The first of many

[fenceliner01]

Image posts, that is. My good friend J.T. Occhialini got to spend the races as a flagman volunteer on the home pylon. I'll be posting many of his images (with his permission) on the site in the coming weeks. Notice on this one how the stress of pulling G's distorts the wing skins.

[T. Adams]

Re: The first of many

Great photo, but you might want to mention to him that the shutter speed is way too high. The dreaded stopped prop syndrome, strikes again.

[NoVibes]

Re: The first of many

I like the stopped prop effect.

[Wild Bill Kelso]

Re: The first of many

I like the stopped prop effect.

Me too!!!

[T. Adams]

Re: The first of many

I like the stopped prop effect.

???????????????
Stopped props are a huge, no no in aviation photography.
It is one of my pet peeves. If I wanted a picture of a plane that looks like it's on the ground, or going to fall from the sky, then I'd take it like that, otherwise, 1/250 max, 1/200 for most airborne stuff.

I have noticed that Victor used a lot of 1/320 at the pylons, but this is because you are so close to the plane. The closer you are, the higher
shutter speed you can use, and still convey motion.

That being said, it is a very sharp, well exposed photo, just too high of a shutter speed. Just my opinion though.

[Wild Bill Kelso]

Re: The first of many

???????????????
Stopped props are a huge, no no in aviation photography.
It is one of my pet peeves. If I wanted a picture of a plane that looks like it's on the ground, or going to fall from the sky, then I'd take it like that, otherwise, 1/250 max, 1/200 for most airborne stuff.

I have noticed that Victor used a lot of 1/320 at the pylons, but this is because you are so close to the plane. The closer you are, the higher
shutter speed you can use, and still convey motion.

That being said, it is a very sharp, well exposed photo, just too high of a shutter speed. Just my opinion though.

We just said we liked it. Matter of opinion... right. No need for reinforcement.

[fenceliner01]

Re: The first of many

It's funny - He stayed at my house during the races and we continually had discussions about that effect. He had just purchased a Nikon D70 and 100-400mm (?) zoom that he was using for the first time. He was more interested in how sharp his focussing was at the expense of image blur. I'm sure as he becomes more familiar with the new gear he'll come around. I kind of like to see motion (props, background) in my photos also, but I can't fault him for what he likes. I was more interested in the stresses showing on the flying surfaces in this image.

Mike Arnold
fenceliner01

[T. Adams]

Re: The first of many

Cool Fenceliner, I was just trying to offer constructive criticism, not jump all over his case.

[Victor Archer]

Re: The first of many

Oh come on you guys it's a model can't you see the fishing line?

[speeddemon]

Re: The first of many

Notice on this one how the stress of pulling G's distorts the wing skins.

Kind of makes you wonder how fast the plane would be if they gave it one of Kerch's 'wing treatments'.....

[AAFO_WSagar]

Re: The first of many

I think what Tim's trying to convey is the frustration felt when we bust our brains trying to get a clear shot with prop and background blur.

It is a LOT easier to get a clear shot if you bump up the shutter speed, it takes the challenge out of it and certainly, no publication will ever use a "stopped prop shot"..

I didn't see that Tim was trying for "reinforcement"... he was pretty clear that he was just giving his opinion.

Tim, Victor and others are very accomplished photographers... If we want to keep them around here and keep getting advice from them, we should listen to what they say and accept it as sharing their many years of experience with us...

Just my opinion...

[rwflyboy]

Re: The first of many

That's the right way to use this board for sure... Where else could you go and get this type of info for FREE!!! Thanks guys for the awesome stuff we see here..

[Bill@Interstell]

Re: The first of many

By all means keep up the discussion. I find it all very useful. I don't think anyone was, or should be, offended.

I too like the blur to convey motion. Having said that, the absolute clarity in this image really makes it useful for looking at what the stresses do to the airframe. It looks like the wing is made of fabric.

I've had to work hard on a similar prop blur problem myself. Depending on the shutter speed, some video has a hideous prop strobe effect. Some of the low end video units don't give you any such control. I note that most of the little cameras ESPN has mounted inside the planes over the years suffer from this in the extreem.

My XL2 handles this very well. I can add a bit of neutral density filter to compensate for strong light and the auto setting selects a shutter speed that gives me good prop and background blur without having to resort to manual overrides. They are available but 'I haven't had to resort to using them.

Keep up the technical discussions. I love it!

PS: FENCLINER, I know you're waiting for a Big Bossman pass. I'm working on it but have a number of distractions.

[FENCELINER]

Re: The first of many

Thanks Bill
Understand
larry

[ignomini]

Re: The first of many

All the discussion is great. I'm no pro, but was at least taught in the age of manual everything. I'm amazed at the number of people today who are totally unaware of the relationships between shutter speed, apature, motion blur and depth of field.

Take a confidence building approach to shooting. Start the week at higher shutter speeds, and as you build confidence in your results, slow it down. Even shots at 1/350th have some worthwhile prop blur.

I am curious to learn from Victor and Tim, do you guys shoot in continuous or single shot mode? I feel as though I get better results concentrating on holding my aim and squeezing off one or two carefull shots, rather than "spray and pray." I tend to lose my hold on the target as the viewfinder image bounces around in continuous mode.

RG