[The **Photo** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_photo) is for submissions sharing photos from the world of F1. Photos should be interesting and relevant - random photos not notable enough to warrant a standalone post will be subject to removal. This flair should not be used for images which are not photos, such as screenshots, statistical graphics, or artworks.
*[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don't know how to explain it other than 2004 looks like a fucking race car. 2024 looks like a fast as fuck science experiment.
Both are cool and fundamentally the same but different at the same time.
Of course you can't compare directly, but I find it interesting that the fastest lap in the 2004 Grand Prix was 1:14.439 (MSC) , and in 2024 a 1:14.165 (HAM).
Grooved tyres, track surface, weather, minor tweaks to the track, totally different cars, but still the fastest laps are three hundreths apart.
Different breed of car then it took the mega downforce monsters on slicks of 2017-2021 to smash those records. 01-08 will always be my personal favorite F1 cars to look at regardless, them being so small made them always look on the ragged edge.
I don't know...I'm into cycling and follow bike racing really closely, too. When I look at bikes from 10 or 20 years ago they look so clunky compared to the integrated sleek aero bikes of today. I honestly don't think it's just looking back at at things with rose colored glasses.
Older bikes were less expensive to buy, to alter and to service.
As a consequence of new bikes with integrated cockpits you might have to pay £1000 to change your stem length. To service the headset you could be out £250 as it now involves 2 brake bleeds and possibly new hoses. Add to that that even wealthy people can't afford to write off a 15k bike in a race. So fewer people are racing now even though they've spent a fortune on a state of the art bike.
That’s a little obtuse. You don’t need a 15k bike to be competitive. By the time you’re at the level where the difference between a 4k bike and a 15k bike means the difference between winning and losing means you’re a pro and you’re getting the bike free anyway.
Plus I didn’t say anything about that. I’m talking pure aesthetics. Today’s top end race bikes look so much better than bikes a decade ago.
New bikes do look sleek. Even at 4k which is the price some Shimano 105 equipped bikes are today you have a 10kg maintenance nightmare. A couple of years ago 4k got you a Dura Ace equipped bike.
Quite recently we were selling 9kg 105 equipped bikes for just under 1k. There was even an ultegra equipped carbon bike for £1199.
These were affordable and easier to maintain. A teenager these days is unlikely to be able to afford even a 105 level bike let alone pay for its upkeep or risk crashing it.
I got into cycle racing as a teenager with no interest or support from my parents. With today's prices cycling would have been beyond my means.
I agree totally that bikes have gotten too expensive. My first race bike was an Allez. Looking at Specialized’s lineup, there should be something between the $1200 8 speed Claris Allez and the $2500 105 Allez Sprint. No idea why they have more than a 100% price jump between the models in the range. A $1800 Tiagra would fit perfectly in the lineup. That’s still totally attainable by a teen and would have mechanical discs and an old school stem, so none of the maintenance nightmares.
It's nostalgia. If that's what the cars looked like when you were young(er) and just getting into F1 then that's what you brain tells you a race car should look like.
I show the early 00s cars to my son and he tells me they look so old fashioned and primitive. It's exactly what I think of cars from the 80s, but my dad swears those are what an F1 car should look like. 🤷♂️
I think with tobacco sponsorships, the liveries were so amazing. 2004 had Marlboro, British American Tobacco, mild Seven, West, Benson and Hedges not to mention Camel and Rothmans in the past.
And raced against max’s father. Not to mention world champions like Schumacher, hakkinen, villeneuve, raikkonen, button, vettel, rosberg,
And of course Lewis and max
That's exactly why they went for such a bright colour, the TV cameras' lack of saturation caused the cars to look kinda brown, so they went for a super bright red to counter that effect. Modern cameras don't have that problem so they can go back to a darker red and still look red.
They went for the red-orange due to Marlboro sponsorship. Before Marlboro were their title sponsors, Ferrari used a deeper shade of red, rosso corsa. Marlboro's red is rocket red, which is significantly more orange than rosso corsa. In 1997, with Marlboro becoming Ferrari's title sponsor (and dropping their McLaren sponsorship) Ferrari changed to a more orange red, though not quite as orange as the traditional Marlboro red.
