How the New NSX Deceives You Through Poorly Taken Pics

[N Spec]

So the prototypes have been roaming the roads and some people have taken great pics of it and some have not. I've heard people describe the car as fat, stubby, etc. Now people are saying nose is too long, etc. The dimensions have been released and the values are far from being huge or larger like some would suggest. Regardless, people have only been spectating from videos/pictures and they don't have a very clear view, especially on this forum when they have so much riding on the first gen and naturally expect so much out of the second gen. I just wanted to post this to inform those on proper viewership experience of a car given their larger scale and say don't let the taper arrow aesthetics of the new NSX fool you.

Our first gen NSX does not photograph well upclose like most cars and looks much better when the photo is shot from afar. See how the top pic is unflattering and the NSX looks kind of wimpy, with no sign of the prominent dragon tail. You can see how there is less distortion as you step further away to snap a pic. Try it on your cars please from the same angle. The same can be said about the new NSX:

Now, obviously there are limited 92 NSX stock photos to choose from for consistency purpose. For the new NSX is the same 2016 model that was unveiled this year, some people believe the proportions of the NSX have been undergoing huge changes as many amateur photos arise. The designers have already stated that the production car will not change drastically from the 2012 concept. Aside from the larger intake and longer spoiler, the NSX has kept the same overhang and cockpit proportions in spirit of the design. It has received subtle refinements, but the only thing really radical is the interior. So there is no longer nose. It's due to perspective.

The new NSX always had a long, sharp nose. The tapered arrow shape just gives the illusion of short overhangs from upclose perspective. Very much like a person looking less flattering in a "selfie" versus a good portrait shot.

Anyways, I've embed a video demonstrating the phenomenon. Look at the series of pictures above of the red NSX and then look at what occurs in the video. I'm not calling anyone a fool because they were tricked by photos. Don't take it personally. It's hard to gauge a car from a picture versus in person. Either way, I can't speak for how the new NSX will perform. All I can speak for is what it actually looks like. They seem to be still perfecting the tech given the 10 year hiatus from the last production NSX.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/VfG-U7T06H8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Keep in mind, I'm trying to demonstrate reality through a LCD or LED screen via a computer simulation. So try to wrap your heads around that

- - - Updated - - -

The question is:

are these NSX having a bigger and longer front end or is it a picture distortion as pointed out by 2slow2speed?


I tend to actually believe that these pictures are not enough distorted to explain all the extra nose length ... ( Why? Look at the front wheels and the stage ... )

When we compare these two different NSX, nose of prototype seems to be shorter when you look at the centre grille section compared to the rolling pre production example showed on the second picture. It is subtle ... I am not sure, picture angles are different ...

I think it has less to do with lens distortion and more to do with the angle of the shot and the design of the front. Because the design of the front has it angled as it approaches the center grill it appears to look bigger when you from a three quarter perspective. Conversely when the car is viewed from a slight rear perspective the front overhang looks very small. This is also true of the design of the rear which looks nice and long when viewed from a slight rear perspective but looks very short when viewed from a slight forward perspective

Watch the first few minutes of the video. Then go try it out on your own cars. It helps if your smartphone has a zoom feature. It's perspective. Plain and simple. I really made the video for the people who have been fixated on the front end, but I figured I'd share with the forum as a whole. I'm not disagreeing with the thought that the frontend needs to be simplified, but that's already been discussed and I can settle for "room for improvement."

 

[effer]

Interesting animation BUT there is no front grille and degenerated beak. We are comparing apples with oranges ...

Which is intellectually dishonest ...

Start with a real reproduction of the actual NSX 2 on Tour ...


I still maintain that its nose is longer ...


Try to prove me wrong, but apples with apples ...

 

[N Spec]

Interesting animation BUT there is no front grille and degenerated beak. We are comparing apples with oranges ...

Which is intellectually dishonest ...

Start with a real reproduction of the actual NSX 2 on Tour ...


I still maintain that its nose is longer ...


Try to prove me wrong, but apples with apples ...

