Early Porsche 911 - iPhone 11 Pro

Looks good to me Godfrey, both the object and the technique. With that old tree and building behind it, it seems almost from another time and place.
John Mc
 
Of course, some dissectors have also said they find the fire hydrant distracting altogether. No problem...

50539705678_168550259b_o.jpg

Early Porsche 911 - Santa Clara 2020
​

:D

G
 
Here's an older one I spotted in Brisbane, Australia in 2017. I don't know how old it is , but the overall body shape still looks similar to "yours" Godfrey. The bumpers have changed the most.
U51008I1603891669.SEQ.0.jpg

Sony A7S Elmar-M 50/2.8
John mc
 
mcfingon said:
Here's an older one I spotted in Brisbane, Australia in 2017. I don't know how old it is , but the overall body shape still looks similar to "yours" Godfrey. The bumpers have changed the most.

Sony A7S Elmar-M 50/2.8
John mc
Click to expand...

Nice! That one has to be 1973 or later ... Those bumpers came in to meet the US bumper damage regulations that year.

G
 
Yes, actually ‘74 was when the ‘smile’ front end appeared, continuing all the way to 1989 models. Note the difference in the headlight trim from first pic, these are Euro lights.

Those wheels are called ‘cookie cutters.’

A timeless design!
 
Google thinks it is a 912 :)
I right-clicked on your image.

A very beautiful car indeed. Excellent image of it too.
 
Interesting article on Porsche 911 and 912:

https://www.caranddriver.com/review...11t-targa-911e-911s-archived-comparison-test/

Looks like the 912 was less expensive, with 4 cylinder engine versus 6 on the 911. And some other things to bring down the price. Maybe Datsun was taking some sales from Porsche. Especially young people back then.

When I came back to L.A. in 1973 from our tour in Vietnam, the car some had bought was a Datsun 240. Since we were still serving in the military, Porsche was out of the money range. The Datsun was different in that they had front engine - rear drive layout. But that didn’t matter because we were back in the U.S. and still alive!

Nice photo of the 911.
 
The 912 was released by Porsche because they were having problems selling the new 6-cyl to the old guard 356 lovers.
That is a nice looking 911. I prefer the darker color on the car in the original shot but everything else you've done with the picture is great.
Silver over red interior is a classic.
 
The 912 was priced in between the 356 (which was still in production) and the 911. It had a 356 engine...

The 240Z (and the 260/280) was my dream car when I was a teenager...ended up eventually getting a 280ZX but it wasn't as raw as the earlier models....
 
raid said:
Google thinks it is a 912 :)
I right-clicked on your image.
A very beautiful car indeed. Excellent image of it too.
Click to expand...

I thought so too, at first...

raid said:
So it is then a 911.
Click to expand...

... Yes, I checked the badging on the engine cover and on the dashboard specifically because I thought it might be too. :)

AlwaysOnAuto said:
The 912 was released by Porsche because they were having problems selling the new 6-cyl to the old guard 356 lovers.
That is a nice looking 911. I prefer the darker color on the car in the original shot but everything else you've done with the picture is great.
Silver over red interior is a classic.
Click to expand...

In the original shot, the silver car looks dark blue ... a reflection from the blue sky as well as because it was in the shade. I removed the blue sky and brightened the foreground so that it looked like what my eyes saw: I'd rather have what my eyes see than what a camera records. I'd have added exposure to the original capture, but the background where the lovely late sunlight was hitting was already right at the saturation limits with the exposure I made.

Frankly, this is why I rarely ever show the original capture of anything... :)

G
 
Godfrey said:
... I'd rather have what my eyes see than what a camera records...
Click to expand...

Yes... and often it's the color or quality of light that we see that may have caused us to make the photo.

Yesterday with my phone's camera I tried to capture backlit leaves against a golden sunset. The straight out-of-camera image just couldn't capture the golden color even with the tweaking provided by the phone.
 
Godfrey said:
In the original shot, the silver car looks dark blue ... a reflection from the blue sky as well as because it was in the shade. I removed the blue sky and brightened the foreground so that it looked like what my eyes saw: I'd rather have what my eyes see than what a camera records. I'd have added exposure to the original capture, but the background where the lovely late sunlight was hitting was already right at the saturation limits with the exposure I made.



G
Click to expand...
I would rather show what my eyes see too. Getting that result straight out of my camera is my greatest challenge and why I enjoy photography.
 
Pál_K said:
Yes... and often it's the color or quality of light that we see that may have caused us to make the photo.

Yesterday with my phone's camera I tried to capture backlit leaves against a golden sunset. The straight out-of-camera image just couldn't capture the golden color even with the tweaking provided by the phone.
Click to expand...

AlwaysOnAuto said:
I would rather show what my eyes see too. Getting that result straight out of my camera is my greatest challenge and why I enjoy photography.
Click to expand...

There is a point when you come to the realization that limitations of the camera mean that it is impossible to capture certain scenes and rely upon the camera's capabilities alone to render it the way your eyes see. A camera, any camera, is just a simple mechanical device and cannot see what your eyes see. Your eyes have the benefit of the most powerful image processing system known...

G
 
When I first saw the photo on Flickr, Godfrey, immediately I thought what a lucky chance to catch the light the way it was at that moment. You were right to correct for the blue hue.


PF
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom