|
Post by greaneyr on Sept 24, 2006 10:25:06 GMT 12
Hey all I've been into amateur aviation photography for a couple of years now. Uploaded to all the usual spots (jetphotos.net, airliners.net) and would really like to start producing something a little different to add to my portfolio. To date, all my photo opportunities have been taken from within the 'cheap seats' (the term i give to places, usually behind security fences, but invariably where any member of the general public is able to go). I've been to open days and airshows, but you've either got to work from behind the barrier, or try and get creative with static displays where there are hoards of people in the background ruining the shot. The problem I'm having is that I don't know anyone who can help me get closer to anything. Even in places like airliners.net, there are a lot of photos of close-ups that could only ever have been taken by someone with physical access to an airfield. From behind security fences, it becomes a case of only ever taking boring 'documentary' shots because that's the only option you have with a long lens. There seem to be a lot of people on here who do air to air photography so I figured this might be a good place to start. Does anyone have any suggestions? Here are my shots at airliners.net: www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?distict_entry=true&photographersearch=Richard%20GreaneyCheers RIchard
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Sept 24, 2006 12:51:04 GMT 12
I sympathise with your need to get closer. However, I have rarely had access to privileged places at airports to take my shots. Your pix on airliners.net look good I use a 20D Canon which magnifies the lens by a factor of 1.6. So a 100 mm lens turns into about a 160mm. I use a 70-200 mm f 2.8 L Image-stabilised lens, sometimes with a 1.4 extender and this is is equivalent to a focal lenth of 450mm. I also use a "Prime" 300 mm f4 LIS. While I own all this lovely kit, I live on bread and water, so there is a price to pay. I agonise over shooting an aircraft so that the whole machine is in the frame or zoom into a portion of it. You can see the two styles with Glenn Alderton's and my pix taken at Temora recently. Glenn had access to the western side of the field and this helped him to be in a position to capture his excellent shots of the aircraft. But then so did I have special access on the Friday to shoot the Spitfire pairs. Sometimes you can get lucky and both cases reflect the kindness of the Temora Aviation Museum staff in allowing us and several other photographers to be driven to the better positions. At Wanaka 2006, the majority of my shots were taken from the press stand which was adjacent to the Gold Pass stand and was actually much lower in height. Other shots were taken from the southern approach in the public area. The well-known British photographer, Peter Arnold, whose work is published in Flypast, etc, was there. His shots were taken with a standard DSLR and lens of consumer quality. And he gets paid a lot for his excellent work. I had no trouble filling the frame with F-111 and the big aircraft with the 70-200 lens and used the 300 for the smaller aircraft. All these were taken from the spectator fence or the stand. At Avalon in 2005, although I had press cerdentials, I was not able to stand any closer to the runway than members of the general public. My shots of the RAAF "Wedgetail" and the combat aircraft were pleasingly close. Have a look at my gallery: www.planeimages.smugmug.com to view the images I have shot at these places. So to sum up: Make sure you have at least a 200 mm lens, 300 is better and a zoom or prime which extends to 400 mm. A DSLR can be beneficial as it allows you to experiment without additional cost unles you wish to have prints made. It also extends your lenses. If the budget will stand it buy Canon "L" series or Nikon kit. I have also seen excellent results from Sigma lenses and these are much cheaper. The oft quoted rules of photography are: Get in close, move closer, go in closer still. And Take photos, take photos, take photos coupled with "Look at photos, etc." I went to Wanak in 1998 and used a Canon EOS 50e with a 28-200 standard Canon lens. The difference in the images taken then compared with those I shot this year are light years apart. This is partly due to technology upgrades and partly due to my having focused my interests on photography in general and aviation in particular over the past three years. I have been involved in two camera clubs since 2003 and the competition and critiques have been of immense value. A professional course in Sydney of three evenings and an afternoon also changed the way I approached the task. The US websites www.fredmiranda.com and www.luminouslandscape.com are excellent starters. Paul Bowen, Charles H.Stites and Mike Fizer' seb sites have been very helpful for aviation photography tips, too. Remember to use a fairly wide aperture when shooting closeups of statics. You can obtain some nice results by shooting at f 2.8 or f4. This tends to blur objects in the background and makes the main subject stand out. Shoot with with AV or TV. Don't let the camera make a decision without helping it comprehend what you are trying to achieve. I can see that you know about keeping the shutter speed fairly low to keep prop blur. I hope this helps. Please feel free to contact me by a post or direct email.
