Rover 75 P4

click photo to enlarge
When new cars are rolled out their novel shape is often welcomed. However, just as often they meet with quite vocal criticism. People find fault with the lines chosen by the designers. "Too angular" they say, "the bonnet's too long" or "the line of the boot is awkward". What's often at work here is less a critique of the overall form of the new design and more a fundamental resistance to change, to innovation, to a shape that is unusual. People tend to like what they know. However, it can't be denied that car designers are just as capable of turning out ungainly looking cars as they are elegant vehicles.

At a recent display of veteran and vintage vehicles at a Lincolnshire country fair I came across one of the ugly ducklings of the automotive designer's art. It was a beautifully presented Rover 75 P4, a vehicle that was manufactured in Britain between 1949 and 1952. In the immediate post-war years car makers wanted to offer the public modern looking vehicles, cars that no longer looked like their pre-war offerings. Seeking inspiration Rover looked abroad to the United States, a country where car manufacture continued through the war, less hindered than in Britain by the demands of armaments production. In particular they looked at Studebaker, and it's perhaps here where they went wrong. American car design of the 1940s and 1950s was undoubtedly interesting but even its most ardent supporters would surely not suggest that it was anywhere near the peak of the art. The rounded lines, big wings, chrome work, emphasis on the bonnet, radiator, lights and badge all speak of U.S. cars of the time. Rover scaled the design down for the British market but in its desire to make an impact added a third headlight in the centre of the radiator. It resulted in the car being nicknamed, "Cyclops" - not the most appropriate name since that mythological creature had but one eye, not three. However, you knew what the wits were were getting at, and the effect is awkward to say the least. It wasn't especially popular with buyers and was soon replaced by versions with the conventional twin headlights.

When I came to photograph this car I decided to emphasise the areas where Rover had spent its money on the excessive and imitative ornamentation - the front. So, I got down low and used the 24-105mm lens at its widest. The unprocessed RAW shots at this focal length have a little vignetting and I decided to keep it when I converted the image to JPEG for the way it emphasises the centre of the composition with that all-seeing eye.

photograph and text © Tony Boughen

Camera: Canon
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 24mm
F No: f4
Shutter Speed: 1/2000 sec
ISO: 100
Exposure Compensation: -1.0 EV
Image Stabilisation: On

"Good bad" books and styling

click photo to enlarge
In his "Tribune" essay of 1945, "Good Bad Books", George Orwell argued for the existence of a type of book "that has no literary pretensions but which remains readable when more serious productions have perished." He borrowed the idea and title from G. K. Chesterton and applied it to authors that today are all but forgotten, people such as Leonard Merrick, Ernest Raymond and May Sinclair, but also to some who are still read and more widely recognised: E. Nesbit, Conan Doyle, Rider Haggard and others. His essential point was that "good bad books" are works that don't aim high but do score in terms of entertainment, effective and affective writing, and incidental insight. Moreover, he opined, they would be read long after the likes of Wyndham Lewis were forgotten, and cites in support of his case the enduring appeal of the less serious Anthony Trollope, over the more weighty but unreadable Thomas Carlyle.

The notion that something "bad" can be "good" has been applied in areas beyond books. For example, early British Pop Art practitioners such as Richard Hamilton and Peter Blake drew inspiration from the vigour and vitality of commercial graphics, posters, the circus and other "low" art, seeing in them qualities that they admired. In mainstream popular music there are a small number of artistes who rise above their medium and are liked, within their limitations, by people who generally wouldn't give the genre the time of day. I wouldn't dare to suggest examples!

