Buick Roadmaster Sedan (1992)


Traffic Car Connoisseur
Okay folks, yet another one. This one was kinda draining on me, because I had to take the front photo with the car behind a McDonald's Customer Parking Only sign, another car's mirror, and other issues. That of course is why the front view looks so strange in the interior of the car :picaso:


I wouldn't wonder if it had interior like that, US cars are sometimes weird o_O

Nice one tho, would be interesting to model it sometime
MuhAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH I just have to model this one!!!:D:D:D:D Uberthx to you MMM, I love you.:grin: Man this will be so much fun, but I have to finish my Impala first, damn. xD

Meh, i think I will start it anyway, its just soo damn hot argh

Maybe some useful information: The Roadmaster has the same plattform like the Caprice. There are also station wagons of both cars which look more or less the same. They changed the dashboard in 1994 and added new mirrors in 1995. Production was stopped after 1996.

Here are some reference pictures, so you dont have to search too long:

pics at ebay motors
Ill explain it in german because its easier and faster^^ And he knows german lol

Ich bin mir nich ganz sicher, aber er macht mehrere Fotos von einer Seite. Einmal in der Höhe des Seitenspiegels, einmal etwas weiter rechts, dann wieder ein bisschen weiter rechts usw. Diese Fotos fügt er dann in photoshop zusammen, sodass sie aussehen als wären sie eins. Die Fotos macht er aus einer sehr hohen Entfernung, zoomt aber mit seiner Kamera nah an den Wagen heran. Dadurch entsteht relativ wenig Perspektive und du kannst das Ganze als blueprint benutzen.

Nice Roadmaster! love these shots you do of the cars. you did say you use photoshop to piece then together right? I was driving behind one of these just the other day......don't see them to frequently anymore.


Traffic Car Connoisseur
yes, this is done with a process similar to how panoramas are made, and how your computer's scanner works.

Each photograph belongs to a certain region of the overall final image.

I get so far away from the vehicles, in optimal conditions, that I only need width regions usually... height isn't needed at that distance.

I'll make an ms paint drawing to represent the theory behind the photographs I take.



Traffic Car Connoisseur
well, once I have access to a vehicle, if I'm on foot (the park pictures), it can take about 10 minutes to photograph the vehicle, or about 3-4 minutes on my bike (also the park). If I'm stalking from my own vehicle, in a large parking lot, then it can be as short as 1 or 2 minutes.

Then when I get on the computer, each car takes around 45 minutes all the way to an hour and a half or even two, depending on how good or bad the photoshoot went, and how many issues there are to correct. This roadmaster, as you can see from the back view, had many issues to correct with the front view, so it took around an hour and a half I'd guess.

GT4 blueprints, the ones where I only have the one picture for each view, that I take at Grand Valley Speedway, take barely any time to compile together, since they're just one picture per view... But it takes about 10 minutes to run the free-race and get the car positioned properly for the views, as well as saving the replay. It takes another 10 minutes or so to go into replay theatre and get the settings for the camera properly set, and save out your images.

I wish heat distortion wasn't such a huge issue at those distances. I could get some really sweet one-photograph views that way. But for a scene setup like what I use in GT4 at Grand Valley Speedway, the car would look like it's underwater from all the heat distortion and the distances.

So in short? prints usually take an average of 50 minutes to create
There might come a time when it IS possible to take pix without perspective. To be published in "Science" and "Nature" journals this week (why do they call weekly magazines journals?), a research project at University of California proved that conceptually, light can be bent around 3D objects by new things called metamaterials, which don't exist naturally. These metamaterials change refractive properties somehow. It was financed by the military, so everyone starts talking about invisibility shields, and it has been done with very thin (almost 2D. Like my grandad's pancakes) objects in practise, but it seems to me that it could be used to modify perspective effect. There's a guy here in Australia who managed to grind lenses that have infinite depth-of-field, after everyone told him that it couldn't be done, and no-one else has been successful since. He doesn't sell his lenses, only leases them with complete non-disclosure and non-reverse engineering agreements, and I don't think he's patented them, either, so no-one knows how he did it. The military's not so interested in that, although Hollywood is.