Unexpected visit to a Ferrari Collection, part 3.

[pterps]

This morning I drove through a industrial area after visiting some customers. Suddenly I saw a Ferrari testarossa (with one high mirror) and a 328 GTS in front of me. More people were taking pics, so I parked my car and jumped out to take some pics myself. After 4 pics I saw a 348 coming out of a warehouse, I walked to it and saw a 355 and 456 behind it, all of them filled with people who were just going to have ride. I took some more pics and after they had left I walked to some people asking if they were interested in my pics, they were and they invited me into the warehouse. There I discored even more Ferrari's (12 cars) including a F40, Daytona and 275 GTB :shock: :shock:

I had to promise them not to tell anyone about the exact location and the owner, and after that they let me take some pics of the cars inside. I was really amazed, I passed this location several times and never expected such a nice collection being stored there.

It was very dark in the warehouse so my pics are not of the best quality, I have been invited to visit them again, with a good tripod. I think I will visit them again in August.

Here is a little teaser, more pics follow later today or this week:

http://img125.imagevenue.com/loc483/th_07265_week_28_2006_by_pterps_098_aan_483lo.jpg (http://img125.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=07265_week_28_2006_by_pterps_098_aan _483lo.jpg)

[Mopsdrops]

YOU lucky bastard :P damn looks promesing, the teaser pic looks awesome :P Can't wait to see the rest, thx :twisted:

[saadie]

mops is right .....
you licky bastard ...

btw ..... take martjn along :) :P

[pterps]

btw ..... take martjn along :) :P

Pretty sure I can do it myself :wink:

[saadie]

lol
thats not what i meant ...
what i mean is ... 2 people = more pics :P
you only really love 1 pic out of 50 .... the chances of it would be greater :P :)

[pterps]

:D I thought it was pretty rude to say something like that, but now I understand. I promised them not to tell anyone about the location, so I have to get there alone. But I promise I will take some time to take a lot of (nice) pics.

[saadie]

im sorry for the miss-understanding :oops: :P
you need to find a lamborghini garage like that :D ...

btw were there any rarities ? like 288 evoluzion or something ..
TopGearNL spotted a yellow 348 Competizione some time ago .. it was in a showroom though :?

[pterps]

first update:

http://img153.imagevenue.com/loc479/th_09916_week_28_2006_by_pterps_098_aan_479lo.jpg (http://img153.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=09916_week_28_2006_by_pterps_098_aan _479lo.jpg) http://img140.imagevenue.com/loc394/th_09878_week_28_2006_by_pterps_094_aan_394lo.jpg (http://img140.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=09878_week_28_2006_by_pterps_094_aan _394lo.jpg) http://img103.imagevenue.com/loc596/th_09863_week_28_2006_by_pterps_075_aan_596lo.jpg (http://img103.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=09863_week_28_2006_by_pterps_075_aan _596lo.jpg) http://img37.imagevenue.com/loc557/th_09646_week_28_2006_by_pterps_026_aan_557lo.jpg (http://img37.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=09646_week_28_2006_by_pterps_026_aan _557lo.jpg) http://img9.imagevenue.com/loc425/th_09657_week_28_2006_by_pterps_002_aan_425lo.jpg (http://img9.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=09657_week_28_2006_by_pterps_002_aan _425lo.jpg) http://img108.imagevenue.com/loc334/th_09671_week_28_2006_by_pterps_007_aan_334lo.jpg (http://img108.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=09671_week_28_2006_by_pterps_007_aan _334lo.jpg)

[MartijnGizmo]

Nice pics, but terrible terrible bokeh!

Is this the location I told you about? (or was that PM from someone else?) :)

[Mopsdrops]

WHY is the F40 so HOT ??? awesome pics pterps, which cam do you use ? :twisted:

[pterps]

bokeh ?

We spoke about a carcollection in Haren/Glimmen, that isn't this one :wink:

@ Mops: Canon EOS 350D

[RC45]

Nice pics, but terrible terrible bokeh!



Hhmm.. pictures are great - and the technical "perfectness" of the bokeh in the front and rear on pictures is a non issue.

In gact, the slight spherical nature of the bokuh, I think, lends artistic value to the entire picture - seeming almost heat haze/frosted glass like in texture ;)

[pterps]

What do you guys mean when you are talking about bokeh :hmm:

[RC45]

bokeh is the term for the out of focus bits of the picture - and some people obsess about how the out of focus area is really still part of the whole image, so you need to be just as worried about how the lens handles these out of focus light points..