I'm not going to debate with you anymore. You refuse the see the actuality of the design. You can clearly see the wheels being distorted and stretching the nose further at the edges in the Red, Black and Blue picture:

Hmm.. I didn't pay too much attention to these pictures, but you are right.

That side profile shot from that angle makes the front end of the car look quite long.

I forgot to tag 2slow2speed as we debated about the illusion before.

Anyways, this is here for other people see the effect of walking up on a car from far away.

 

[2slow2speed]

FWIW: I also posted this on a later post on the same thread based on some reading:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/wide-angle-lenses.htm

Hmm..

Could it be possible that the illusion of the extra long nose be the the result of a wide angle lens or post processing?

From what I understand a wide angle lens will throw off the perspective depending on how close or how far an object is.

Update: Keep in mind that both the blue and black cars are not 90 degrees perpendicular to the camera, so a wide angle lens would not capture the cars "at the right scale/proportions".

 

[N Spec]

FWIW: I also posted this on a later post on the same thread based on some reading:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/wide-angle-lenses.htm

It's more complicated with a wide angle lens. The wide angle lens distorts the outer edges of the image to fit it into a rectangle, which is what occurred when you put the outer two NSX at the edge of the photo. What I am referring to is the area of lens where these is minimal distortion, the center part. If you photograph the new NSX dead center of the shot from far away, you will see that the nose is still actually long (not as long as the wide lens distortion, but still long) and it's not an effect of the lens. Your own eyes will see this happen to a better degree as you walk up on it from afar to upclose.

What I've been saying is since the 2012 concept, the nose has been long and sharp:

I made this above render like 3 years ago when the concept's patent blueprints were leaked online. The nose has always been that long sharp. It just looks short and stubby up close as I demonstrated due to perspective.

 

[synth19]

lens distortion for sure.

 

[Stephen@NCAutoUSA]

The looks are growing on me. However the sound is another story...

 

[krea.tion]

Most cameras extend the image slightly along the edges of the lens. Not sure why its being beat into the ground so much.

 

[effer]

I'm not going to debate with you anymore.

Wanker ...

You refuse the see the actuality of the design.

You refuse to consider anything that doesn't come from your stubborn mind ...

You can clearly see the wheels being distorted and stretching the nose further at the edges in the Red, Black and Blue picture:

I forgot to tag 2slow2speed as we debated about the illusion before.

Anyways, this is here for other people see the effect of walking up on a car from far away.

I'm not convinced, because wide angle lenses create barrel type distortion which result at the exact opposite of stretching the edges.



Compare bricks length from center to outer edges ( can we assume this wall is made of bricks of same dimensions? ).

Of course, your tendency to be intellectually dishonest won't allow you to consider and try to understand these facts ...

It's more complicated with a wide angle lens. The wide angle lens distorts the outer edges of the image to fit it into a rectangle, which is what occurred when you put the outer two NSX at the edge of the photo.

Wide lens! LOL!

Your picture doesn't show any significant distortion. Just for the kick, show us the same picture with cars not facing themselves!!! ( intellectually dishonest ... )

What I am referring to is the area of lens where these is minimal distortion, the center part. If you photograph the new NSX dead center of the shot from far away, you will see that the nose is still actually long (not as long as the wide lens distortion, but still long) and it's not an effect of the lens. Your own eyes will see this happen to a better degree as you walk up on it from afar to upclose.

LOL! Blah! Blah! Blah! B ...ull s hi t ...

What I've been saying is since the 2012 concept, the nose has been long and sharp:

I made this above render like 3 years ago when the concept's patent blueprints were leaked online. The nose has always been that long sharp. It just looks short and stubby up close as I demonstrated due to perspective.

This is not the same car anymore ... Useless. Blah! Blah! Blah! ... B ...

Most cameras extend the image slightly along the edges of the lens. Not sure why its being beat into the ground so much.

Not totally sure. Pictures has been taken by a wide angle ...

 

[N Spec]

Not totally sure. Pictures has been taken by a wide angle ...

You already have a group of people, even 2Slow, say it's distortion. Just stop buddy.

 

[effer]

You already have a group of people, even 2Slow, say it's distortion. Just stop buddy.

