I completely agree... Art, for art's sake, is very subjective. While that shot works very well for me, your shot of the "Bulldog" with the Model in the park does not. Is it a bad photograph? Certainly not. It just doesn't have any impact on me like the simple heli shot does.

Here are a few of my more recent attempts. Feel free to critique .

MinnFlyer... The "Edit" button is not available anymore on my older posts. Would you be able to make them editable again so that I can upload the pics to instead of linking to them?

Josh

TJ,

I like some of your pics on your website (really good website, by the way). Since getting into photography, I found that I personally like candid shots with people and their airplanes. On your website, the album called "Joe Nall - The People" is my favorite.

On another note... What equipment to you use for your arial photographs?

Josh

Thank you for the compliments. I'm hoping to do better with the candid shots this year. The few images of yours that I could see really inspired me.

For my Aerial shots I'm using an 80" WS electric foamie called the "Super Solution" designed by Mike Evans ("Power" on RCGroups.com), and I have my older Canon Rebel XTi (350D) with the 18-55 EF lens on it. I did have a "Hawkeye" designed by Joel Scholtz with a Canon A640 on it, but lost it in high winds. The "Super Solution" has a little more control (elevator) than the "Hawkeye", can carry more weight (I'll eventually have video downlink to help compose shots - I'm shooting blind now [&o]), and is a dream to fly. The only advantage the "Hawkeye" had over the "Super Solution" is that I could adjust the camera angle from more oblique to more horizontal while in flight. The Mobile, AL, skyline shots were done with the "Hawkeye" back in December.

The second image is my camera plane. The camera would sit where the "fuel" tank is rubber banded on. It was just there in place of the camera for the initial test flights (with lead shot to match the weight of the camera).

Great photos guys. I too enjoy both RC flying and photography my only draw back is I don't spend enough time with either one to become really good but hey its only a hobby. I have been practicing panning with a slower shutter speed to try an get the motion effect. Here are a few shots from my first couple attempts.

Zounds!  Those are nice, sharbold!  I especially dig the second shot...the glimpse into the cockpit adds some real "life" to the photo, imo.<div>
</div><div>
</div>

Just for grins and giggles, some of this past weekend's shots from the Red Bull Air Race in Windsor/Detroit. Oh...and I must reiterate something i said earlier in this thread...The folks at lensrentals.com kick very large truckloads of ***. They are simply awesome.

Enjoy.

Full album from the weekend may be found here.<br type="_moz" />

Great shots guys...both of you. Keep it up. rich

I haven't used them, but I know Borrowlenses.com is great. I've used them four times now and have been very pleased.

sharbold...looks like you've got panning down perfectly. Those were very sharp shots. What are you shooting with? Rich

Thanks guys for the compliments. richg99 I am using a Canon 20D with a 100-400L lens for all these shots. Here are a few more shots.

Sam

lot of nice work in here everyone.

some more here. sans offsite linking

Nice work definitely. Here's some of mine. Mainly kinda curious how RCU's interface would butcher the images

nice. what are you shooting with?

im using a 40D with 10-22 and 55-250IS

Hey Vic,

I use either a Nikon D80 or D300s with a 80-300mm f4.5-5.6. Been wanting a 70-200mm f2.8 but they are pricey!

Keep the shots coming!

Frank

niiiiice. thats one camera that i would trade my canon gear for. those 70-200 2.8 lenses are nice, but i find the range of a crop body with a 55-250 unbeatable when shooting RC

I like the term "crop body", it's the first time I heard it but will make sure it won't be the last. The f2.8 wouldn't be for strictly for RC, need more light for other stuff. I tell you if Nikon doesn't do a modern 70-400mm soon I may go over to a 7D (but would be extremely hard to do after all these years with Nikon).

Just found this thread so thought I would offer up some of my shots for you guys to have a look at. All taken with a Canon 40D and either a Sigma 120-300 2.8 or a Canon 35-350L

I have the pleasure to fly with some real good pilots so I do get the camera out quite often

Andy very nice, Very crisp Rich

Very nice indeed. I wish we had more 3D pilots and a better background at out club! This guy and a visitor are it!

these are awesome!

sfsjkid,<div></div><div>If I may offer a critique, on several of your photos now, i've seen some pretty significant grain, making me think you're shooting a fairly fast ISO. 800 maybe?</div><div></div><div>Given that you're picking up a third of the prop arc or so, and since most of your shots are outdoors, looks to me like you've got some time to play with. </div><div></div><div>If I may, I'd suggest coming down to 400 or even 200 ISO, and opening up the aperture a stop or two, keeping the shutter speed the same. You should, at that point, get the same prop arc, less grain, and even sharper edges. You'll lose some depth of field, of course, but i think most of your shots can handle that.</div><div></div><div>Just friendly suggestions...i might be completely full of ****, of course. *lol*

================

having said that, i should note....there's a couple of yours i love. That shot above with the Yak inverted in its smoke is AWESOME....and the sunset shot is a really nice piece of "different thinking" imo.</div>

Do you see grain in all of the shots? Partially that is due to the fact that I got them off of our club gallery (ie compressed a couple of times). Thanks!

That probably explains much of it, yeah. <div>
</div><div>I see it in most, but it's definitely worse in some than  others.  The inverted yak pic above, for example, has significant graininess imo, compared to the shot of the ultimate, which has very little.</div><div>
</div><div>It could certainly be jpeg artifacts from resizing and compression however, no doubt. </div>