I guess ideally the bokeh needs to be soft a fluffy and not actual little out of focus gauzian blurry circle like areas.

To me I, the entire picture as the artist took it, is what they saw and what they wanted - so I respect their (in this case your) interpretaiotn of the scene.

Whether or not the image is technically correct, asthetics will always be in the eye of the beholders ;)

Besides, if the bizarre appearnce of boken in digital images bothers folks that much, Photoshop has a "Blur" plugin for that :P ;)

Either way - your pics are great

[pterps]

Thanx for your information and compliment RC45.

[TT]

:love:

[Stikz]

Awesome teaser and the first pics look SWeeeeet. :D

[pterps]

Part 2:

http://img159.imagevenue.com/loc374/th_43730_week_28_2006_by_pterps_093_aan_374lo.jpg (http://img159.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=43730_week_28_2006_by_pterps_093_aan _374lo.jpg) http://img11.imagevenue.com/loc559/th_43739_week_28_2006_by_pterps_046_aan_559lo.jpg (http://img11.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=43739_week_28_2006_by_pterps_046_aan _559lo.jpg) http://img150.imagevenue.com/loc554/th_43753_week_28_2006_by_pterps_016_aan_554lo.jpg (http://img150.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=43753_week_28_2006_by_pterps_016_aan _554lo.jpg) http://img150.imagevenue.com/loc338/th_43756_week_28_2006_by_pterps_036_aan_338lo.jpg (http://img150.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=43756_week_28_2006_by_pterps_036_aan _338lo.jpg)

[r2r]

Some impresive pics!!

Will be waiting to see new pics from your next photoshoot in august.

[SilviaEvo]

wow nice pics on lots of these! hurry up and post all the pics!

[pterps]

There are not so many pics yet, but there will be more in august. Some more pics this weekend.

[MartijnGizmo]

bokeh is the term for the out of focus bits of the picture - and some people obsess about how the out of focus area is really still part of the whole image, so you need to be just as worried about how the lens handles these out of focus light points..

I guess ideally the bokeh needs to be soft a fluffy and not actual little out of focus gauzian blurry circle like areas.

I like my bokeh like this: click (http://www.xs4all.nl/~akoevoet/GoT/IMG_4226.jpg)

[saadie]

^^ soo its like .... in the manual focus cameras, you can only focus one thing .. the rest is blured ... .:?

[pterps]

So do I Martijn, but did you ever manage when taking a picture of car?

This picture wich I took from my noughbours kid is much better. (?)


http://img28.imagevenue.com/loc13/th_44350_lars.jpg (http://img28.imagevenue.com/img.php?loc=loc13&image=44350_lars.jpg)

[MartijnGizmo]

Yeah, much better idd. Other pics look like they were taken with a 70-300 DO.

[MartijnGizmo]

^^ soo its like .... in the manual focus cameras, you can only focus one thing .. the rest is blured ... .:?

That has nothing to do with manual or autofocus, only with sensor-/film-size and aperture.

[saadie]

:| ... ok im lost ...

bokeh is a shot of something moving really quickly :|

:lol: just explain it in simple english :oops:

[pterps]

Yeah, much better idd. Other pics look like they were taken with a 70-300 DO.

They were taken with a 75-300 and so was the picture of the kid. But tell me, did you ever manage to take pic with a good bokeh from a complete car?

[MartijnGizmo]

:| ... ok im lost ...

bokeh is a shot of something moving really quickly :|

:lol: just explain it in simple english :oops:

From Wikipedia:

Bokeh (from the Japanese boke ぼけ, "blur"[1]) is a photographic term describing the subjective aesthetic qualities of out-of-focus areas in an image produced by a camera lens. For example, causing an out-of-focus background image may reduce distractions and emphasize the primary subject.

Although difficult to quantify, and hence open to debate, some lenses are believed to enhance overall image quality by producing more subjectively pleasing out-of-focus areas (bokeh). Bokeh is especially important for large-aperture lenses, macro lenses, and long telephoto lenses because they are typically used with a narrow depth of field. Bokeh is also important for "portrait lenses" (typically medium telephoto — 85–150 mm on 35-mm format) because the photographer would typically select a shallow depth of field (wide aperture) to have an out of focus background and make the subject stand out.