|
|
|
Post by Bruce on Sept 24, 2006 18:18:13 GMT 12
As a suggestion, keep your eye out for "low key" fly - in events (such as the Tiger club annual weekends or even the Black Sands Fly In at Raglan (Have to put a plug for it in here...) where there arent the crowd barriers and razor wire fences, and you can get close to the aircraft and the runway (being sensible of course). There are also less people to get in the way of shots on the ground. Mornings and evenings are good because there are less people again, and the light can give some stunning results. Chances are you wont see an A340 at these sort of events, but sometimes some very rare machines turn up that dont come to bigger airshows etc. Besides, everyone has pictures from the big shows - its good to get something different! as an example, (although not stunning) see this photo below taken at Tokoroa at an SAA fly in in 2005. I was standing in a ditch (dry) beside the runway to get this picture of Steve Chilcott taking off in his Jodel D18, taking his son for a ride. The camera is a fairly Basic olympus E20, no fancy lenses or anything like that - it looks close because it is!
|
|
|
Post by greaneyr on Sept 25, 2006 13:12:19 GMT 12
Thanks for that info guys, you've all been really helpful. Peter: Your work is stunning. It really captures some great 'action' in a whole new way I haven't seen before. Particularly with the WOW shots, I'd have to say that the value of the images together as a whole is greater than the sum of the individual parts. You've really shown that in a lot of cases, it's not about being super close either. I use a 100-300mm Canon EF lens which is equivalent to 480mm on 35mm. It's never enough, but then nothing ever is! My gripe was not so much with distance but more with the fact that there's only so many shots you can get from the places where you can shoot a good close-up using that lens. After looking at yours, it seems I'm back to the drawing board Bruce: You are dead right about the smaller events being lower key. I really need to get to some more of them since my GA work needs a bit of brushing up on. xr6turbo1: (sorry, your name escapes me!) I've just been reading a book on taking 'saleable' images and one thing I have learnt from that is that you can be the world's best photographer but if you don't market your work, you won't be successful commercially. I think that's a similar concept to what you're talking about, except using contacts rather than marketing. I have 'reasonable' gear, albeit a slightly limited range of lenses at present. I've tried to avoid falling into the "i'd be able to do this if only I had better gear" trap, because it's a never-ending cycle. Ultimately, I'd like for my work to at least partly pay for itself in terms of equipment anyway. Thanks again everyone.
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Sept 25, 2006 15:39:01 GMT 12
Hi Richard, Thank you for your kind response and acceptance of the input by several members. Funny thing about buying good gear is that you tend to go out and use it! Also the quality of the images taken with top-drawer lenses does make a difference. The 1.4 and (to some extent the Canon 2 x) and I imagine Nikon, extenders are very high quality..much more so that consumer grade items. Here is your master plan: Buy a Canon 100-400 f4 LIS and a 1.4 EX II. The 1.4 is compatible with the Canon lens but I am not sure if it will accept the Sigma. Failing this I find the Canon 70-200 LIS is a beautiful lens and, coupled with the 2 x ex, can get you as close as a 400 mm. There are some comparisons on the net on this subject. The problem with using the 2 x extender is that you loose some of the auto focus facilities and the sharpness is not as good. The alternative is the Sigma 100-400 but you would need to research its capabilities, particulalry with image stabilisation. Do whatever you need to do to obtain a lens of this category. I believe Glenn uses a 400 mm Canon L or Nikon equivalent lens. Obviously, it works for him very well. These two were shot within seconds of each other in January 2003 with a Canon EOS 50e and a 17-40 mm f4 L lens I seem to recall although I might have fitted the 70-200 f4 L I had at the time. Either way both images show the underside of the B.747up pretty close. I stood on the pedestrian footpath on the northern side of the road which links the International and Domestic Terminals at KSA. As public a place as you would find at any major airport. I would think that Christchurch, Wellington and Auckland would have similar areas suitable for viewing. RPT aircraft are excellent for practice as they arrive at regular intervals. The Air Fiji B. 747 (ex Ansett) nearly blew me away with the noise and wind but, as Marverick said, " I took the shot, there was no danger." This was one of the first submissions I made to my camera club and it won a top award. The image quality is not up to the standard of pure digitals as it is a scan of a pair of photo prints. It also shows the difference between negative film/prints and digital processing using effectively the same lens quality. I look forward to seeing your efforts.