LOL!

Argumentum ad populum!


You are ... lame.


Just try to be more convincing with real arguments and serious analysis ...

 

[Zoom]

I'm not convinced, because wide angle lenses create barrel type distortion which result at the exact opposite of stretching the edges.

Technically that's a fisheye lens effect. Fisheyes will keep proportions right, but distort straight lines.
Rectilinear wide angle lenses keep straight lines straight, but will distort proportions (areas), so objects on the side will seem larger especially if they are closer in perspective.
That's why people look better on fisheye photos - but architecture, cars and other straight line applications look better with a rectilinear lens.
Cars look mighty fine with a wide angle ! I'll post a few examples tonight.

 

[Nero Tenebre]

Did you really make a separate thread on this? The effort you will go through to make excuses for this poorly designed car are amazing. "It's disproportionate! No no that's just how the camera fools you, let me explain 'actuality' " [emoji23]

 

[jagtiger]

Did you really make a separate thread on this? The effort you will go through to make excuses for this poorly designed car are amazing. "It's disproportionate! No no that's just how the camera fools you, let me explain 'actuality' " [emoji23]

N Spec give it a rest already unless you are actually getting paid to do this

 

[Zoom]

A wide angle closeup of a friends Elise:

Looks interesting i think There is NO distortion since the lens i used there is rectilinear.

Another example, see how straight lines stay straight:

 

[N Spec]

That's a classic Elise there!

Wide angle doesn't distort lines by curving much and are more accurate than fish-eye lens, but close-ups of larger objects will still be distorted with perspective. If I got a really close picture of your nose focused, it's going to look big no matter what compared to the rest of your face.

Again, the proper way to photograph a car is to capture it from atleast 15-20 feet away. The upclose shots are to show off the finer details like the wheels, or small stuff, but it does not do the car's proportion's justice for any car.

 

[Elistan]

Here's an example of a wide-angle rectilinear lens.
Objects to the side of the image get lengthened a good bit, depending on distance and focal length.
The is the case for the picture of the trio of NSXes. I wouldn't be surprised if the photographer was only 15 feet away from the cars.

 

[effer]

Here's an example of a wide-angle rectilinear lens.
Objects to the side of the image get lengthened a good bit, depending on distance and focal length.
The is the case for the picture of the trio of NSXes. I wouldn't be surprised if the photographer was only 15 feet away from the cars.

Interesting example.


Note how non linear is the lenghtening as it approaches the edges and how it gets blurred.


Something we do not perceive as much in the picture of the trio of NSX.


I just want to understand!




And what about the other picture? This one:




Is there any lenghtening of the Blue and Red NSX ?

If so, how can we explain the fact that the Black NSX seems to be right? While, at the same time, located more on the side?


Could it be possible that the lense used is not too bad and the NSX nose is ... ?????

 

[N Spec]

Effer, all of those shots were taken very close. The photographer clearly more excited than actually taking time to consider cropping the cars in properly for a good shot.

Rest assured tho, you're not the only one that is being misled by these "Show pics." That's the point of making this thread, because other people are getting the wrong impression from inaccurate photos.

 

[effer]

Effer, all of those shots were taken very close. The photographer clearly more excited than actually taking time to consider cropping the cars in properly for a good shot.

Rest assured tho, you're not the only one that is being misled by these "Show pics." That's the point of making this thread, because other people are getting the wrong impression from inaccurate photos.

Ok, but what about the Black NSX?

Just try to answer questions ...

 

[bullithollywood]

Rest assured tho, you're not the only one that is being misled by these "Show pics." That's the point of making this thread, because other people are getting the wrong impression from inaccurate photos.[/QUOTE]

The facts is that in person the new NSX looks good but it is tall and wide and therefore appears stubbier. The original still looks longer/lower even if it isnt. The NSX 2.0 hood is definitely shorter than the original and the nose/grill is more rounded and less pointed. The windshield size and rake is almost identical to the original.

 

[N Spec]

Ok, but what about the Black NSX?

Just try to answer questions ...