I think that you were referring to a small DoF (Depth of Field) where the subject really stands out. This depends on film-/sensor-size, aperture, focal length and the distance between subject and background.


They were taken with a 75-300 and so was the picture of the kid. But tell me, did you ever manage to take pic with a good bokeh from a complete car?

Well, a creamy smooth bokeh (from a really small DoF) like the bird-pic is hard to get on a complete car (unless you are lucky enough to own a 400 f/2.8 lens), but I meant the hard edges on the leaves in the background. Leaves are always the first things that stick out in these situations.

I'll have a look in my archive. :) This is the only car-pic I could find with clear leaves in the background. Notice how they don't have these hard circles around them. click (http://www.thundernet.nl/Foto/Papenburg/IMG_3613-small.jpg)

Edit: Found another one, also with a smaller DoF: click (http://www.xs4all.nl/~akoevoet/JW/IMG_4299.jpg)

But I think this is enough thread-hijack, I guess I should look at these gorgeous Ferrari-pics as a car-enthusiast rather than as a photographer. :)

[RC45]

bokeh is the term for the out of focus bits of the picture - and some people obsess about how the out of focus area is really still part of the whole image, so you need to be just as worried about how the lens handles these out of focus light points..

I guess ideally the bokeh needs to be soft a fluffy and not actual little out of focus gauzian blurry circle like areas.

I like my bokeh like this: click (http://www.xs4all.nl/~akoevoet/GoT/IMG_4226.jpg)

I hate that kind of bokeh... because I like it to be the "rest of the picture, but not in focus" - not an amorphous blob ;)

Diff. stroked for diff. folks.

Besides... PhotoChop can ive you all the bokeh you want ;)


I'll have a look in my archive. :) This is the only car-pic I could find with clear leaves in the background. Notice how they don't have these hard circles around them. click (http://www.thundernet.nl/Foto/Papenburg/IMG_3613-small.jpg)

Edit: Found another one, also with a smaller DoF: click (http://www.xs4all.nl/~akoevoet/JW/IMG_4299.jpg)

But I think this is enough thread-hijack, I guess I should look at these gorgeous Ferrari-pics as a car-enthusiast rather than as a photographer. :)

One more thing - as a ex-pro model maker and an avid car enthusiatand total amatuer photog, 1:1 scale cars photographed with such a dof detract from the "realism" of the real subject, and are very off-putting.

Why would someone want to portray a real car so it looks like a model car?

This I think is the danger of over technically analysing images and not seeing the wood for the trees. :)

If I were to judge a picture of a real car that ended up looking like a model car photographed with a pin-hole lens, I would mark it 0 - because you are totally losing the essence of the car - and when you stare in a awe at a real ferrari, you may not have the background in mind and it may be outof focus, but it (the background) is what provides the ambience and atmosphere in which the car is viewed ;)

So indeed - without getting too caught up in the technical mumbo jumbo, those F-Car images actually do portray the warehouse and side street atmosphere pretty well. :)

[MartijnGizmo]

.....detract from the "realism" of the real subject.....

Ah, that's where our opinions differ. I never intend to capture realism, I just want to make a photo that I like. :) But it's good that there are different opinions on a board like this, can be a real eye-opener sometimes. Heck, JW is what got me taking pictures of cars in the first place. Btw, a pinhole gives an infinite depth of field. ;)



Apart from the whole DoF-story, I just caught my eye that the bokeh was a bit harsh around the leaves, that's all. :)

[RC45]

Btw, a pinhole gives an infinite depth of field. ;)

Exactly.. which is really the only way to photograph small scale models with any hope of at least a little "realism" in the shot - but still you "know" it's a small scale model... cause the "artisitic" bokeh ((such a pretyentious artsy term :P) is too "large scale" to be realistic looking dof blur. :)


Apart from the whole DoF-story, I just caught my eye that the bokeh was a bit harsh around the leaves, that's all. :)
Yu should see a doctor about the leaf phobia man ;) -- leaves are your friend.. you can chew on them, make tea from them and even smoke them... :P ;)

[MartijnGizmo]

