argyris

....

argyris

....

argyris

,,,,

BobH

My Feedback: (2)

Nice flying picture of the Mustang but the tail wheel is a dead give away.

ROGER RUSSELL

My Feedback: (12)

Mark:
This is a LOW pass done by Brian at the 09 IWC.
Have not posted here until now as no a scale shot. (Or did not want to get yelled at)
Palmer Johnson took one and published a mag a year later.
This is the lowest Brian has ever got, and as his partime spotter (wife other spotter) he said he stained himself on that pass........LOL

mark fadely

Wow! that's low. Great shot too.

Mark

joebahl

My Feedback: (2)

My 100 inch electrict short solent seaplane built from Ivans plans comming back in from a flight .joe

david polley

Joe Bahl..

Very Nice.....Beautiful...........

That is still something I still need to try some day....Along with a bi-plane....

Maybe someday......

1/2 time show

My Feedback: (78)

another pic of the tomcat video of it flying
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqMnaAMdZhQ&list=FLaeDsIZ3aFjjfvDjzGz4-CQ&index=1[/youtube]

joebahl

My Feedback: (2)

Thanks David it took me a year to build but i love hayday of flight when they had no runways just water and big seaplanes.

tenacious101010

My Feedback: (97)

1/2 time show

My Feedback: (78)

Thunderbolt47

My Feedback: (8)

I didn't take this one but I like it all the same.

sebo

Nice plane and picture but the rubber band on the antenna ......... well what can Isay?

mark fadely

Great shots Hammerd. I love the mountain background in #3.

Mark

NeilHutch

Hi All,

I know there's been a lot of comments over the last few pages - some valid and some a little OTT. For me, I just like to see pictures of model aircraft. I know some aren't quite up to the mark and I do know what the original premise of this thread was, but I think it should evolve. I do think it's hard for a modeler with an ordinary camera and lens to compete with someone with a pro camera kit - eg getting in close to the model in flight. Perhaps going slightly easier on some of the comments after all we don't want to elitist or the thread may dry up - I hope not. That's just a few of my thoughts.

Right down to the pictures bit - a few taken with my cheapy camera kit










TTFN,
Neil

abufletcher

Great photos as always, Neil! (Despite the fact that all of these "aircraft" are missing their propellers! )

While you're right that serious camera gear, in particular a seriously expensive telephoto lens, is needed to get the pro-level in-flight shots, many of the most egregious failures on this thread have been photos of models on the ground. And with those ground shots, even a basic camera...even most point and shoots...can do the job. On the ground it's primarily about the guy with the camera creating a fantasy tableau by selectively positioning the camera (which is of little importance for in-flight shots) and really examining critically what's in the frame. In many cases, even a mediocre model can be made to appear "real" with some clever camera positioning.

NeilHutch

Hi Fletch,

I must admit I was only thinking of the flying shots, but you're right in what you say. I think the 'on the ground' shots are harder to get right than the flying stuff.

TTFN,
Neil

abufletcher

BTW, all my favorite jet photos show the air distortion from the jet wash as in several of your photos above. All to often jet photos (even of real jets) make it seem like the model/aircraft was simply dropped from a ladder.

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

I don't believe that. I use a small Olympus $78 dit it all camera and our club PHOTOGUY and news letter editor commented that my camera takes pictures as every bit as sharp as his $3000 Nikon with a $2000 lens ... mostly it's how U frame the subject and the angle from witch U take the picture ... the closer U get to your subject and the lower U get the more a plane looks like the ful scale subject does. JMHO

abufletcher

That is exactly what I said, Hounddog. Almost any inexpensive modern camera can take great ground photos. Where you need the expensive photo gear is for those close-up aerial shots. I've got a Nikon DSLR and a very nice Nikon 70-300 zoom. But it won't give me the pro-level results of a 300/2.8 lens. It's not just faster shutter speeds; it's being able to take great photos in variable (and often interesting) lighting long after the guys with the cheaper kit have to put their cameras away (or dial in a higher ISO). Or here's another example, when I'm photographing a model against the sky, I can be getting exposures of f8 and 1/2000 at ISO 400. But as the model comes in to land and the background changes, that shutter speed can drop below 1/250 and then I'm in trouble.

But for on the ground shots, point-and-shoots can do a great job. So no one on this thread has an excuse for posting crummy ground shots!

Note: Be aware though that the photo editors at magazines CAN tell the difference between those shots taken with the point-and-shoot and ones taken with a high-end DSLR.

Dwhart24

Hounddog, I don't believe you read Albufletcher's post correctly. You basically repeated what he said. The in-flight shots are very difficult to get right with a point and shoot camera.

By the way, nice shots Neil!

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

I was comminting on Aerial shot too ... the only shots that you need far away are the crashes other wise the plane always comes down the middle of the runway else the Pilot coulen't show off (his Flying Skills) and his pride and joy. But then some people feel they have to fly out in the next county too. That just Pisses off the neighbors but that's another whold jubject.

joebahl

My Feedback: (2)

It does not make any difference to me if someone takes pictures with very nice gear ,i like to see them. Most of us know people with exspensive photo gear ,i am just to lazy to ask them to come out and take pictures or video of my builds . They would come out for free cause a camera nut is always looking for something to get photos of.lol Great close up pictues BTW Neil. joe

HoundDog

My Feedback: (49)

Did not ... i do it all the time ... Try shooting Video with a Canon XL-1 with a 16x lense ... most people can't even hold any Video Camera Steady much les get UP CLOSE and PERSONAL wwith a video Camera. Look up HOUNDDOGMECH videos on RCU ... I had to install a paint ball RED DOT sight on that camera in order to even find the plane most of the time. But it sure makes a differance. Just put the dot on the nose and pull out front of the subject and let it fly back into the frame. and let it fly back out the other side makes a much more interesting video ... but then again that's a whole different subject ain't it. ... U R right cause U R always right ... Can't argue that.