View Full Version : US Air Force Museum Batch 2 [01/64] - WPAFM  batch 2 Index 1.jpg (0/1)
Indrek
April 25th 10, 02:46 AM
Here is the second, and last, batch.
Cheers,
Indrek Aavisto
Criticism is easy; achievement is difficult W.W.Churchill
Morgans[_2_]
April 25th 10, 08:53 PM
"Indrek" > wrote ..
>
> Here is the second, and last, batch.
I would like to make a comment about your photography, but take it in the 
light of constructive criticizm, please.
I have no idea if others feel the same way about your pictures, so this is 
my opinion alone.
I realize that this particular museum is real tough to get good 
line-of-sight, but I wonder if you could have gotten better placement to 
take the pictures.  Unless you are taking a close up to show a detail of a 
particular feature, I would like to a view that shows more of a side view, 
or at least an angle that shows the front and back plane at the same time. 
Just backing up would help, in many cases, or using a lens with a slightly 
wide angle, like a 28mm.
Also, I do not know if you are allowed to take a two foot step ladder of 
something of the sort into the museum, but getting a little higher would 
help the viewpoint, also.
Again, thanks for posting your pictures, as there are a lot of shots of cool 
planes.  Perhaps you can improve your pictures by keeping some of my 
suggestions in mind.
Thanks for the series.
-- 
Jim in NC
Giganews[_2_]
April 25th 10, 11:31 PM
"Morgans" > wrote in message 
...
>
> "Indrek" > wrote ..
>>
>> Here is the second, and last, batch.
>
> I would like to make a comment about your photography, but take it in the 
> light of constructive criticizm, please.
>
> I have no idea if others feel the same way about your pictures, so this is 
> my opinion alone.
>
> I realize that this particular museum is real tough to get good 
> line-of-sight, but I wonder if you could have gotten better placement to 
> take the pictures.  Unless you are taking a close up to show a detail of a 
> particular feature, I would like to a view that shows more of a side view, 
> or at least an angle that shows the front and back plane at the same time. 
> Just backing up would help, in many cases, or using a lens with a slightly 
> wide angle, like a 28mm.
>
> Also, I do not know if you are allowed to take a two foot step ladder of 
> something of the sort into the museum, but getting a little higher would 
> help the viewpoint, also.
>
> Again, thanks for posting your pictures, as there are a lot of shots of 
> cool planes.  Perhaps you can improve your pictures by keeping some of my 
> suggestions in mind.
>
> Thanks for the series.
> -- 
> Jim in NC
>
>
Thanks for your feedback. You make some good points.
The physical realities of the location and equipment posed certain 
difficulties.
I was using 18 mm focal length for most of the pictures, which is as short 
was my 18-55 lens will go. Even if I had owned a shorter focal length lens, 
I suspect the picture quality would have been impaired by spherical 
distortion.
As I mentioned in the preamble to the first batch, the aircraft are packed 
very close together, and it was next to impossible to get far enough away 
from the aircraft to get a full profile view. It was also very difficult to 
avoid parts of other aircraft intruding into the frame.
I did consider trying some shots taken with the camera just above the floor, 
but that would have necessitated shortening the tripod legs each time, and 
time was very short. The tour only allowed 40 minutes in the hangars so 
there was not enough time to fiddle with the tripod legs. As for using steps 
to get the camera higher, it's something that might have been possible, but 
I'm not sure how much that would have enhanced the images. Certainly it 
would have made using a tripod difficult. Given the available light, many 
shots were in the half to one second exposure time range. I think shots from 
a low angle would be much more dramatic...but that's just my opinion.
Anyway, thanks for the feedback and I will, of course, bear in mind what you 
have said the next time I have the opportunity to take some museum shots.
Cheers,
Indrek Aavisto
-- 
Criticism is easy; achievement is difficult  W.S. Churchill
Morgans[_2_]
April 26th 10, 01:48 AM
"Giganews" > wrote
> Thanks for your feedback. You make some good points.
>
> The physical realities of the location and equipment posed certain 
> difficulties.
>
> I was using 18 mm focal length for most of the pictures, which is as short 
> was my 18-55 lens will go. Even if I had owned a shorter focal length 
> lens, I suspect the picture quality would have been impaired by spherical 
> distortion.
Wow, that is already short.  Nothing more you could do there.
> As I mentioned in the preamble to the first batch, the aircraft are packed 
> very close together, and it was next to impossible to get far enough away 
> from the aircraft to get a full profile view. It was also very difficult 
> to avoid parts of other aircraft intruding into the frame.
Yes, I realized that, too.  I would rather see parts of other airframes, and 
see the full profile.  That's just me, perhaps.
> I did consider trying some shots taken with the camera just above the 
> floor, but that would have necessitated shortening the tripod legs each 
> time, and time was very short. The tour only allowed 40 minutes in the 
> hangars so there was not enough time to fiddle with the tripod legs. As 
> for using steps to get the camera higher, it's something that might have 
> been possible, but I'm not sure how much that would have enhanced the 
> images. Certainly it would have made using a tripod difficult. Given the 
> available light, many shots were in the half to one second exposure time 
> range. I think shots from a low angle would be much more dramatic...but 
> that's just my opinion.
>
> Anyway, thanks for the feedback and I will, of course, bear in mind what 
> you have said the next time I have the opportunity to take some museum 
> shots.
That long of exposures would make a high view hard, without a  super tall 
tripod.  Perhaps it would be better to go with a super fast film, and accept 
the graininess.  I dunnow.
I think above views are superior, in most cases, because that allows you to 
see the wing plan better, and the cockpit.  Who wants to see the greasy 
underside of planes, anyway? <g>
Perhaps that was the best that could be done in that place.  Too bad the 
taxpayers won't spring for some more hangars to spread out the planes some 
more.
-- 
Jim in NC
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.