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Sept 25, 2006 16:02:29 GMT 12
While my button is pushed here are two more from early 2003. These were taken with the 50e using a 300mm f4 LIS from an 18' boat on Rose Bay where the Sunderlands used to operate. Yes, I know the props are stopped but my excuse is that I had to use a high shutter speed to cope with the movement of the boat. I was also naive about the need to shoot at under 1/250th or 1/320th at a pinch to keep some prop blur. The pix are another illustration that shows you can shoot aeroplanes anywhere, you just need to be in the right place at the right time with a camera and to use it!
|
|
|
Post by greaneyr on Sept 25, 2006 18:03:06 GMT 12
The pix are another illustration that shows you can shoot aeroplanes anywhere, you just need to be in the right place at the right time with a camera and to use it! Yup, and you've captured the essence of my original post in that line right there. My passion is helicopter photography. I always like to capture 'aircraft at work' and helicopters, by their very nature, don't do much of their "work" anywhere near airports or heliports. My quest is to develop a network of contacts so I can get some info into when they are operating in accesible locations. I'm in Palmerston North and on one occasion had a formation of 5 Hueys literally fly right over my house at 500ft. This just goes to show you don't need to get to an airport to get a helicopter shot, although your chances are greatly increased obviously!
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Sept 25, 2006 18:51:28 GMT 12
I'm sure if you offer member "phil" a case or two of beer, he'd be able to let you know if the Iroqouis are going to be buzzing around your part of the world. Contact your local Ag operator because they might be willing to let you know where their aircraft might be operating too; ag aircraft in action would make for some interesting shots.
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Sept 25, 2006 20:34:05 GMT 12
Good advice from Corsair67. Chase those helios. This is an example of a pic shot from a public place. The road past Temora's 34 runway allows easy, safe positioning and this is an example of the sort of shot you can take. The original RAW file has been cropped by 50%. Shot with 200 mm lens. Matt Denning's CAC Boomerang which he spent over 27 years restoring from a rusty frame. he learned all the skills to remake the aircraft, then learned to fly, gained formation endorsements and then sold the Boomerang to TAM. He still fiels it for the museum.
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Sept 26, 2006 9:36:37 GMT 12
Me too, please. Got to recover the cost of all this gear (she says).
|
|
|
Post by amitch on Sept 26, 2006 11:05:24 GMT 12
Me too, please. Got to recover the cost of all this gear (she says). What about the cost of insurance (both gear & liability) & ACC?
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Sept 26, 2006 11:31:06 GMT 12
For me this part is fortunately covered by my overall policies. Insurance issues sure are a concern though. Some Australian air show organisers require a PL policy and this cover costs about $A600.00 pa.
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Sept 26, 2006 12:53:04 GMT 12
Insurance? I thought all you had to have was a nice high-visability vest and a hat to keep the sun off, and then you're fully covered. ;D Public Liability has got ridiculous nowadays: too many freeloaders around looking for easy money - "Oh, I've tripped over your tripod - give me $1 million and we'll call it quits."
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Sept 26, 2006 14:47:10 GMT 12
That's about it. Actually the policies should be about the photographer being injured and protecting the organiser from claims. Especially if he is silly enough to stand on the approach end of the runway!
|
|
|
Post by greaneyr on Sept 26, 2006 15:05:21 GMT 12
It's called "Photos that sell. The art of successful freelance photography" by Lee Frost. It's written in 2001 so still talks a lot about transparencies, negatives and prints. It doesn't really have a huge relevance for the aviation-only photographer, but does introduce some impotant concepts about marketing and how to choose photos that are likely to 'sell' rather than photos that just look amazing but have little re-saleable value other than as wall art.
It also deals with work from the UK, so things could be a little different than they are here. Still, if you were successful selling images to picture libraries online NZers would come out a lot better off due to the exchange rate.
|
|
|
Post by greaneyr on Sept 26, 2006 15:09:49 GMT 12
I'm sure if you offer member "phil" a case or two of beer, he'd be able to let you know if the Iroqouis are going to be buzzing around your part of the world. Sounds like a plan at some stage! For the record, there are also alcoholic rewards available for anyone who can assist me in meeting a pro-photographic contact at PM Helipro or Wanganui Aero Work, and one for someone who can get me into OH during non-airshow times for some Huey shots!
|
|
|
Post by planeimages on Sept 26, 2006 18:38:42 GMT 12
A neat trick with DSLRS and Photoshop is that you can convert a colour image into b&w if required, One of the RNZAF's Boeing 757s at Wanaka in the process of retracting the undercarriage.
|
|
|
Post by xr6turbo1 on Sept 26, 2006 21:07:37 GMT 12
Me too, please. Got to recover the cost of all this gear (she says). What about the cost of insurance (both gear & liability) & ACC? Interesting question. Its an area I havent thought about that much. My gear is insured and as I am a licenced pilot I do have cover written into my personal insurance agreement but I am not to sure what policies apply to the company that let you fly with them? I guess the day will come when flying in Ag aircraft will be stopped all together which will be a shame. I intend to make the most of it when invited along. Have a few more trips lined up with other guys as well so I will question them a bit on the subject of liability etc.
|
|
musice
Warrant Officer
harms way - only way to go!