I've often felt that manufacturers sometimes produce examples of car styling that have this "good bad" quality. In 2006 I posted a photograph of a Cadillac's fin and tail light cluster saying, "It's the sort of styling that you think should never have happened, but part of you is glad that it did." Today's photograph shows the front of the bonnet of a 1936 Ford V8 Coupe. The radiator mascot is a greyhound in the act of leaping over an 8 nestled in a V. This chromed device must be some kind of bonnet release. When I first saw it I immediately thought of what the protrusion might do to a pedestrian unfortunate enough to be struck by it. As I considered it further the ludicrousness of this piece of bad sculpture sitting on the bonnet like a canine parody of a Cellini salt-cellar struck me. And yet, all that notwithstanding, I felt a touch of admiration for the person who had crafted his (or her) artistic vision and persuaded Ford that it should adorn hundreds of thousands of their cars. Perhaps it was the way the chrome and the black bonnet were picking up the tinted late afternoon light that filtered through the clouds. Maybe I was just feeling more charitably inclined than usual towards what I consider bad design. Whatever the reason, I took the photograph and I'm glad that I did.

photograph and text © Tony Boughen

Camera: Canon
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 105mm
F No: f8
Shutter Speed: 1/250 sec
ISO: 100
Exposure Compensation:  -0.33 EV
Image Stabilisation: On 

Citroën H-Type Van

click photo to enlarge

One of the stages of the design process is conceptualization. This results from ideation (idea generation). Looking at modern automobile styling and design you could be forgiven for wondering if there is an agreement that every manufacturer has to use the same half dozen basic ideas. Further, that any resulting car design and styling is not not allowed to diverge from those of their competitors by more than fiver percent. It's got to the point that if manufacturers didn't put a badge on the bonnet or radiator you'd be hard pressed to distinguish one model from another. Of course, where the same model is actually produced by more than one manufacturer - as happens with, for example, Fiat and Suzuki (Sedici/SX4) or Toyota, Citroën and Peugeot (Aygo/C1/107) the confusion is understandable. As it is also when the basic body and internals is used by more than one manufacturer e.g. Opel and Vauxhall Corsa/Fiat Grand Punto or Ford Fiesta/Mazda 2. But even where this doesn't happen there seems to be an enormous amount of design convergence making cars virtually indistinguishable. Kias, Hyundais, Opels, Volvos, Peugeots, Toyotas, etc - who can tell them apart?

There have been times and manufacturers that have bucked this trend. In the past the French firm of Citroën had a name for turning out distinctive cars that stood out from the herd. The Citroën DS, a design produced by the combined talents of the industrial designer and sculptor, Flaminio Bertone and the aeronautical engineer, André Lefèbvre, was renowned for its idiosyncratic qualities. So too was the "umbrella on four wheels", the Citroën 2CV, an economy car that was so successful it remained in production for over forty years, from 1948 to 1990. Citroen's H-Type van (shown above) wasn't produced for quite that span, but it did remain available from 1947 until 1981. It too has qualities that make it stand out from vans of its time and today. I particularly like the flat glass windows and the corrugated metal. Both are chosen for their low cost, though putting folds into metal does, of course, increase its structural strength. The overall aesthetic of the vehicle is utilitarian with a slight hint of the military in the angled faces of the cab. When it was first made it was distinctive: it remains so today. Which is more than can be said for the vans made by the major manufacturers. These are even more clone-like than their cars.

This particular van has been restored and beautifully painted to act as a mobile coffee shop for "Café Classique". It was doing steady business at the Boston Classic Car Club Show, as the smaller photograph illustrates.

photograph and text © Tony Boughen

Photo 1
Camera: Canon
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 70mm
F No: f7.1
Shutter Speed: 1/400 sec
ISO: 100
Exposure Compensation:  -1.0 EV
Image Stabilisation: On 

Old Jags as automotive sculpture

click photo to enlarge

My interest in cars is strictly limited so I feel left out of most conversations about them. I see cars as a relatively inefficient form of transport that is very destructive of our environment: I much prefer my bicycle. For many years I tried to live without a car, using public transport, a cycle and a tandem. However, Margaret Thatcher's assault on the former and a growing family forced my hand and I got a car.