The black one in the picture is angled away so the nose is not going to show. Also, The nose and the rear of the new NSX tapers in towards the center point, so it gives the illusion of short/stubby overhang when there is a lot of perspective up close since cars are generally long. See below pics for example.

Rest assured tho, you're not the only one that is being misled by these "Show pics." That's the point of making this thread, because other people are getting the wrong impression from inaccurate photos.

The facts is that in person the new NSX looks good but it is tall and wide and therefore appears stubbier. The original still looks longer/lower even if it isnt. The NSX 2.0 hood is definitely shorter than the original and the nose/grill is more rounded and less pointed. The windshield size and rake is almost identical to the original.

[/QUOTE]

The top pic actually shows that the NSX hoodline/fenderline is not much higher than the original NSX. That's a miracle considering all odds with stringent regulations and much larger wheels.

I think they did well for a car 25 years later. It's not perfect by any means. It's the same size as the 458/488 just like the old NSX was the same size and height as the 348. I think that's competitive and right where it needs to be. Sure they could have probably made it a little lower in roof height, but then track drivers would complain about headroom with helmets.

The rear tapers off as I mention before giving the illusion of a short, stubby rear, but in fact, it has decent trunk space still, and that geometry is shown when you approach the car from the rear:

The first gen NSX has that trademark, long dragon tail that is very apparent, but it also disappears in the 3/4 front angle if not photographed properly as demonstrated in my first post. And this pic looks like it was taken with a cellphone, so there is no wide angle lens to stretch or distort the image vastly.

- - - Updated - - -

No, that is just the fish eye effect of the lens being used. Even a Fiat 500 can be made to look slim and sexy with such a lens.
We all know the dimensions of the NSX and how it looks when photographed with a 35mm + lens at a few feet away to give accurate proportions.

Also, we can continue that discussion again now if you'd like, since before you were telling me that the new NSX doesn't look like this:

When there are countless pics of it now and the wide lens effect of above actually made people think the NSX had a viper nose...

 

[Zoom]

Wide angle doesn't distort lines by curving much and are more accurate than fish-eye lens, but close-ups of larger objects will still be distorted with perspective. If I got a really close picture of your nose focused, it's going to look big no matter what compared to the rest of your face.

Technically no - a wide angle lens and a fisheye are totally different beasts. They do a completely different kind of projection from the 3D world to the 2D photo, actually they use the opposite strategy. The wide angle lens will *not* distort anything unless the optics are bad, a good lens will keep all straight lines perfectly straight no matter what. So a brick wall shot straight on will look perfectly flat with no distortion at all. What you see when objects are on the side of the frame with such lenses is *extreme perspective* which keeps the same shape at the cost of expanding the area of objects.
A fisheye will keep all distances (and thus areas) right, at the cost of shape. Straight lines that do not cross the optical center will become curves, so the shape of objects will be altered but proportions will be kept.

Technical argument nonwithstanding, many of us have seen the car in person and we arent fooled by photographs wide angle or not.

 

[Lostbuckeye]

The first gen NSX has that trademark, long dragon tail that is very apparent, but it also disappears in the 3/4 front angle if not photographed properly as demonstrated in my first post. And this pic looks like it was taken with a cellphone, so there is no wide angle lens to stretch or distort the image vastly.