Posts: 41
|
Post by musice on Sept 28, 2006 3:45:05 GMT 12
back to the taking of pics....... and the why wont someone pay me to do it......... a couple of replies have touched on it......... ask people - get contacts....... etc..... but even then sometimes the elusive $$'s still don't seem to come.................. I hope by now everyone here has seen my bio.............. (introduce yourself) what still amuses me is the fact that most of us still hide behind 'aliases' - even me ......... but I do try and let as many people know as possible my 'real name' I suppose having saisd that - you should all know how the 'musice' name came about........ first you have to look at the web site www.musice.co.nz then go to page three....... up on the left you'll see a logo for the 'disco' I tried to start about three years ago.......... 'Capital Music Experience' MusicE was born............... and the web site domain name purchased......... the disco 'flopped' - not one phone call......... but I still had the web site..... A couple of years ago I bought a digital camera.......... Canon 300D - started taking pics again.... hence the 'Bob Leask Photography' and WHY it uses the 'musice' alias........ having in earler times been involved with cameras and photographics - the transition to digital was not really that hard.......... getting recognition......... now thats a whole new ball game.................... I always maintain that it's the mug behind the camera that takes the 'good' pictures....... not the $$$$$ spent on the gear.............. and if you look at the pics on links you'll notice there are some good - bad and downright awful pics - all taking up a spot in the line-up........................ ............... a heart attack three years ago left me on a 'do nothing regime' - hell taking pictures is just that............. you dont have to 'do' anything - just be there.... and look what I've achieved in three years..... 'doing nothing' ;-) Why take pictures of aircraft........... evryone asks......... well there are many reasons......... my main one at present is.... they dont answer back....... they do as they're asked....... and you dont get into too much trouble doing it.......... I wrote this about a years ago.......... it explains 'planespotting' dont suppose I've ever really described my motives for picture taking............. but here goes. ....... if it moves - shoot it ........if it cant talk back and get you in trouble - shoot it if it tells a story.......... shoot it if you can make it tell a story - shoot it if it wont move and is almost in the right light - shoot it............... (including ships slightly backlit) if it wont move and you can - get the light right - then shoot it if your not there - too bad........... if you are there - make the best of what you've got................. even if your totally pissed off with the lack of flying ability of the pilots.......... especially true at Masterton this year.......... no-one (bar one who did all his stunts into the sun) put themselves into any more than 2g manoeuvres....... great if your me and cant take it but if your in the plane 'we' expect a display - not a 'fly-round' still it was windy........... and that might have been an excuse.......... but I always thought you can make the velocity work for you........... and I've never flown........... but doing stunts and fly-bys forcing 'into the sun' photos means they didn't have 'spotters' in mind at all.................. and that lack of foresight pissed me off... my favourite comment.. from a 737 pilot................ when asked if he ever worried about things going wrong when he moved the throttles to 'full' so rapidly when taking off..................................... “nah they're built like British shit houses and can take it - and we move them even faster when the wheels hit the ground for rev thrust” so now you know that all pilots try to make any aircraft 'self destruct' in either t/o or landings (and fortunately - not tooo many succeed...:-) other motives - interest in cameras - cameras have lenses - satellites have cameras - cameras take pictures - I like looking at pictures............... mine and everyone else :-) the main thing to do is - keep taking the pictures ........... no matter what......... get a web site or something that will let others enjoy your work as much as you do.......... and leave a lasting 'memory' for future enjoyment........ what you take today will be historic in no time at all..................... ;-) the most important thing is 'lighting' if the lights right - the pictures will have had that much more going for them................. regardless of what 'gear' you have.......... good gear does help - but like I said earlier....... it's the mug behind the camera that 'makes' the picture.......... for planes........ use and learn panning' skills......... without them your lost................ dont care if the props dont blur........ some pics look better with 'still' props............. if you 'must' blur the props you'll have to learn the panning technique - or use a - heaven forbid - tripod - this depends on whether you want to take a specific planned shot - like getting a 'full rotation prop shot' - or 'need to take a quickie' for jets........ keep an AV of 7.1 - camera decides shutter speed..... for props use Tv 125-250 and get the panning right and dont forget to set - .33 exposure to allow for harsh sunlight.............. Bob
|
|
|
Post by corsair67 on Oct 3, 2006 18:56:16 GMT 12
Some great advice there, Bob.
Cheers.
|
|