Today I choose my cars on the grounds of utility and economy. I have a small Japanese hatchback that has the virtue of almost total anonymity and the reputation of being one of the most reliable cars on the road. I bought it on the premise that it does everything I need and that a car that doesn't work is nothing more than a useless tin box. Its size (compact), speed (0 mph to well above the legal limit), acceleration (0-60 eventually), ride (whatever that means), its status, what it says about the owner to others, all these are of little consequence to me. Hence the fact that I tend to get marginalised in discussions about cars. Actually that's not strictly true: I am known to offer my views even if they're not sought. At times I see myself as something of a missionary bringing truth and light to such conversations, throwing in what are seen as contrarian views like hand grenades. On other occasions I resort to ridicule. Neither approach is one that wins friends and influences people. The trouble is that at these times I can't help myself because, of all modern conversations, those surrounding the car are one of the most in need of a strong dose of reality.

There is, however, one aspect of cars that I find interesting, which I can debate with car lovers, and that is as objects of design and styling. But here again my tastes are often conflicting because in the main I am more interested in the design of small cars and utilitarian vehicles than luxury vehicles and sports cars. I say "in the main" due to an idiosyncratic liking for some of the 1960s Jaguar designs - the 2.4, 3.8 etc. These are vehicles that I remember from my youth, often characterised then as "getaway cars" (in the bank robber rather than holiday sense) though also used, I recall, by the British police. The front ends of this range of cars have a quality that few other marques can match. Smooth, flowing, tactile, sensuous, they could be detached from the vehicle and displayed in an art gallery simply for their sculptural qualities. I photographed today's example on a visit to the recent Boston Classic Car Club annual show (that's Boston, Lincolnshire, the original Boston, not Boston, Massachusetts). An urge to photograph something bright and shiny overcame me and so I indulged myself at this festival of all things automotive. More to come over the next few days.

I suppose you may be wondering if I fancy one of these sought after old cars. Not on your life! Noisy, unreliable and uneconomic is what they are. That handsome form masks a load of trouble and expense.

photograph and text © Tony Boughen

Photo 1
Camera: Canon
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 70mm
F No: f7.1
Shutter Speed: 1/400 sec
ISO: 100
Exposure Compensation:  -1.0 EV
Image Stabilisation: On 

Crossover craziness

click photo to enlarge

When it comes to the leading edge (or even the bleeding edge) of automotive development I'm clueless. But, I do consider myself to be observant, so if a trend develops it does eventually register on my consciousness. Which brings me to the "crossover" vehicle. For a while I've noticed cars appearing on our roads that are neither one thing or another: not a 3-box saloon, not quite a 2-box hatchback, and with elements of an urban 4X4 (a concept that still mystifies me): in fact, something of a mixture of the styling of the last two. I mean vehicles such as the Ford Kuga, Mitsubishi ASX, Peugeot 3008, Nissan Qashqai (or is it CashCow?), and the one whose advert caught my eye on the back of my morning newspaper, the second-generation Kia Sportage. The latter, by the way, describes itself as an "urban crossover" that "gives you the confidence to be a bit more adventurous". To support that statement it is shown on a traffic-free rural A-road carrying two unicycles on its roof-rack. How I laughed at the wit of the advertising agency that came up with that one.

Apparently, if my reading about this class of vehicle is correct, all crossovers are urban in essence and they may or may not have four-wheel drive suitable for "light off-road usage" (presumably parking on the pavement or cutting up the roadside verges), so quite how an urban crossover such as Kia's vehicle differs from a bog-standard crossover I can't begin to guess. But then perhaps I'm searching for a meaning and purpose that doesn't exist beyond marketing to the gullible. However, I did discover that some manufacturers prioritise "sportiness" over "ruggedness", and others do the opposite, so perhaps there's a nuance to the Sportage that escapes my untutored eye. That may also explain my puzzlement about the BMW X6, a vehicle that I described as "suffering from a personality disorder" in a 2009 blog post. Finally, I read that the "crossover" vehicle "has strong appeal to ageing baby boomers", which makes me part of the target demographic! Well, I won't be buying one because such a vehicle undermines three key design principles that I hold dear. Firstly, a product that purports to do two or more things invariably does them worse than products designed for a single purpose. Secondly, a product that relies on nonsensical advertising to find its market is likely to be nonsense, and thus to be avoided. And thirdly, I don't buy a product that is ridiculous unless ridiculousness is its intended purpose!

