Test your eyes vs. my tripod closeups

B

BoxsterCharlie

New member
This is a quasi-scientific test I've been meaning to do for a long time. Now that I have a controlled environment, AKA, a garage, it is possible!



When I finished I realized there are some flaws so that I can't use the histogram feature of Photoshop to give real numbers to the shine, this is fine for looking at. I may follo up with a "perfect" test if you guys are interested.



This is a zoom of the rear quarter of a MINI, taken at night on a tripod. The first shot was detailed with 2 layers of AIO, the second added 2 layers SG, and the third added a single layer of S100 carnauba. This is the "perfect shine" method, but without any drying delays between layers (sorry).



Sorry about the width, but you need to see these side-by-side.



I have my own conclusions, but what do you guys think?



1_AIO.jpg
2_SG.jpg
3_S100.jpg
 
I can see a difference between photo 1 and photo 2. There is more definition of the reflection. But I cannot see a real difference between photo 2 and photo 3.
 
without any drying delays between layers
Click to expand...



I think the lack of curing between the SG coats, and S100 negates the objective. I, too, see a diff between Pic 1 & 2, but I really think you'd see something with 4 photos, over a three day period.



Jim
 
Yeah, dramatic difference between left and middle, but it looks like you might have moved the camera, changed the focus, etc. The left pic just isn't quite as sharp (look at black molding, especially the right side of where it meets the paint). And the left pic looks a little darker overall, maybe 1/3 of an f-stop or so.



I see what I *think* is a slightly sharper reflection in the middle pic compared to the one on the right. I see greater definition around/in the rectangular thing hanging on the wall and maybe in the coils of the extension cord on the floor too. So if I *had* to choose, I'd take the one in the middle, with no wax topper.
 
It's good to see the consensus here. I felt the same way. I have to say, even while I was doing it, I could see a big difference when I put on the SG and not any with the S100 topper. It would be tough for me to set this test up with 24 hour drying time, though, if that is the difference.



Unfortunately my camera is pretty automatic, but it looked like it was firing the same aperture/speed on each shot. I won't go into the details, but there are a few improvements to this test which I'm going to repeat tonight and I think will make it scientific. Stay tuned.
 
What type of camera are you using?



You should be able to pull the EXIF information (Exposure Time, F-stop etc) from the photo itself.



There are several versions that are freeware. Just do a google search and you should come up with several of them.



Here's one I came along that has a couple of nice features:

http://home.pacbell.net/michal_k/exif_v.html



Paco
 
BoxsterCharlie said:


I won't go into the details, but there are a few improvements to this test which I'm going to repeat tonight and I think will make it scientific. Stay tuned.
Click to expand...



look forward to it! :bounce
 
So I saw your post and laughed because I was doing the same thing this weekend. I wanted to see a difference between a sealant and carnauba on dark color cars.



Hope you don't mind if I post my results...if so LMK and I'll delete it.

============================================

I received my bottle EX-P and stripped the wax I had on the Yukon off with some paint cleanser and applied a coat of EX-P...a couple of days later - yesterday - washed and applied a second coat of EX-P . The paint looked great, very reflective, slick but lacked warmth.



So I decided to top the sealant with CMW and take some before and after shots.



This morning I set up the camera on a tripod in the garage, door shut, halogen, manual focus, f/5, exposure 1/5 for both pictures.



What I found out is the sealant is a tad clearer and more reflective, and the carnauba darkens, fills minor swirls and adds a bit of warmth the paint.



Here are the pics (untouched, just resized in PS):



This is with just sealant, I haven't done any swirl remover on it in about a year so you can see minor washing marring:



yukon_before.jpg




Here is after a layer of Carnauba wax applied with a foam pad by hand :

The carnauba not only darkened the paint it also filled in some of the marring.

yukon_after.jpg






The best way to see the difference is to download the pics and go back and forth
 
To me looks like #3 is the best...I know there isnt much difference and maybe since i know you have a topper it may have affected my judgement but to me it seems a taaaaaad bit more clear and little more brighter color showing under the window from the paint. this is just my 2 cents
 
blkyukon, that is funny!



Well, I blew it again last night. I had everything set up perfect and I did a door panel. I even took a pre-AIO picture. When I went to take one of the last pictures, though, I realized that my back was shielding the panel from a light source. :(



When I review the pictures, they were all over the place because of this. Darn. I'll give it one last try tonight, this time I'll put it on self-timer and leave the room.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top