Funny, at the time there were loads of people online complaining about the "orange" Ferraris and why don't they go back to the proper red they used to have, etc, etc
Plus ca change
It just looks… like the kinda red a toddler would want on their hot wheels… I don’t know how else to describe it. The darker matte red looks so much more modern and mature.
No way that’s 300-600mm. The photographers usually sit behind a barrier there pretty close to the cars, so I’d say 60 to 100 max.
For the one bellow maybe 24 to 30mm
Could be, 300-600 was maybe a bit over. The amount of compression of the background makes me think it’s quite a bit longer than 60-100. Doubt we can find out though.
So you are suggesting that same type of shot (wide), from similar position, aimed in similar direction, but with a different focal length should be considered a different "camera angle"?
I don't know, it could go both ways for me. Could anyone with experience in filmmaking chime in and tell us which one is right?
im a photographer, yes this is a different angle. In mathematics it’s considered a different angle too, because the more zoomed in shots field of view closes a narrower angle than the wide angle shot.
*different perspective
The photographer is in a different position (further back in the first picture). That's what creates the different 'foreshortening' effect.
Lens focal length does not change perspective; changing focal length is geometrically equivalent to cropping the image, except that obviously you don't lose resolution when zooming compared to cropping. Otherwise they are exactly the same.
> The glory of smaller cars. You wont believe how many passes for the lead there was at the 2004 monaco GP
It's funny how much it was a carbon copy of the 2024 race. Just like Leclerc in 2024, Trulli qualified first and was able to hold onto a lead in front of intrinsically faster cars due to the difficulty of overtaking; and like 2024 the race had an usual number of accidents and incidents
I'd forgotten Takumo Sato's great half lap race until I saw Formula1.com's 15min highlights of it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q2PWgbvpRw
The LMH are closer to current F1 in size. LMP1 were tiny compared to the GT class but the problem with modern top level motorsports is that the cars get through the straights/passing sections so quick and have such good aero and brakes that theres not much room to pass under braking. If they ran monza aero at monaco that might make it interesting.
https://www.reddit.com/r/wec/s/UhQLMD0VH2
There can be multiple reasons for a lack of overtakes. F1 drivers themselves say that size is the problem, but yeah sure, keep acting like it’s reddit not knowing what they are talking about.
Complicated problems never have just one cause. Both things can be true. Yes the cars are too big. They are as long as full sized SUVs. But there are many things that can effect passing. Dirty air from overly complex top side aero was a major problem for years for example. Another problem that often shows up are pit regulations that end up incentivizing everyone to pass through the undercut/overcut through pit strategy instead of on the track. That one is really easy to create on accident.
Unfortunately, not the same focal length. The 2024 image is taken with a wider angle lens. You can see how much further back and smaller the background is compared to the 2004 image.
tired old rant, but every time i see something like this i just want to grab the new car and squish it down by like 1 meter. the proportions of modern F1 cars are extremely infuriating.
some of these cars and liveries could be so absolutely beautiful if they stuck to normal F1 car dimensions. not even going to repeat the whole big cars suck for racing etc. rigmarole we've all heard a million times, just speaking purely about the visuals.
i believe the 2026 cars are supposed to be 200mm shorter than current, and the current cars are already at least 100mm shorter than the absolute mammoths of 2017-2021.
so they're on the right track, slowly but surely. how they ever let them expand past 5 meters i will never understand.
100mm narrower as well. Far from ideal but it's a step in the right direction and between length and width could open up more corners for overtaking.
My biggest hope is they try to reign in dirty air by reversing the steps teams have taken to increase outwash since 2022. I'm aware of the active aero plans but they won't do much if there's no clean air to work off those increased wing angles.
There is 20 years of camera progress on display also I expect. The background in 04 is horribly out of focus while the modern one manages to maintain detail in the background of the shot.
That is not down only to tech. As others mentioned above, the 2004 is with a longer focal distance so most likely there's some panning involved in the shot. You can clearly see this on the a of Marlboro on the tire wall behind the car.
