Windscreen Glare

canon400d

One again I sincerely apologise if I am in the wrong forum. My problem is, I have done an Autograss car venue. The sun was behind me but the majority of approaching cars have all got windscreen glare, and to be honest have spoiled a lot of damned good close up shots if you know what I mean, I hope you can give me some advice on this as I have another shoot shortly but living in south west Scotland it could be p......g down as usual.
Regards
Bob

Ric Grupe

canon400d wrote:

One again I sincerely apologise if I am in the wrong forum. My problem is, I have done an Autograss car venue. The sun was behind me but the approaching cars have all got windscreen glare, and to be honest have spoiled a lot of damned good close up shots if you know what I mean, I hope you can give me some advice on this as I have another shoot shortly but living in south west Scotland it could be p......g down as usual.
Regards
Bob

What metering mode did you use?

A polarizing filter may be what you need.

canon400d

Ric Grupe wrote:

What metering mode did you use?

A polarizing filter may be what you need.

As advised Ric I was using 40D, Time Value mode continuous at 100 and 200 ISO as the clouds came over and used various shutter speeds ie: 1/800 for frontals and 1/160 an 1/100 for panning if you understand what I mean. I should have said I was using a 70-200 F/4 but I am seriously thinking about getting the 2.8L because that is what everyone is using on these big venues. I am the only photographer for these venues. It is a hobby and I do not charge. You may give me your views on the 2.8L.
Regards
Bob

pathfinder

canon400d wrote:

You may give me your views on the 2.8L.
Regards
Bob

The f2.8 is bigger, heavier, costs a lot more, and may not be as sharp as the f4 IS L.

Unless you really need the f2.8, the f4 is fine. I own the f2.8 IS L, and my wife has the f4 IS L, Bob, and I wish I had hers much of the time.

If you must have f2.8, there you are!

TonyCooper

canon400d wrote:

One again I sincerely apologise if I am in the wrong forum. My problem is, I have done an Autograss car venue. The sun was behind me but the majority of approaching cars have all got windscreen glare, and to be honest have spoiled a lot of damned good close up shots if you know what I mean, I hope you can give me some advice on this as I have another shoot shortly but living in south west Scotland it could be p......g down as usual.
Regards
Bob

I had to Google "Autograss" racing. The term is not used in the US. It seems to be automobile races with amateur drivers on natural surfaces, and most seem to be on quarter-mile oval tracks. Closest thing we have is dirt track racing.

What I don't understand is that the races are on an oval track, so it would seem that you could move to the side of the track where the sun would cause less glare on the windscreens. It seems that you have a positioning problem and not a camera problem. Perhaps the other parts of the track are off-limits to spectators.

canon400d

pathfinder wrote:

The f2.8 is bigger, heavier, costs a lot more, and may not be as sharp as the f4 IS L.

Unless you really need the f2.8, the f4 is fine. I own the f2.8 IS L, and my wife has the f4 IS L, Bob, and I wish I had hers much of the time.

If you must have f2.8, there you are!

Thanks Pathfinder I see exactly what you mean. My F4 doesn't have IS but I don't suppose it matters when you are panning.
Regards
Bob

canon400d

TonyCooper wrote:

I had to Google "Autograss" racing. The term is not used in the US. It seems to be automobile races with amateur drivers on natural surfaces, and most seem to be on quarter-mile oval tracks. Closest thing we have is dirt track racing.

What I don't understand is that the races are on an oval track, so it would seem that you could move to the side of the track where the sun would cause less glare on the windscreens. It seems that you have a positioning problem and not a camera problem. Perhaps the other parts of the track are off-limits to spectators.

Hi Tony these Autograss venues take place in a huge field which usually have hills and slopes and each car is timed as it goes around. You stand where you want at your own risk at these events. At bigger events spectator areas are usually roped off with the exception of official photographers which I am not. It is the same old cry the shots looked ok on the LCD it was only when I put them through the computer I found the glare.
Regards
Bob

canon400d

Ric Grupe wrote:

What metering mode did you use?

