SDCrashmaster

I think the image is excellent and exemplifies the spirit of this thread.
Nicely preconceived and well executed. To an unknowing public, this image wouldn't cause any suspicion whatsoever.
Also agree with TJR1. The depth of field in the near foreground sells the distance of the model.
The only thing hurting this image is that in needs a little rotating counter-clockwise. Split the difference between the wing plane and ground plane...which is 1 degree counter-clockwise.
I really like this shot. Nice work.
Paul

Tango Juliet

I don't disagree with your thought on rotating it a little counter-clockwise, however, I still think it works well as is. Consider that if it were a real Cessna 182, and the Pilot is the gentleman in the photo and his "passenger" has taken the photo, you might lend yourself to believe that it is a couple and "the unseen" she is a petit woman. Then, the larger framed Pilot might cause the aircraft to sink slightly on his side upon exiting. Soft grass maybe? The clouds in the background look rather ominous, it may have rained and softened the ground. Like I said earlier, I had to study the image a little to determine that it wasn't a real Cessna 182. In a larger format, it may become more obvious, but overall this is an excellent example of what this thread is all about.

anderhau

My Feedback: (1)

Thanks for all nice comments!:-)

Personally I like small "imperfections" in images. It sort of makes them "real"....:-) If something can be left unchanged and not look terrible, I prefer to let it be... I think to much Photoshopping is like cheating...

Picture is taken with [link=http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/]Canon EOS 40D[/link] with my [link=http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/canon_70-200_2p8_is_usm_c16/]Canon EF 70-200 USM[/link] lens (I LOVE it for shooting model airplanes).

kempff

Good photo of my Remake Kyosho Spitfire, at this angle it's hard to distinct from a real bird. Unfortunately model is now 'defunct' :-(



Haha hard to see, picture really small...

ZoomZoom-RCU

Leaving the hangar, and out into the sun.

ZZ.


This is an experiment. If it doesn't come out as expected...please forgive me. I will remove. It was attempt at a rafter shot.

ZoomZoom-RCU

Now that I see it in context, I'm really bummed. Some small (miniature) accoutraments would have really sold this. A small stool, chair, some tools or a doll jacket would really have SOLD this better.

ZZ.

Tango Juliet

The way out of scale floor texture isn't going to help I'm afraid. If a diorama is what you're after, then everything needs to be in the same scale.

ZoomZoom-RCU

Good eye, TJR1, I didn't even notice that. Then again, I have seen some pretty rough shop floors!!

Wasn't really going for a diorama, just a different approach.

ZZ.

Spuetz

ZZ,

can you tell me a little more about the model? Is it a Proctor Kit? How did you get the Lozenge fabric? Is it printed, or painted? Looks really good (and I have had a Proctor Albatros on my workbench for 5 years now - might inspire me to continue...)

Cheers, Martin

ZoomZoom-RCU

Hey Spuetz,

This is actually a scratchbuilt, close to 50" span DV, that I did up myself. The lozenge is homemade as well. I took digital scans of lozenge, and with a graphics/illustration program, recreated them as accurately as possible. This is neat cause I can resize the originals now to fit any scale model I'm doing. Then I took white cotton cloth, tacked it to sheets of 8.5 x 11 copy paper and ran it through an inkjet printer for the printing phase. All you do after this is iron it with a really hot iron to set the colors in fast, then put it on your bird and clear dope or poly it. I thought it worked well. Its really much clearer/brighter when its not in the shade like it is in this image. That was just for effect.

ZZ.

sforrest

My Feedback: (13)

Top Flite P-51 taken by Don Thun at the 2008 Scale Masters Quailifier in Hillsdale, Kansas.

allanflowers

Great lighting and mood in a very simple photo.

David Bathe

The light on the model is surprizingly good.
There's things knock, but at least it's in synch with the thread.
Good shot.

abufletcher

The essential art of photography is learning to see good light...then finding something to wrap it around.

Hello82

Ziroli P51 on take off.....

anderhau

My Feedback: (1)

Is this a model airplane?

js3

My Feedback: (3)

Wow. About the only thing giving that one away is the two blade prop.

Nice shot!

SDCrashmaster

Very nice indeed!

ZoomZoom-RCU

Marvelous! The depth of the weathering is really amazing, and sells the shot! Great stang.

ZZ.

Hello82

thanks...I've been learning a lot from this thread about photo filtering, cropping etc and tweaked this one to look a bit older... I was flying my plane, so actual photo credit goes to Mitch Baker.

ZoomZoom-RCU

Hope you dont mind Hello, but I fixed your 2 blade prop prob. Hope you like.

ZZ.

Hello82

cool thanks, that does help a lot....question.... is that now over the line or not? (not that it matters to me)

...but.....what's the overall opinion here about editing in photoshop etc...to what degree is it no longer a regular photo or consider authentic.......regarding this forum and in the general outside media etc....or has computer editing become so common place that anything goes these days?

M

allanflowers

I think that within the context of this thread, anything is okay but we should be open about any editing done on an image.
I know there are people who don't even believe in cropping, outside of the viewfinder. That is kind of extreme but, if they get a great image under such personal rules, it adds to my understanding and appreciation of their efforts. Likewise, if someone enhances the pix somehow, I enjoy knowing about that too.
I submitted a Sopwith Pup a few months back with a person photoshopped into the image. I didn't bother to point that out in that case because I figured it was obvious.

SDCrashmaster

I my opinion, great Photoshop work is widely accepted, and I do it to virtually every image in my daily work/profession. But I would rather see the image straight from the lens if the Photoshop work is second-rate.
It doesn't take much to do something in Photoshop. It requires a lot to do it well.
One must be very careful here, as when the digital retouching is mediocre, it stands out like a sore thumb and does more harm than good.
The images that require no retouching and still stop you in your tracks...now those are special.

Idigbo

Heres a few of my 109's, apologies if I have posted a couple of them before, couldn't find them to check!! Man this thread is ace!!! It must be the most looked at thread on here?

Ian.