There is very little connection between crossover vehicles and today's photograph, but if, in the manner of a DJ segueing between tracks, I were to make one it would relate to the footwear I selected for our walk in the woods at Woodhall Spa in Lincolnshire. However, you'll be pleased to know that I'm not going to bore you further with that. Instead I'll say that the side of this corrugated metal shed appealed to me for two reasons - the pattern of shadows and the mixture of colours and textures, though I can see that, like a crossover vehicle, it won't be everyone's cup of tea.

photograph and text (c) T. Boughen

Camera: Canon
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 37mm
F No: 7.1
Shutter Speed: 1/50
ISO: 320
Exposure Compensation: 0 EV
Image Stabilisation: On

Choosing a Jaguar

click photos to enlarge

Don't worry, I haven't taken leave of my senses, I'm not agonising over which Jaguar to buy. My views on sports cars (and 4X4s) remain as they always have done: I think they are silly forms of transport, that say something about their owners (and not what they think they say). No, today's piece is about choosing photographs to display.

Evidence that many find this a difficult task is well illustrated on virtually every photographic forum. People find it hard to select a single, best image to represent their labours, and end up posting too many. But it shouldn't be quite the problem that it seems. Once you've filtered your photographs for technical quality (sharpness, noise, light etc) you look at composition and the other "artistic" aspects of picture making. That, for most people (the odd photographic genius excepted), reduces the number down to a manageable few, and then it's a matter of taste. During my few hours spent at the Bicker Steam Threshing country fair I took several photographs of some of the veteran and vintage cars that were on display. This Jaguar 3.8 Mk II (helpfully labelled or I'd know little about it) presented a few interesting details for the passing photographer (yes, even one who has no time for sports cars can find visual interest in them), and I took several shots. The only two that I thought worth anything as pictures were these of the radiator, badge and mascot. I present them both because each has a different quality that appeals to me. The bigger image is the more conventional, showing off the colour and details best. I think its composition, though similar to the other, is slightly better. The smaller shot appeals because of the subdued reds, and the clouds and light that enliven the bonnet.

I've photographed Jaguars of this era before. See here and especially here for a very similar composition (and better photograph), though a different colour. And if you are remotely interested in my views on why I find sports cars and 4X4s risible and ridiculous, those posts say more.

photographs and texts (c) T. Boughen

Photo 1 (Photo 2)
Camera: Olympus E510
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 86mm (172mm/35mm equiv.) (79mm (158mm/35mm equiv.))
F No: f4.5
Shutter Speed: 1/1000
ISO: 100 (100)
Exposure Compensation: -0.7 EV
Image Stabilisation: On

Cars, styling and water droplets

click photo to enlarge
Elsewhere in this blog I've confessed to having little interest in cars except their price, utility, safety and economy. However, the way in which they are designed and styled does have a certain fascination for me, as much for the sociological and psychological reasons, as for the engineering and aesthetics angle.

The other day I was out shopping when the sight of a new Ford Fiesta set me thinking. In recent years Ford appear to have steered two divergent paths with their European models. The original Focus and Ka were styled to be different and eyecatching, but with the Mondeo and the newer Focus they opted for bland inoffensiveness. However, as I looked at the most recent incarnation of the Fiesta it occurred to me that this was styled as a "me too" car. By that I mean Ford's stylists had looked at the trends in small hatchbacks - the small Peugeots, Mazdas, Vauxhall/Opels, etc. and come up with a shape that says, "don't forget we've got one of those too!" It has the same "going fast when standing still" appearance, the elongated headlights, and the bodywork curves, bumps and flicks of the rest of the leaders of that market sector. I've always felt that "me too" is one of the two main approaches to car styling. The other is "look at me", a course that is adopted by all sectors of the market, though mainly the top and bottom - think Rolls Royce, Ferrari, Lamborghini, BMW, but also Fiat Multipla (first incarnation), Kia Soul, Honda Civic (current), and Smart Fortwo.

