OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

[Flyer57]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

http://www.pbase.com/ignomini/image/119176839

If this is your picture I have a fun fact for you.
The plane behind N A Rush is Dancing Queen.
That is the last race plane Larry Burton had a hand in.
In 2009 Larry and I built the engine for DQ.
Larry died Sat. morning.
I would like to get a copy even though he is being passed, It's a great shot and I would like to be able to use it in a book Larry was writing. I hope to get it published.
Obviously credit would be on it.
Please let me know.
Roger

[RAD2LTR]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

Here are a few random shots that I was able to process last night after I got home.
Yes its a blown pic, but still, its got an impressionist feel to it.


Miss Virginia. Again, not a great shot.

Somewhat better shot...


Had to crop the heck out of this shot, but its a cool shot. Dusty leading Miss Virginia and Wee Willy2 out of pylon 2. (taken from the hillside above 3.)


That's all I have for now.

Will

[wingman]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

Good stuff so far

Nothing at all wrong with cropping. You have the megapixels to do it, so go for the impact if the original is sharp enough to work with.

[RAD2LTR]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

Neal,
You weren't kidding about there being a learning curve to shooting at the pylons. I went in a different direction with it however. I got a few shots with a pylon in the frame, but mostly went for getting the pilots in the cockpit. Everyone shoots the same sort of stuff, so I wanted to try and do something different. From what I have seen looking at the pics on the camera, I've got some really cool shots. The thing I don't like about not having a pylon in the shot is that its just an empty blue sky for the most part. No sense of speed or motion, just clear blue sky. Pylon 8 at least had Peavine in the background, if you got creative. Pylon 2 also had Peavine, but you had to shoot so far out the pics ended up with lots of heat distortion.

I have to admit, despite the fact that its a blown shot, that cropped shot of blurry Voodoo is kinda cool. If the background were different, it might make for an interesting impressionist poster. (Who's good with Photoshop?)

Will

[wingman]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

LOL, I told you it was different from doing cars. A whole new set of problems to work out. Sounds like your approach kind of mirrors the direction I moved in once I had digital to work with -- and I was pushed in that direction mostly by Victor Archer, whose work was a revelation to me. If you can get in close enough. the "just blue sky" backgrounds don't matter so much. There's enough interest in the closeup aircraft that the background doesn't matter. Were you a bit surprised at your success rate?

Neal

[RAD2LTR]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

LOL, I told you it was different from doing cars. A whole new set of problems to work out. Sounds like your approach kind of mirrors the direction I moved in once I had digital to work with -- and I was pushed in that direction mostly by Victor Archer, whose work was a revelation to me. If you can get in close enough. the "just blue sky" backgrounds don't matter so much. There's enough interest in the closeup aircraft that the background doesn't matter. Were you a bit surprised at your success rate?

Neal

My success rate was all over the place. Even shooting from my normal places. I spent most of the time trying to figure out if my lens is off or if my technique is off, or both. I did verify that the 200-500 will not work with the filters my lens came with. I tried them on Connor Madison's rental lens and it had the same issues mine did. That still doesn't tell me if its the lens that doesn't like the filter, or if the filters are a POS. I was ending up with a lot of blurry shots even shooting at 1/800th of a second. That tells me that its the lens and not me, but again, I can't tell for sure. I don't want to blame the equipment if the issue is user error. That said, I did get a couple nice shots of Voodoo from the hillside on Saturday at 1/100 sec at about 470mm. The shots are sharp, but there is some atmospheric distortion going on in them. I was having trouble getting sharp shots of the jets shooting warp speed shutter speed. It wasn't hand shake, but focus issues even though I was tracking the target from way out. I also seem to have issues with red planes. Just about every red plane I shot was fuzzy, and looked over saturated.

The issue I was having was simply the image being a bit soft most of the time, like the lens wasn't quite locked on. I had a few shots with the plane lost behind the pylon, or just a tail, or stuff like that. Perhaps my panning was off, I really don't know. The stuff I shot thursday pretty much all sucked (from the pits), Friday from the Pylons, was hit or miss at best, Saturday from the hillside was even more hit or miss, and Sunday I think I started to get into my rhythm, but again had times were I just sucked.

By the way, I heard a few people asking where you were. Your presence is missed at the pylons.

Will

[wingman]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

Nice to know I'm remembered and missed a bit. I was a fixture out there for a long time.

I would certainly do some serious lens testing, but overall your experience mirrors mine and that of others. This particular sort of shooting is very difficult for the photographer, and even more difficult for the equipment. There is nothing easy about it. It looks like it shouldn't too hard to master, but boy, if your personal standards are high it can be really agonizing sometimes. It's also really difficult to analyse your results afterwards. There are just so many variables and things that could be screwing things up -- camera shake, autofocus speed, heat distortion, even relative colors of subject and background. And on and on.

Back in our film days Birgitta used to call the weeks after Reno "Neal's Oh Sh#t period" as the discard slides piled up in drifts on the floor next to my desk and I exercised my language skills muttering over endless piles of slides that were close but not good enough. This pylon shooting thing can be really rewarding, but it can be REALLY hard on your ego.

It ain't easy...

[wingman]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

Save some of your problem shots and post them with questions over on Nikonians. There are some really bright and experienced people there who might well be able to help figure out what all is going on. There are people who have put a lot of thought and effort into working out optimal menu settings for various shooting scenarios. This can be a complex subject.

The high shutter speed jet shots should have been fine. I was always happy when the jets ran because I could shoot them at 1/4000 of a second and delude myself into thinking I'm really good at this. Review all the autofocus menu items (there are a bunch) and make sure you know what the camera is doing.

I do suspect your filters are junk, but who knows...

[RAD2LTR]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

When I get things right... This one I'd like to submit to the photo contest.


ISO 400, F18, 440mm, 1/100 sec.

Will

[wingman]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

I would think hard about a much tighter crop, and some local adjustments to just the airplane to give it a bit more "pop". A bit more contrast and quite a bit more clarity might make a real difference.

That looks nice and sharp for a 1/100 sec pan. Were you using the lens VR for this kind of stuff?

Neal

[Fence Sence]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

So far some nice stuff. iPhone catagory is looking tough!

[wingman]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

Not qualified for contest

[RAD2LTR]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

I would think hard about a much tighter crop, and some local adjustments to just the airplane to give it a bit more "pop". A bit more contrast and quite a bit more clarity might make a real difference.

That looks nice and sharp for a 1/100 sec pan. Were you using the lens VR for this kind of stuff?

Neal

I was thinking along the same lines as you. The beautiful thing about digital photography is that I can duplicate the image and crop it down while keeping the original. Yes its sharp, the reflection in the spinner is pretty fantastic.

How about this?


This was shot a little faster, 1/200. 440mm, F11, ISO 200


Will

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

I'd forgotten all about the contest. This is being entered for Desertdawg, who seems to be too F&c#ing lazy to enter it himself.

Interesting photo, I seem to remember an email from Doggie mentioning he was having trouble uploading photos.

I've been a bit busy, thanks for helping him out!

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: OFFICIAL AAFO PHOTO CONTEST - Reno 2016

The issue I was having was simply the image being a bit soft most of the time, like the lens wasn't quite locked on.

I would not even suggest this, had I not discovered that my preflight of my gear was WAY off. I'd not selected AFC... that does not work well!