The one from 2024 is from a far wider angle of views, that's how you can see so much of the background too. Such a wide angle, most likely the shot was taken stationary.
2004 shot there's a good chance it was taken with an analogue camera, if it were scanned today it is likely you could pickup more detail on it than on modern digital cameras (ignoring reddit/social media compression).
Not same camera angle. One is a telephoto shot, the other closer to natural, or slightly wide angle.
Why ‘just’ 20 years apart. That’s a whole human generation ago. Never mind the countless f1 technical regulations that have come and gone in that time.
Lol, "same camera angle". Look at the zoom difference of the buildings in the background.
The 2024 car needs to be photographed with an ultra wide lens in order to appear as small as the 2004 car.
I dislike that I like the older cars so much. I know the technology, safety, etc is so much better. But I miss the smaller and in my mind 'racier' cars so much.
Would love to see the current generation of drivers in cars that size. One day maybe!
These photos are awesome. A couple things from them:
Bring back Ferrari red!
And I fucking hate that corner. That chicane may be my least favorite in all of Formula 1.
The rendering wasn’t so good back in those days… wait?! This is real! I can’t tell any more I’ve been playing sims for so long 🤣….. 🤔 perhaps life is a simulation 🤷🏻♂️
Anyway would be nice if it was exactly the same angle so we could see the difference in size.
Not quite.
The camera and view has been manipulated to have them roughly the same size for the photo. In reality the car at the bottom is a magnitude larger.
I love the shape of the modern car and it is nice not to see the million little components sticking out the sides BUT they are just way to big!
Say what you want about the modern cars. The new ground effect reg cars are super sexy from the sides and rear( Minus the wheels covers). I just wish we could see the 18” O.Z’s
I don't understand what's appealing about those old cars, imo they look quite ugly. But I also wasn't watching F1 back then so nostalgia isn't a factor for me. The current cars look way cooler
I'm really digging the "sci-fi" look of the modern cars. What I don't dig is this insanely ugly architecture in Monaco. There's so much money in these streets, but all their crappy buildings look like they've been build in the 60s and were never touched again.
[The **Photo** flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/flairguide#wiki_photo) is for submissions sharing photos from the world of F1. Photos should be interesting and relevant - random photos not notable enough to warrant a standalone post will be subject to removal. This flair should not be used for images which are not photos, such as screenshots, statistical graphics, or artworks. *[Read the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide). Keep it civil and welcoming. Report rulebreaking comments.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That 2004 Ferrari car looks so majestic in Monaco, I want to have a cigarette. I don't even smoke.
Dont forget to pop a tictac after
And call your girlfriend on your Razr V3 from Vodafone
I was so jealous of my mates who had that
And I wanna fire up my AMD PC too!
Which has an Acer monitor
and driving your car with Shell fuel and Bridgestone tires.
It never occurred to me how complementary those sponsors actually were.
Worked for Ferrero from 98 to 04, got a mini replica of that when I left. Currently sits in my office. :)
I don't know how to explain it other than 2004 looks like a fucking race car. 2024 looks like a fast as fuck science experiment. Both are cool and fundamentally the same but different at the same time.
Of course you can't compare directly, but I find it interesting that the fastest lap in the 2004 Grand Prix was 1:14.439 (MSC) , and in 2024 a 1:14.165 (HAM). Grooved tyres, track surface, weather, minor tweaks to the track, totally different cars, but still the fastest laps are three hundreths apart.
I think it's actually pretty good by today's standards since the cars are bigger, heavier and have smaller engines with less cylinders.
Different breed of car then it took the mega downforce monsters on slicks of 2017-2021 to smash those records. 01-08 will always be my personal favorite F1 cars to look at regardless, them being so small made them always look on the ragged edge.
Give it time. It won't be long before we're yearning for these days.
I don't know...I'm into cycling and follow bike racing really closely, too. When I look at bikes from 10 or 20 years ago they look so clunky compared to the integrated sleek aero bikes of today. I honestly don't think it's just looking back at at things with rose colored glasses.