Exactly.. which is really the only way to photograph small scale models with any hope of at least a little "realism" in the shot - but still you "know" it's a small scale model... cause the "artisitic" bokeh ((such a pretyentious artsy term :P) is too "large scale" to be realistic looking dof blur. :)

Maybe I don't understand you, but there's no bokeh/dof-blur in a pinhole-shot. :)

Yu should see a doctor about the leaf phobia man ;) -- leaves are your friend.. you can chew on them, make tea from them and even smoke them... :P ;)

I might even hug a tree for you. :P

[RC45]

Exactly.. which is really the only way to photograph small scale models with any hope of at least a little "realism" in the shot - but still you "know" it's a small scale model... cause the "artisitic" bokeh ((such a pretyentious artsy term :P) is too "large scale" to be realistic looking dof blur. :)

Maybe I don't understand you, but there's no bokeh/dof-blur in a pinhole-shot. :)


I really don't want to get into a he say she say - evidently you are looking for a way to "catch me out" - but almost all pinhole shots end up blurred in some way, even though they are infinite depth of field.

When you do pinhole macro photography you are interested in the first 150mm of so of the foreground and the "infocus" background lends some realism to the shot (for scale models) - however, if there are any focus issues and you get any blurring (bokeh or what ever the hell you want to call it) the image looks like a photo of toy - which is what you are trying to avoid.

Yes a pinhole lense will allow an inifinite in focus depth of field but it often happens that this is not the case, but as long as the first 10 to 20cm are in focus you can get away with it.

Would you like to open a "my photo penis is bigger than your photo penis thread in the photography section and continue this discussion there so we can keep the ferrari sighting thread clear of clutter?

[pterps]

Back on topic :wink:

Part 3:

http://img16.imagevenue.com/loc591/th_46009_week_28_2006_by_pterps_047_aan_591lo.jpg (http://img16.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=46009_week_28_2006_by_pterps_047_aan _591lo.jpg) http://img126.imagevenue.com/loc371/th_46025_week_28_2006_by_pterps_063_aan_371lo.jpg (http://img126.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=46025_week_28_2006_by_pterps_063_aan _371lo.jpg) http://img18.imagevenue.com/loc501/th_46032_week_28_2006_by_pterps_037_aan_501lo.jpg (http://img18.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=46032_week_28_2006_by_pterps_037_aan _501lo.jpg) http://img132.imagevenue.com/loc457/th_46038_week_28_2006_by_pterps_032_aan_457lo.jpg (http://img132.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=46038_week_28_2006_by_pterps_032_aan _457lo.jpg) http://img156.imagevenue.com/loc314/th_46057_week_28_2006_by_pterps_022_aan_314lo.jpg (http://img156.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=46057_week_28_2006_by_pterps_022_aan _314lo.jpg) http://img154.imagevenue.com/loc389/th_46064_week_28_2006_by_pterps_039_aan_389lo.jpg (http://img154.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=46064_week_28_2006_by_pterps_039_aan _389lo.jpg)

[MartijnGizmo]

The width of a Testarossa still impresses..... more than the popups. ;) Why didn't the Testarossa come with 2 mirrors btw?

[pterps]

The one on the first pic has 2 mirrors, the one on the 3rd pic is a testarossa from the 1st series and those have been delivered with one high mirror.

[lambocars]

The one on the first pic has 2 mirrors, the one on the 3rd pic is a testarossa from the 1st series and those have been delivered with one high mirror.

Hello guys,

first, awesome pictures, wish I would find a Lamborghini collector like that in the Benelux ... but anyway about those first series TestaRossa, they did have only one exterior rear view mirror because a second mirror would add 'drag' to the car according to Ferrari.

Several owners actually bought a second mirror in the UK, since those were RHD models, the mirror would be on the right hand side of the car, so if you see a TestaRossa with two 'high mounted' mirrors you can be sure the right on is a UK mirror.
When Ferrari came out with the second series they actually offered two mirrors, but no longer mounted high on the sill anymore.

Mark

[MartijnGizmo]

Ah, so it was for drag-reasons. Thanks for enlightening me. :)

[stmoritzer]

You lucky guy :lol:

[Wutputt]

That's a warehouse with a nice collection inside. Thanks for sharing these pics. And I'm looking forward to your newt visit ;)

[davide]

wow, just every carhunters dream. Finding a garage filled with nice cars....!

Get to work and get us an indepth also! :D