N-Spec, in the interest of clarity, I took the picture with a Nikon Cool Pix camera at about 35 to 40 feet away to avoid the distortion and cropped the picture.In this next picture I'm a bit closer but my car and the Red NSX 2.0 are of equal distance to me. There is a little wide angle distortion but not much. As you can see the new NSX is a little larger (higher, wider and longer), and more muscular looking than my car. The nose does not drop off as sharply as our current NSX probably due to DOT regs or engineering needs. All of this banter about NSX 2.0's looks and design make for an interesting discussion. However, my suggestion is to keep an open mind and withhold your opinion until you actually see it in person. I have yet to see any picture (including N-Spec's to scale computer renderings as good as they are) capture it's lines and dimensions. The car is stunning in person. We'd all like to think it has all of the attributes of our current cars and it does have some. As I said before, when I was sitting in the car, it felt oddly familiar yet more modern. But, the fact is it's a completely different car technically. We are talking "hyper car" technology and hopefully Ferrari/McLaren performance for a lot less money. Furthermore, in my rant, I hear all these people complaining about how long it's taking for Honda/Acura to produce this car. Remember, it took about 5 years to develop our current car and Honda didn't unvail it until it was almost finished. IMO and the opinion of the designers and engineers, Honda/Acura insighted more pressure and scrutiny on the design and engineering team by unvailing the car so early in the process. No other manufactuer does that. We are now on Year 5 of a much more complex car than what we currently drive. After seeing it in person, my only concern for discussion's sake is how will it perform? Does it give the control feedback that our current cars produce or will it be like a GTR and take away the risk/reward of driving a technical road course? We already know that initially it will be beyond the skills of 90% of the DIYers out there but, will it be as reliable as our cars to daily drive? That's what the engineers doing all of the cross country driving are trying to evaluate.

 

[N Spec]

N-Spec, in the interest of clarity, I took the picture with a Nikon Cool Pix camera at about 35 to 40 feet away to avoid the distortion and cropped the picture.In this next picture I'm a bit closer but my car and the Red NSX 2.0 are of equal distance to me. There is a little wide angle distortion but not much. As you can see the new NSX is a little larger (higher, wider and longer), and more muscular looking than my car. The nose does not drop off as sharply as our current NSX probably due to DOT regs or engineering needs. All of this banter about NSX 2.0's looks and design make for an interesting discussion. However, my suggestion is to keep an open mind and withhold your opinion until you actually see it in person. I have yet to see any picture (including N-Spec's to scale computer renderings as good as they are) capture it's lines and dimensions. The car is stunning in person. We'd all like to think it has all of the attributes of our current cars and it does have some. As I said before, when I was sitting in the car, it felt oddly familiar yet more modern. But, the fact is it's a completely different car technically. We are talking "hyper car" technology and hopefully Ferrari/McLaren performance for a lot less money. Furthermore, in my rant, I hear all these people complaining about how long it's taking for Honda/Acura to produce this car. Remember, it took about 5 years to develop our current car and Honda didn't unvail it until it was almost finished. IMO and the opinion of the designers and engineers, Honda/Acura insighted more pressure and scrutiny on the design and engineering team by unvailing the car so early in the process. No other manufactuer does that. We are now on Year 5 of a much more complex car than what we currently drive. After seeing it in person, my only concern for discussion's sake is how will it perform? Does it give the control feedback that our current cars produce or will it be like a GTR and take away the risk/reward of driving a technical road course? We already know that initially it will be beyond the skills of 90% of the DIYers out there but, will it be as reliable as our cars to daily drive? That's what the engineers doing all of the cross country driving are trying to evaluate.

I don't disagree with you at all and thanks for clarifying on the pic details. I'm more concerned about the car's engineering at the moment than it's design unlike much of the loud criticism from the car's looks from would-be haters of the new NSX or Honda.

I just hope Honda can deliver a reliable and effective car that they once did back in the day. I hope they hit their target.

Thanks for sharing your pics and thoughts. I enjoyed your pics next to the new cars as it gave much needed context.

- - - Updated - - -

Technically no - a wide angle lens and a fisheye are totally different beasts. They do a completely different kind of projection from the 3D world to the 2D photo, actually they use the opposite strategy. The wide angle lens will *not* distort anything unless the optics are bad, a good lens will keep all straight lines perfectly straight no matter what. So a brick wall shot straight on will look perfectly flat with no distortion at all. What you see when objects are on the side of the frame with such lenses is *extreme perspective* which keeps the same shape at the cost of expanding the area of objects.
A fisheye will keep all distances (and thus areas) right, at the cost of shape. Straight lines that do not cross the optical center will become curves, so the shape of objects will be altered but proportions will be kept.

Technical argument nonwithstanding, many of us have seen the car in person and we arent fooled by photographs wide angle or not.

That is the idea of the wide angle lens, but perspective is always going to distort an object dependent on angle and distance. So it may not be the lens doing it, but the distance or sometimes even our own eyeballs....