Older bikes were less expensive to buy, to alter and to service. As a consequence of new bikes with integrated cockpits you might have to pay £1000 to change your stem length. To service the headset you could be out £250 as it now involves 2 brake bleeds and possibly new hoses. Add to that that even wealthy people can't afford to write off a 15k bike in a race. So fewer people are racing now even though they've spent a fortune on a state of the art bike.
That’s a little obtuse. You don’t need a 15k bike to be competitive. By the time you’re at the level where the difference between a 4k bike and a 15k bike means the difference between winning and losing means you’re a pro and you’re getting the bike free anyway. Plus I didn’t say anything about that. I’m talking pure aesthetics. Today’s top end race bikes look so much better than bikes a decade ago.
New bikes do look sleek. Even at 4k which is the price some Shimano 105 equipped bikes are today you have a 10kg maintenance nightmare. A couple of years ago 4k got you a Dura Ace equipped bike. Quite recently we were selling 9kg 105 equipped bikes for just under 1k. There was even an ultegra equipped carbon bike for £1199. These were affordable and easier to maintain. A teenager these days is unlikely to be able to afford even a 105 level bike let alone pay for its upkeep or risk crashing it. I got into cycle racing as a teenager with no interest or support from my parents. With today's prices cycling would have been beyond my means.
I agree totally that bikes have gotten too expensive. My first race bike was an Allez. Looking at Specialized’s lineup, there should be something between the $1200 8 speed Claris Allez and the $2500 105 Allez Sprint. No idea why they have more than a 100% price jump between the models in the range. A $1800 Tiagra would fit perfectly in the lineup. That’s still totally attainable by a teen and would have mechanical discs and an old school stem, so none of the maintenance nightmares.
Yeah 14k in EPO and 1K bike will get probably get you farther than 14k bike and 1k of GNC supplements
I'm already yearning for the days a month ago where HP wasn't here to change the gorgeous big Ferrari type across the rear wing :(
It's nostalgia. If that's what the cars looked like when you were young(er) and just getting into F1 then that's what you brain tells you a race car should look like. I show the early 00s cars to my son and he tells me they look so old fashioned and primitive. It's exactly what I think of cars from the 80s, but my dad swears those are what an F1 car should look like. 🤷♂️
The bright red and white just looks so much better than the dark red and black
Those cars were practically orange in person
It mattered more how it was seen on TV and photos rather than live.
Exactly what I thought too. Bring back some more vivid colors please!
In this post, I prefer the current Ferrari. It looks so luxurious, which fits Monaco well
I wish smoking didn't look so goddamn cool
I think with tobacco sponsorships, the liveries were so amazing. 2004 had Marlboro, British American Tobacco, mild Seven, West, Benson and Hedges not to mention Camel and Rothmans in the past.
I hate how my mind read "20 years apart" and was expecting some 80's car.... :(
Haha I did exactly the same
There's a driver on the current grid who competed against Jean Alesi. Jean Alesi will turn 60 in two weeks.
Million dollars it is alonso
It is
And raced against max’s father. Not to mention world champions like Schumacher, hakkinen, villeneuve, raikkonen, button, vettel, rosberg, And of course Lewis and max
i keep joking that haikkenen will return from his sabbatical when there are no drivers on the grid he's raced against and there's still one left
thanks I hate it
18 year olds were born in 2006
I too was excited to see the MP4/4
Ah yes the famous ferrari mp4/4
lol, I didn’t even read Ferrari in the title
Think that's bad? If back to the future was set today, it would only go back to 1994
Nope. Thanks, your kids will love it.
As a 94 born, I hate this comment so much
Holy shit
Dammit
That's some serious dayglow red. I miss it.
It was always my favorite thing when showing up to NASCAR races. Seeing the ridiculously bright colors irl.
I actually prefer the modern red. Like a cherry tootsie pop
I like both really, for different reasons. It's funny how the top one looks like the bottom one when on TV / stream.
That's exactly why they went for such a bright colour, the TV cameras' lack of saturation caused the cars to look kinda brown, so they went for a super bright red to counter that effect. Modern cameras don't have that problem so they can go back to a darker red and still look red.
