steven_marquez
-
Posts
39 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
Downloads
Gallery
Store
Everything posted by steven_marquez
-
Thanks very much. Are these two examples better? One is of the same plane then the other is of a different one. http://www.airliners.net/photo/Cubana/Antonov-An-24RV/2302916/L/&sid=a49f619fd59fef4f86f85d6de4cabefd http://www.airteamimages.com/boeing-737_N276EA_eastern-air-lines_212259_large.html I work for this company so the logo is still on purpose Thanks -
-This image is just a snapshot, its not artistic in any way. -I like planes so I wanted to photograph the aircraft. -This was the only angle that will show the reg and airline titles. -This is a static angle, and KNOW that a more creative ones are out there. -I am just documenting this plane That being said, Is there anything visually wrong about the wing blocking the fuselage? I have received various comments saying that it was not a problem, only one said, that he prefers that its was not blocked as it will look nicer. This does not make sence, because we see that "principle" happening in portrait and product photography. I ask you now,,, I dont think there is anything important, and it would not look any nicer either, but I am probably wrong here.k..
-
-
I think this needs to be cropped tighter to focus more on the plane. -
Various comments have been said, Mostly I need to recop closer and focus on the primary plane. -
-
-
Various comments have been said, Mostly I need to recop closer and focus on the primary plane. -
Various comments have been said, Mostly I need to recop closer and focus on the primary plane. -
-
-
-
Guys do you agree with this comment made about the image below? "This shot doesn't work for me at all. The skyline leads into the prop and the out the tail into the trees. All of these are distractions for a picture of the plane" -
Exposure Date: 2015:04:11 10:06:14; Make: NIKON CORPORATION; Model: NIKON D600; ExposureTime: 1/640 s; FNumber: f/8; ISOSpeedRatings: 100; ExposureProgram: Aperture priority; ExposureBiasValue: 4294967292/6; MeteringMode: Pattern; Flash: Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode; FocalLength: 23 mm; FocalLengthIn35mmFilm: 23 mm; Software: Adobe Photoshop CC 2014 (Windows);
-
<p>Thanks guys, I am understanding this more, and some great points to keep in mind.<br> So the pilots look "Natural" in my shot?<br> Anyways I can always Photoshop some pilots heads looking forward, if the consensus leans more to this.. </p>
-
<p>Thanks Matt, I take time and sit down and analyze the "Why" factor.<br /> I guess this is what I am trying to mimic image below, And it seems to be a staple of Air-Air images.<br /> Like with the image below (Not mine). They seem to do it a lot and I guess the responce is "plane and pilot"</p> <p>thanks <img id="bigphoto" src="http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/2/6/0/2338062.jpg" alt="Van's RV-8 aircraft picture" width="1024" height="695" border="0" /></p>
-
<p>Thanks Matt, great response.<br> I can not figure out what is the intention that I want it to be. <br> In your words, its not working for you right?<br> <br />Thanks</p> <p>Steven</p>
-
<p>Hey guys, I think some of you might remember the question I asked, regarding the eye direction in my Eastern flight attendant photograph.<br /><br />Well, I already received great response telling me that the pilots looking at me was not a problem and that it could potentially add to the image,however a comment was made which the person was leaning toward having the pilots look straight. <br /><br />Which way do you guys prefer, and more importantly why. Its a bit confusing, cause if you look at a lot of Air-Air shots, the pilots or looking at the photoship; I was wondering if the same applies for here.<br> http://postimg.org/image/i9spjlcxv/
-
<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>
-
<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>
-
<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>
-
<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>
-
Watson Island
steven_marquez replied to steven_marquez's topic in The Digital Darkroom: Process, Technique & Printing
<p>Thanks guys for the comments, I was also told the background is busy, but a good "busy". What are your thoughts is the busyness intentional and needed? Have you seen other photos, that take advantage of a busy background to convey a message. </p> -
This is a real simple photo, Just asking if the general composition is "okay" -