But then, as I considered the Fiesta a little more I realised that it wasn't falling neatly into either of the two main categories of styling - it was aiming to be both "me too" and "look at me". Maybe that's the reason I'm not keen on it : it falls betwixt and between. Though I must say that, as far as I'm concerned, body styling that doesn't say "functional" before anything else rarely gets my vote, and never gets my money.

Today's photographs are two views of a Porsche Boxster S that regularly parks next to my house. Not the sort of vehicle I'd ever want, need or buy, but it clearly has appeal for my son. One morning, as I fed the birds, I noticed that the overnight rain was liquid on its bonnet and still frozen on its boot, so I popped back in for my camera and took these two quick shots for the colours, lines, lighting and textures that the car offered.

photograph & text (c) T. Boughen

Photo 1 (Photo 2)
Camera: Lumix LX3
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 5.1mm (24mm/35mm equiv.)
F No: f2.8
Shutter Speed: 1/100 (1/200)
ISO: 80
Exposure Compensation: -0.33 EV
Image Stabilisation: On

Pickups and bad styling

click photo to enlarge
When I first saw the Range Rover Sport I thought it the ugliest vehicle I'd laid eyes on. It seemed like the stylist had fashioned its form with a lump of wood and an axe, then tricked it out with details borrowed from the sort that are added to toy cars to make seven year olds part with their pocket money. Surely, I thought, this is the nadir of automotive styling. But then I saw the Audi Q7! With this car the designers apparently took a glob of dough, said, "Lets make everything BIG!", then for good measure connected it to a pump and inflated it even more. Its top-heavy, dodgem-car looks and over-fed demeanour achieved the seemingly impossible task of making the Range Rover Sport look stylish. Here, surely, was the low-point of vehicle looks. But I was wrong. The other day I saw a BMW X6, an automobile that looks like it's suffering from a personality disorder. Is it a luxurious saloon? Is it a sports car? Is it an off-road vehicle? It hasn't a clue! And neither have I! Like the "variety" stars of yesteryear, whose time has passed, it wants to be a bit of everything - all singing, all dancing, a little comedy patter, and an appeal to all ages. If it was an entertainer I'd say it should focus on comedy and ditch the rest of its act because when I saw it I had to suppress a smile - and I was laughing at it, not with it.

A smile also came to my lips when I passed this little old Morris Minor pickup in front of a house. I saw it on the same day that I saw the enormous BMW, and reflected that the world (and the roads) would be so much nicer if all vehicles were this sort of size and styled with this sort of cosy aesthetic. So often, it seems, big, boorish, styling seems to engender offensive, aggressive driving. There's probably a Toyota Aygo or Citroen C3 driver speeding around somewhere proving me wrong, but I have the feeling that the size of vehicles and the way we style them affects how they are driven. A few more "Postman Pat"-inspired cars on the road would be no bad thing!

Two final reflections. Firstly, I'm struck by how much my photograph looks like a model against a background set. The light when I took this shot was clear, strong, and at a good angle, and that, combined with the nicely refurbished Victorian semi-detached houses (remodelled into one dwelling) must account for it. Secondly, from what I've written you may think I'm interested in cars. Nothing could be further from the truth - I drive a small Honda that I chose principally on the grounds of economy and reliability. However, I am interested in the design and styling of cars, because I find the subject an endless source of interest and amusement.

photograph & text (c) T. Boughen

Camera: Lumix LX3
Mode: Aperture Priority
Focal Length: 5.1mm (24mm/35mm equiv.)
F No: f4.5
Shutter Speed: 1/1000
ISO: 80
Exposure Compensation: -0.66 EV
Image Stabilisation: On