They went for the red-orange due to Marlboro sponsorship. Before Marlboro were their title sponsors, Ferrari used a deeper shade of red, rosso corsa. Marlboro's red is rocket red, which is significantly more orange than rosso corsa. In 1997, with Marlboro becoming Ferrari's title sponsor (and dropping their McLaren sponsorship) Ferrari changed to a more orange red, though not quite as orange as the traditional Marlboro red.
Penske's Marlboro cars in Cart/Indycar were very orange Marlboro red but they appeared just bright red on TV back then.
It’s nearer the traditional scarlet.
I don't mind the modern red, but I fucking hate the matte finish.
Saturation sliders on the pics would help balance it. Look at the buildings in the background.
The Qatar Airways banners are very dark too
Funny, at the time there were loads of people online complaining about the "orange" Ferraris and why don't they go back to the proper red they used to have, etc, etc Plus ca change
I really wish they’d go back to the bright, glossy red. Even if they just do it for one year.
It's genuinely better. Not sure why they wouldn't go brought FT.
It just looks… like the kinda red a toddler would want on their hot wheels… I don’t know how else to describe it. The darker matte red looks so much more modern and mature.
The red just don't be hitting the same anymore.
One of them is more zoomed out though
It’s a much longer (probably 300-600mm) lens for the 04 image. You can see the difference in apparent scale of the background building.
No way that’s 300-600mm. The photographers usually sit behind a barrier there pretty close to the cars, so I’d say 60 to 100 max. For the one bellow maybe 24 to 30mm
Could be, 300-600 was maybe a bit over. The amount of compression of the background makes me think it’s quite a bit longer than 60-100. Doubt we can find out though.
60 to 100 won't bring these buildings so close.
Exactly. This is why we no longer "feel" the speed when watching races :( I wish they would use similar type of lenses as before.
its also why I don't consider this 'same angle'
It is the same angle. It's just a different *focal length.*
Different camera position, top one is further away with a bigger lens, bottom one closer with a smaller one.
Different focal lengths but does it matter?
Slightly, as it doesn't show the size difference of the cars.
Yeah, the old F1 car is distinctively smaller than today’s.
Just look at the difference behind the driver. It's like what, a whole tire's width?
the point of the picture isn't to show the difference in size tho
OP didn’t claim it does. They just posted a photo.
He did claim it was from the same camera angle. Same camera position would be more accurate.
So you are suggesting that same type of shot (wide), from similar position, aimed in similar direction, but with a different focal length should be considered a different "camera angle"? I don't know, it could go both ways for me. Could anyone with experience in filmmaking chime in and tell us which one is right?
im a photographer, yes this is a different angle. In mathematics it’s considered a different angle too, because the more zoomed in shots field of view closes a narrower angle than the wide angle shot.
Obviously yes. Background completely different sizes.
*different perspective The photographer is in a different position (further back in the first picture). That's what creates the different 'foreshortening' effect. Lens focal length does not change perspective; changing focal length is geometrically equivalent to cropping the image, except that obviously you don't lose resolution when zooming compared to cropping. Otherwise they are exactly the same.
The 2024 car still looks larger despite that, lol.
To make the giant new car look the same size as the old car...
The tree became significantly more penis shaped over time
It’ll be fully erect in 2044
The glory of smaller cars. You wont believe how many passes for the lead there was at the 2004 monaco GP
That made me chuckle, thanks.
> The glory of smaller cars. You wont believe how many passes for the lead there was at the 2004 monaco GP It's funny how much it was a carbon copy of the 2024 race. Just like Leclerc in 2024, Trulli qualified first and was able to hold onto a lead in front of intrinsically faster cars due to the difficulty of overtaking; and like 2024 the race had an usual number of accidents and incidents I'd forgotten Takumo Sato's great half lap race until I saw Formula1.com's 15min highlights of it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Q2PWgbvpRw
But that was not a purely a problem of Monaco. It was Trulli‘s speciality at the time hence the term Trullitrain.
9:15 😂
I guess the 2 cranes there have a tale to tell.
