Aviation Photography

[steven_marquez]

<p>I am posting here, as I cant find a direct forum for aviation photography.<br>

Anyways, in these photos its apparent that the wing is blocking whats behind. I am asking if it looks "bad" or visually not working? Is there still a "visual continual flow" going on? And is it something that does not need second thought?<br>

I asked a bunch of people, including aviation photographers The answer has been yes, even to the extent to why it works. Also I asked if it would look nicer shot in an angle, that wont show hidden fuselage, to which I got no, it will be different in the purpose, and I think could be apples to oranges. <br>

I have many images, but here are three: They are just simple plane pics not fine art.<br>

<img src="http://www.airteamimages.com/pics/212/212259_big.jpg" alt="" width="1200" height="820" /> <br>

<img src="http://www.airteamimages.com/pics/210/210409_big.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p><img src="http://www.airteamimages.com/pics/199/199109_big.jpg" alt="" width="1200" height="820" /></p>

<p>Thanks, and the other question is if this crop is working for this aircraft image? The only thing I have been told, is to remove crop more of the left, to remove that shinny box (flap).</p>

<p><img src="http://www.airteamimages.com/pics/191/191351_big.jpg" alt="" width="1200" height="820" /></p>

<p>Thanks, </p>

<p>If this is not the right forum to post, Let me know.</p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>Steven, we have a critique forum where you can ask these questions and others viewing the gallery can comment. Just upload your photos to a folder in your workspace and submit it for ratings and/or critique.</p>

<p>I think people generally accept aviation photos at face value since they are typically shot from contained spotting positions where one has little control, so what you see is what you get. Unless, of course, you have authorized access to the airfield and have the freedom to choose your spot. </p>

 

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>"...we have a critique forum where you can ask these questions and others viewing the gallery can comment. Just upload your photos to a folder in your workspace and submit it for ratings and/or critique."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The ongoing challenge to using our existing critique system is getting a targeted critique from photographers who actually have experience with a particular genre or style. Otherwise you're getting very generalized feedback, if any. Generic compliments from folks who enjoy landscapes, nudes or bird photography won't help.<br>

<br>

And skip the ratings. That's just a popularity contest with no value in terms of critiques or practical feedback. The numerical ratings might be useful only if regarded in the very limited context of comparison with other aviation photos. But the ratings system isn't set up that way and it's a waste of time other than as a simple popularity contest where most viewers prefer colorful or dramatic landscapes, flowers, birds, pretty girls, etc.<br>

<br>

Try checking the photo.net <a href="/gallery/tag-search/search?query_string=aircraft">tag system and keywords</a> to find other photographers who enjoy photographing aircraft. Ask them for specific feedback. You may be able to cultivate a small group of like-minded photographers to exchange ideas and suggestions for aviation photography.</p>

[DickArnold]

I am a long time military and civilian pilot and sometime photographer of airplanes. Eastern airlines

has been out of business for many, many years. I do not like that picture as one keeps looking for

the rest of the airplane. The airplane in landing flare or more likely taking off looks better. Although the quality is good the

above pictures do not, IMO, have much dynamism. I have some airplanes in my PN gallery that have

mostly been done at airshows. Some of those are not that great technically but they are of airplanes

that are maneuvering, flying formation, doing aerobatics etc. I just got a new 7DII with a great new

focusing, tracking and exposure system that I have just used to photograph a large swim meet with

really good success. I cannot wait to shoot some airplanes in a show with this camera. Backlight is

a nemesis and it is hard not to wash out the sky behind. If you shoot propeller driven airplanes you

need to get shutter speeds below 1/200th to keep from freezing the props. You need to track the

airplane to get a decent picture.

[steven_marquez]

<p>Thank Dick for the response.<br>

I agree that compared to your airshow photos, these four are not dynamic why are just nice pictures of planes landing.<br>

What I am confused about is: " I do not like that picture as one keeps looking for the rest of the airplane" How can we not see the whole plane in the Eastern one?, Unless you meant to say that you dont like the when wings do blocking.<br>

I seen some professional shots, where this is occurring bTW:</p>

<p><img src="http://worldairlinenews.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/eastern-2nd-737-800-wl-easternlr.jpg" alt="" width="1000" height="404" /></p>

<p><img src="http://www.emirates.com/au/english/images/SYD_A380_Double_Daily_Bottom_780_tcm276-1214232.jpg" alt="" width="780" height="355" /></p>

[DickArnold]

I just did not like the look of the airplane. I like the subsequent one better. There are no rules. I

think all of the pictures are quite good.

