - two photographers! Comparison...

[Stevenson Gawen]

I'm not quite sure is this is a reasonable idea or not...
Yesterday I was at the Light Car Club of Canberra Khanacross, both competing and taking photos (as I've done a few times here).
Khanacross is an entry level motorsport event - loads of fun.

What I'm getting at is that Anthony, of We Love Our Cars Photography was also there...
I've found it rather interesting comparing my photos to his. Same event, same subjects (mostly) but different styles.
But now, I'm not sure what to take away from the exercise.

He has some great shots and more experience than me.

I think some of mine are pretty good too... but in comparison mine feel a little lacking somehow. Now, I know comparison is futile sometimes, but it can also help one improve.

If you feel it's appropriate and interesting, would anyone care to have a look (if you don't mind heading over to Facebook) and let me know any 'prominent thoughts'? I know I'm a newcomer here on RPF but it's already clear to me that your thoughts are very much worth listening to.

On Facebook his are here: www.facebook.com/weloveourcars.photography
and mine are here: www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100089691728970

Mine are also under "Events" on my website... https://monarophotography.au/lccc-2023-national-patios-khanacross-round-3/

 

[Pete Askew]

Well, this is not a field of photography that I have a lot of experience with although I have taken the odd shot at mono sport events in the past, but only got one or two that I was particularly happy with. I have of course seem many images taken by others and even have a copy of a book called Photo Formula 1 containing images from the early 60s to the late 80s and some of the image in that are stunning and some truly stand out as great photographs.

Much of the photography of motorsports seems to be 'journalistic' in content showing certain cars, drivers etc at certain places on a circuit and that is understandable. Often the subject is purely the car which is fine and these shots dominate the ones in the facebook link with the subject more or less centred: I guess the drivers love to see them, but as an outside viewer they are not that interesting as such. Sometime the shots are panned and you get a sense of motion / energy and these to me are the most effective and interesting. You have these in your portfolio too. The Facebook link images are a bit sharper, but that is maybe because more were taken and more rejected, he is using a lens with a wider aperture. A number in both sets are taken either face-on or from the rear at a corner and while these are sharper I find in general that they lack energy and feel, even when there is dust etc from the wheels present.

None of this is intended as a criticism, but only as observations of someone who has little interest in motosport, but a great interest in images and image-making. For me the more effective images are ones with the vehicle smaller in the frame and so showing more context and, in most cases either side-on and panned or using a static camera and allowing the subject to become blurred by its motion. My favourite shots in both portfolios are the static shots of details and people and these, interspersed with action shots would produce great series / records of events etc.

My favourite motorsport image of all time remains the one taken by Jacques Henri Lartigue in 1912!

Jacques Henri Lartigue – Donation Jacques Henri Lartigue

 

[Stevenson Gawen]

I think you're right about the journalistic side of it - and that is arguably easier to do I guess! There's a lot of that kind I think, and as you say it definitely has it's place too. Quite a lot of my images are very much aimed at that - I know many of the drivers personally, some are new to the sport and love to get a few nice shots, and so on.

But then there's the images which are good in themselves, quite apart from their 'record' value. And these are (almost by definition) few and far between to some extent. Certainly where I'm concerned.

And criticism is what I'm looking for really - as I often find it hard to judge my own work.

Re aperture - quite a lot of mine were shot with a pretty small aperture (spot my dusty sensor!) as I tried to get a slow enough shutter speed to show motion. But then, as you noticed, you loose some impact of the subject against a blurred background. An ND filter would be interesting...

Processing style is a difference too... but arguably less important then actual content.

I love that 1912 shot too - the slant from the shutter 'sweep' is just... so... expressive!

Thanks very much for your thoughts - much appreciated!

 

[Stevenson Gawen]

P.S. Aaron Wishart is a really professional motorsport photographer - https://www.wishartmedia.com.au/
He's someone I look up to - and I don't have many of those! Some of his work, while I guess still journalistic is definitely blurring the line towards 'art' (for want of a better word!) in it's own right. IMHO!