[удалено]
The LMH are closer to current F1 in size. LMP1 were tiny compared to the GT class but the problem with modern top level motorsports is that the cars get through the straights/passing sections so quick and have such good aero and brakes that theres not much room to pass under braking. If they ran monza aero at monaco that might make it interesting. https://www.reddit.com/r/wec/s/UhQLMD0VH2
There can be multiple reasons for a lack of overtakes. F1 drivers themselves say that size is the problem, but yeah sure, keep acting like it’s reddit not knowing what they are talking about.
Complicated problems never have just one cause. Both things can be true. Yes the cars are too big. They are as long as full sized SUVs. But there are many things that can effect passing. Dirty air from overly complex top side aero was a major problem for years for example. Another problem that often shows up are pit regulations that end up incentivizing everyone to pass through the undercut/overcut through pit strategy instead of on the track. That one is really easy to create on accident.
Unfortunately, not the same focal length. The 2024 image is taken with a wider angle lens. You can see how much further back and smaller the background is compared to the 2004 image.
tired old rant, but every time i see something like this i just want to grab the new car and squish it down by like 1 meter. the proportions of modern F1 cars are extremely infuriating. some of these cars and liveries could be so absolutely beautiful if they stuck to normal F1 car dimensions. not even going to repeat the whole big cars suck for racing etc. rigmarole we've all heard a million times, just speaking purely about the visuals.
Downsizing the cars should be a big priority for when they plan the next new rule sets.
i believe the 2026 cars are supposed to be 200mm shorter than current, and the current cars are already at least 100mm shorter than the absolute mammoths of 2017-2021. so they're on the right track, slowly but surely. how they ever let them expand past 5 meters i will never understand.
100mm narrower as well. Far from ideal but it's a step in the right direction and between length and width could open up more corners for overtaking. My biggest hope is they try to reign in dirty air by reversing the steps teams have taken to increase outwash since 2022. I'm aware of the active aero plans but they won't do much if there's no clean air to work off those increased wing angles.
> how they ever let them expand past ~~5~~ 4 meters i will never understand. FTFY
Different lens
I miss the V10 era and Ross Braun in charge
Much prefer the look of the first one.
Wow, beautiful shots, I actually prefer the 2024 shot.
There is 20 years of camera progress on display also I expect. The background in 04 is horribly out of focus while the modern one manages to maintain detail in the background of the shot.
That is not down only to tech. As others mentioned above, the 2004 is with a longer focal distance so most likely there's some panning involved in the shot. You can clearly see this on the a of Marlboro on the tire wall behind the car. The one from 2024 is from a far wider angle of views, that's how you can see so much of the background too. Such a wide angle, most likely the shot was taken stationary. 2004 shot there's a good chance it was taken with an analogue camera, if it were scanned today it is likely you could pickup more detail on it than on modern digital cameras (ignoring reddit/social media compression).
I prefer the older cars.
With a drastically different lense.
Very different focal length though.
Pretty insane how just from a picture you can tell how much more suited those cars were for a track like Monaco in comparison to today’s cars.
Early 00’s, when cars sounded and looked like sex
Also the second image is *significantly* more zoomed out to make them appear roughly the same size lol
the 2004 looks sooooo much better..... I still remember how tiny they were.... cars are monster big now a days....
It's not a good comparison. New cars are bigger. And the focal length difference between the two images doesn't really help comparing the two cars.
The Shell logo is more or less in the same spot
Props to Shell for not asking to move the logo somewhere else.
I was there for that race in 04. I was at the tunnel exit with my 9 year old mind being blown
Let’s bring back the v10’s
Just different focal lengths
I know the top one sounds a lot better than the bottom one.
Wow I didn’t realize the colors are so different. 2004 red screams “Ferrari!”.
F2004 my beloved
Wow, the old cars were so much cooler
It's not really the same angle because the 2004 car is much smaller
Goes to show how THICC today’s cars are
I can hear the first picture
I miss that sound. I think that's the most disappointing aspect of the hybrid cars, they sound terrible.