[steven_marquez]

<p>Thanks, I agree there is no rules for things like this.<br>

But there has to be a reason why you dont like the look, perhaps that can help me next time pick out the right image, when I have a similar instance to this.</p>

 

[Rick Helmke]

<p>The watermark messes up the Eastern 737 shot for me. Gives it a blurry appearance in the center. Otherwise I like all of them.</p>

<p>Rick H.</p>

[DickArnold]

The single wing in that pic just looks awkward to me.

[steven_marquez]

<p>Thanks,<br /> Unfortunately the watermark needs to remain there, for theft reasons.<br /> I wish I could see the awkwardness of the wing, Ill keep looking at it and ask a friend of mine who is a graphic designer, see if he can point it out.</p>

<p>So in general there is no problem about having the wings block some parts of the aircraft fuselage....... </p>

[sfcole]

<p>I'm not sure how one can make these interesting--they're just too common. It's like shooting a wedgie-type train photo: it is what it is. Personally, I've found much more interesting subject matter at the local small GA airport.</p><div></div>

[sfcole]

<p>Needs paint:</p><div></div>

[sfcole]

<p>Flying thing:</p><div></div>

[sfcole]

<p>Bad landing. Actually, the pilot lived, so technically it was an ok landing. The plane was toast, though.</p><div></div>

[steven_marquez]

<p>Thanks Scott, I agree with you 100%. These images are just not exciting, but that is fine, by me, because there what never my intention.....<br>

Its like stamp collecting or even coin collecting. You want it as perfect as can be, That is why I was asking if the wing blocking some parts of the plane is nice, acceptable and still works...... Thats were I am trying to get at.</p>

[stinshoff]

<p>I tend to be a sucker for airplane photos myself, especially those of a more vintage era. I think shots of planes in flight tend to be my favorite since they show the aircraft in their proper context and without all the distracting backgrounds you tend to get when shooting in flight museums or on the tarmac at airshows. In those settings, I think focusing on details is the best bet. As an aside, I tend to fly into Seattle-Tacoma International at least once a year and I don't think I've ever not taken a shot of the biplane that hangs above the baggage claim area. See link below:<br>

[michael_young3]

<p>The relevant questions to ask, as for any photo, but possibly more so in these examples: Why that angle? Why that moment in time?</p>

<p>I found myself looking for evidence that the missing wing or other parts aren't really missing, but just not in view. We're all pretty good observers of airplanes these days. We can fill in the missing pieces, but the image shouldn't provoke us to do so unless that was the intent. Is that 707 wing tip missing a few feet, or is that just an illusion of some kind? The Emirates A380 is oddly proportioned on its own, without that seemingly too small wing poking you in the eye. </p>

<p>I can see why you posted these. They're all nicely executed photos, but they seem to be more unsettling than pleasing.</p>

 

[steven_marquez]

<p>Thanks Michael.<br>

I think my question may be getting overlooked. I simply wanted to know if the "wing blocking the part of the fuselage was okay"....<br>

The 707 wingtip is missing, I cropped it out intentionally to get a closer view of the plane. Plus we can see the other wingtip. I guess its one of those preference things, as I gotten comments that the crop works, just cut out the "silver box". At least is it "okay for you"<br>

I did not notice that effect on the A-380, i guess its the fact that I am "used" to foreshorten objects....<br>

Can you explain visual what is "unsettling" in these shots"<br>

Thanks </p>

 

[michael_young3]

<p>Steven, I don't think that's quite it. It might be just the near co-altitude, three and nine o'clock views.</p>

[steven_marquez]

<p>Thanks Michael, So you are fine with the wing blockage and the crop on the 707 shot, since it was intentional?<br>

I guess what you are trying to say, these are not really dynamic/to plain and have no "reasoning" in them?<br>

Thanks, also do you have some airplane shots. </p>

[michael_young3]

<p>I'd be more specific if I could. I doubt it's something so simple as blocking the fuselage.</p>

<p>I like the front quartering shot on the 737. It stands on its own: great crop and classic composition; fortuitous background; golden twilight; and good angle for the wide focal length. There's lots to gush about. The 707 is not so bad. The front quarter view flatters the nose. (It's the far wing tip, on the right edge of the photo, that bothers me. It still looks chopped. The other, near, wing tip isn't really in the view center.)</p>

<p>Trust the gut. You chose these shots to illustrate your question, I'm presuming because you felt similar. Too plain, a bit static, as you say, maybe sums it up. That's maybe not far from my Why this angle, that moment in time? The lighting is good and the tones are pleasing. What else do you find to like?</p>

[steven_marquez]

<p>Thanks Michael, that will do.<br>

I am confused with which wingtip on the 707 you where hinting to?<br>

You meant on the left side, correct.</p>

<p>Steven</p>