short1 0 Posted September 11, 2008 I was a combat pilot with the USAF... and our gear is quite different from that pictured. I didn't know if this was an error, or if the pilot was NATO - likely Volkswaffe. I've commented about this photo under "Ramona", ranking both 7/7. Excellent capture and thematically compelling in both cases, Bis Spater, Craig Unger Link to comment
short1 0 Posted September 11, 2008 There is no way to rate the photo- the rating tab is absent, Will return and try again. Craig Link to comment
juergen reinsch 0 Posted September 12, 2008 Your comments are welcome - thanks in advance; J Link to comment
Lacerda 1 Posted September 12, 2008 Beautiful image the light is very good on this one. All the best. Link to comment
seismiccwave 0 Posted September 12, 2008 Young pilot yes. I can't tell if he is a Phantom driver or not.;-) Very nice photograph though. The lighting created a very serious mood that is beyond the pilot's age. Link to comment
short1 0 Posted September 18, 2008 Having seen your series of this Phantom/ Tornado/ whatever pilot, straffing D-day beaches in a modern jet, his gear bizarre, the combat in which engaged placing him at a distinct disadvantage ( the phantom is not a front line air superiority fighter - it's been withdrawn from service. Maybe this guy just tools around the runway in a Vietnam left-over ) against modern jets ( an F-16C could wax an F-4 with the '16 pilot sound asleep; so could the older F-15...the F-4 is generations behind modern jets ), makes me dizzy with what you're trying to convey. If you just titled the photo pilot ( and I personally have seen too many images of this particular pilot...he has more flying hours than I do, and I have over 1000 ), and lost the outerwear, it would be credible, and congenial. But the phot, while well executed, is a thematic lie. And the pilots aging before my eyes. He's probably completed his rotation by now. In context, you getting too much milage out of the same image, and the image is not a reflection of reality. This alone - the lack of cradibility, the absence of any research into the subject of a studio shot, and the repetative use of the same image to garner ratings, degrades the fundamentals of creative photography. I'm thus down-grading this rating to a 4/4.Why, when you do such beautiful portraiture, must you destroy it with poor costuming and a bogus theme?C.U. Link to comment
Recommended Comments
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now