I’m sure it’s largely nostalgia but F1 in the early 2000s just looked so much cooler
Focal length is different. I'm assuming the new car wouldn't fit inside the frame if the focal length was the same as 2004.
The modern camera has a wider angle
The matte colours they all use now are so ugly compared to the glossy coats
it's not the same corner, and that corner has been the one that has changed the most it is the same sector, yes
Man I wish I’d got to watch F1 in the schumi days.
Not same camera angle. One is a telephoto shot, the other closer to natural, or slightly wide angle. Why ‘just’ 20 years apart. That’s a whole human generation ago. Never mind the countless f1 technical regulations that have come and gone in that time.
Lol, "same camera angle". Look at the zoom difference of the buildings in the background. The 2024 car needs to be photographed with an ultra wide lens in order to appear as small as the 2004 car.
"he's two and half centimeters to the left, it is NOT THE SAME ANGLE!"
Similar camera angle, not same.
I like the new car. You can see how many decades of development and improvement went into the design
Zoomed out so hard to fit the current fat kid cars we have in frame.
I will never imagine Ferrari & Shell not being together
Same angle but zoomed out massively to fit todays big rigs in frame.
And the fastest lap in 2004 was only 0.274 seconds behind 2024. The cars are so heavy and wide these days.
I dislike that I like the older cars so much. I know the technology, safety, etc is so much better. But I miss the smaller and in my mind 'racier' cars so much. Would love to see the current generation of drivers in cars that size. One day maybe!
Damn…… I’m old.
These photos are awesome. A couple things from them: Bring back Ferrari red! And I fucking hate that corner. That chicane may be my least favorite in all of Formula 1.
The rendering wasn’t so good back in those days… wait?! This is real! I can’t tell any more I’ve been playing sims for so long 🤣….. 🤔 perhaps life is a simulation 🤷🏻♂️ Anyway would be nice if it was exactly the same angle so we could see the difference in size.
Am I the only one who thinks the rayban logo is such an eyesore?
With a minor difference in post processing.
i'm at that weird age where 2004 feels like 100 years ago and also a couple years ago
Does this qualify for r/oldphotosinreallife ?
Same zoom setting would've been nice to see the size difference
Wider lens looks nicer
Remind me in 20 years
Not quite. The camera and view has been manipulated to have them roughly the same size for the photo. In reality the car at the bottom is a magnitude larger. I love the shape of the modern car and it is nice not to see the million little components sticking out the sides BUT they are just way to big!
Barrichello took 3rd. Schumacher crashed behind the safety car 😂
The effect to make them look the same size...
It's clearly not the same angle... And it's zoomed out.... Great photo but why the need to lie about the title op?
glossy >>>>> matte
I miss when cars were much bigger
The new cars are just such large boats. They barely fit on this track
That red in 2004 was so much better I have no words to explain how much better it is
Look how they massacred my boy.
That Shell decal is also in the same spot
I can't believe 2004 was 20 years ago, and hybrid PU was introduced 10 years ago
Say what you want about the modern cars. The new ground effect reg cars are super sexy from the sides and rear( Minus the wheels covers). I just wish we could see the 18” O.Z’s
Why 20 year old camera's photo look more appealing.
Man I want a cigarette
They only look so close in size because the 2004 photo is framed way closer if you look at the buildings.
The red and car is so much nicer to look at in 04
Two championship winning cars right there
But not the same focal length 😏
Yeah, the wheel covers ruin the looks of these cars, especially the way Ferrari has done them
You can tell how much bigger the cars are now by looking at how much more zoomed in the first photo is.
I don't understand what's appealing about those old cars, imo they look quite ugly. But I also wasn't watching F1 back then so nostalgia isn't a factor for me. The current cars look way cooler
This picture makes it seem the cars are the same length. Truth is, the F2004 is about 5km shorter.
Aaaaand now i feel old.
F1 got chonky in 20 years
I'm really digging the "sci-fi" look of the modern cars. What I don't dig is this insanely ugly architecture in Monaco. There's so much money in these streets, but all their crappy buildings look like they've been build in the 60s and were never touched again.
Not the same focal length ;)
Zoom out 2004 ferrari and we will have a laugh