A polarizing filter may be what you need.

I have purchased and awaiting the arrival of a Hoya 67mm Pro1 digital circular polarising filter for my 70-200 F4. This is my first polarising filter. I have always used a hood on my lens. I understand with a polarising filter it is necessary to adjust the filter to get rid of the glare. I take it when using this type of filter a hood is not required. Also I can't see how I will have time to adjust the filter when the cars are approaching so fast. Will it affect the panning of the cars too?
Regards
Bob

TonyCooper

canon400d wrote:

I have purchased and awaiting the arrival of a Hoya 67mm Pro1 digital circular polarising filter for my 70-200 F4. This is my first polarising filter. I have always used a hood on my lens. I understand with a polarising filter it is necessary to adjust the filter to get rid of the glare. I take it when using this type of filter a hood is not required. Also I can't see how I will have time to adjust the filter when the cars are approaching so fast. Will it affect the panning of the cars too?
Regards
Bob

If you Google for instructions on how to use the circular polarizing filter, you'll find lots of instructions and how easy it is to use.

Lies, all lies. It's not easy. I keep trying to figure it out, but my success has been very limited.

canon400d

TonyCooper wrote:

If you Google for instructions on how to use the circular polarizing filter, you'll find lots of instructions and how easy it is to use.

Lies, all lies. It's not easy. I keep trying to figure it out, but my success has been very limited.

So are you saying Google says its easy but in actual fact it is not? I think I need some help here. What can you tell me about the points I raised in my last post. In addition is a polarizer ok with a 70-200 lens for the job I want it to do? I have just read that a polarizer absorbs a lot of light so if I pan at 1/120 with the polarizer this reduces it to 1/60. So I will have to double my shutter speeds. Is that correct?
Regards
Bob

TonyCooper

canon400d wrote:

So are you saying Google says its easy but in actual fact it is not? I think I need some help here. What can you tell me about the points I raised in my last post. In addition is a polarizer ok with a 70-200 lens for the job I want it to do? I have just read that a polarizer absorbs a lot of light so if I pan at 1/120 with the polarizer this reduces it to 1/60. So I will have to double my shutter speeds. Is that correct?
Regards
Bob

Google doesn't say anything. Google merely points you to people who have written about the subject. They say it's easy.

I stood in front of a shop window that was highly reflective of the street and shot a series of photographs turning the CP to just about every point on the compass. All the photos came out much the same, and the reflection wasn't changed.

It's me, not them, I know it. Other people use them successfully.

I thought that a TTL system compensates for the CP effect (exposure, not speed), but some say they still open the lens about 1.5 stops over what they'd shoot without the CP. If you shoot RAW, you adjust exposure in post.

As I understand it, a CP is less effective shooting straight at your object. That's what you will be doing.

canon400d

TonyCooper wrote:

Google doesn't say anything. Google merely points you to people who have written about the subject. They say it's easy.

I stood in front of a shop window that was highly reflective of the street and shot a series of photographs turning the CP to just about every point on the compass. All the photos came out much the same, and the reflection wasn't changed.

It's me, not them, I know it. Other people use them successfully.

I thought that a TTL system compensates for the CP effect (exposure, not speed), but some say they still open the lens about 1.5 stops over what they'd shoot without the CP. If you shoot RAW, you adjust exposure in post.

As I understand it, a CP is less effective shooting straight at your object. That's what you will be doing.

Thanks Tony, I received the CP today and late this afternoon the sun came out and I tried it out positioning myself perpendicular from the sun and took several shots of the reflections in the sea. Albeit the tide was well out and the lens 70-200 F4 truely absorbed the light and I had to move it two stops up. I turned the CP to several different positions and I could see a difference but not a lot. As I say the tide was well out. If as you say it does not work directly pointing it at glass, I fail to see it working successfully when I am shooting directly at a cars windscreen.
I am showing my ignorance again. What is TTL system?
Regards
Bob