10,500 feet is way the heck up there!

Actually I hike up. No cheating be me!

Mike
MU-2


"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 02:04:38 GMT, Mike Rapoport

wrote:
Well, the hill behind my house in NV is over 10,600'...

Ah, but you cheat. You have turbines and pressurization :-)

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

We normally fly at around 11,000 - 12,000 ft. because its where we get out best
speed.
This picture I took over Phoenix 2 weeks ago at 12,500 ft, we flew over the
Phoenix class B and started our decent about 20 miles out at 500 fpm on the far
side of Phoenix..
http://216.158.136.206/newplane/phoenix.jpg

There is allot less color to see on this side of the country.
We use an the Olympus E-10 digital camera for pictures.

Jeff

Jay Honeck wrote:

I've spent a fair number of hours droning along at 10,500 feet in the
MidWest. (For you mountain-flyer-types that think 10.5 K is LOW, that
altitude is a lot different here in Iowa, cuz it puts you almost two miles
above Mother Earth.) It's usually quite boring, and is something I
normally do only en route.

However, I've never actually maintained that altitude *over* an area I was
familiar with. This past weekend we were on our way back from leaf-peeping
in Wisconsin, and the visibility was just stunning -- crystal clear, azure
blue skies, with no humidity and temperatures in the upper 60s -- so it
seemed like a perfect time to get some aerial photos of Iowa City.

(I've been trying for some time to get a picture for our website that had
enough scale to show the whole area, and our position in it -- but have just
never had the right opportunity.)

A few things I discovered:

1. Two miles up is actually TOO high for good photography with a standard
Canon Elph digital camera. The pictures I found to be best were taken
around 8,000 feet as we slowly spiraled down to land.

2. The kids thought it was great! With hundreds of hours in the air over
the last nine years, my kids are old pros that only rarely look out the
windows anymore. At 10.5K over familiar territory, however, they were like
newbie passengers again, squealing and pointing. We were all amazed at what
we could see.

3. Spiraling down from 2 miles over the airport takes a LONG time! I tried
to maintain a nice, easy 300 - 400 fpm descent, which meant circling the
airport for twenty minutes in order to land!

4. It was fun watching the landing pattern from a "God's Eye" point of
view.

It's not something you would normally think of doing, but if you get a
chance viewing your home turf from WAY up high is kinda fun!

(And you can take a peek at the picture I selected for our opening webpage
at www.AlexisParkInn.com. It's really shows our position relative to the
airport and other important local attractions. For our potential guests,
this picture really is worth a thousand words...)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

This picture I took over Phoenix 2 weeks ago at 12,500 ft, we flew over
the
Phoenix class B and started our decent about 20 miles out at 500 fpm on
the far
side of Phoenix..
http://216.158.136.206/newplane/phoenix.jpg

There is allot less color to see on this side of the country.
We use an the Olympus E-10 digital camera for pictures.

One thing I've found makes a HUGE difference with digital photography is to
NOT get the wing in the picture. My digital autofocus usually locks onto the
wing, and makes everything else in the background (which is what you're
aiming at!) look fuzzy.

Also, Photoshop does a much better job of adjusting color, brightness and
contrast if you don't have a big, white wing in the picture.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:m4cjb.784881$uu5.136505@sccrnsc04...
One thing I've found makes a HUGE difference with digital photography is
to
NOT get the wing in the picture.

Actually, that's not a "digital photography" thing. There are a number of
digital cameras that won't have that problem, and a number of film cameras
that will. It all depends on how the autofocus works, and how you use the
camera.

Pete

Peter Duniho ) wrote:

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:m4cjb.784881$uu5.136505@sccrnsc04...
One thing I've found makes a HUGE difference with digital photography is
to
NOT get the wing in the picture.

Actually, that's not a "digital photography" thing. There are a number of
digital cameras that won't have that problem, and a number of film cameras
that will. It all depends on how the autofocus works, and how you use the
camera.

My digital camera, an Olympus, has an infinity focus setting that overrides
the autofocus.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Olympus makes some nice cameras.
The new E-20 I think it is, is suppose to be super crisp. We payed $1800 for the E-10
and it does everything we need so we didn't upgrade to the E-20. The E-10 has more
functions then we actually use.

"Peter R." wrote:

Peter Duniho ) wrote:

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:m4cjb.784881$uu5.136505@sccrnsc04...
One thing I've found makes a HUGE difference with digital photography is
to
NOT get the wing in the picture.

Actually, that's not a "digital photography" thing. There are a number of
digital cameras that won't have that problem, and a number of film cameras
that will. It all depends on how the autofocus works, and how you use the
camera.

My digital camera, an Olympus, has an infinity focus setting that overrides
the autofocus.

--
Peter

----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Not with my camera, the Olympus E-10 has a aiming dot, the focus is where the
dot is. My aiming point was actually downtown Phoenix but its so small your
can't see it in the picture.
Its actually just pretty hazy there from higher altitudes, SoCal is the same
way.

This picture I took over Oklahoma, I was at 8500 ft I think, it has the wing in
it but the colors are good. I could touch it up with photo shop but it would
take the natural look from it.
http://216.158.136.80/newplane/trip/image5.html

I actually prefer flying over the midwest area, flying was great, there are
actually things to see, not like the desert, where it all starts to look the
same.



Jay Honeck wrote:

This picture I took over Phoenix 2 weeks ago at 12,500 ft, we flew over
the
Phoenix class B and started our decent about 20 miles out at 500 fpm on
the far
side of Phoenix..
http://216.158.136.206/newplane/phoenix.jpg

There is allot less color to see on this side of the country.
We use an the Olympus E-10 digital camera for pictures.

One thing I've found makes a HUGE difference with digital photography is to
NOT get the wing in the picture. My digital autofocus usually locks onto the
wing, and makes everything else in the background (which is what you're
aiming at!) look fuzzy.

Also, Photoshop does a much better job of adjusting color, brightness and
contrast if you don't have a big, white wing in the picture.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

We may have to have a photo contest amoungst every one
who ever submits the best photo wins a free night at your place

(hey its good advertising for you


Jeff

Jay Honeck wrote:

This picture I took over Phoenix 2 weeks ago at 12,500 ft, we flew over
the
Phoenix class B and started our decent about 20 miles out at 500 fpm on
the far
side of Phoenix..
http://216.158.136.206/newplane/phoenix.jpg

There is allot less color to see on this side of the country.
We use an the Olympus E-10 digital camera for pictures.

One thing I've found makes a HUGE difference with digital photography is to
NOT get the wing in the picture. My digital autofocus usually locks onto the
wing, and makes everything else in the background (which is what you're
aiming at!) look fuzzy.

Also, Photoshop does a much better job of adjusting color, brightness and
contrast if you don't have a big, white wing in the picture.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jeff ) wrote:

We may have to have a photo contest amoungst every one
who ever submits the best photo wins a free night at your place

Sounds good, but I vote that Rosspilot is automatically disqualified from
this contest.

--
Peter












----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

I had to go to his site to see what he does, I agree with you after reading this
"OUR QUALITY
Rosspilot uses medium format cameras with a gyro-stabilizer to produce the industry's
highest quality images. Digital files, computer artwork, and other imaging services
are available."





"Peter R." wrote:

Jeff ) wrote:

We may have to have a photo contest amoungst every one
who ever submits the best photo wins a free night at your place

Sounds good, but I vote that Rosspilot is automatically disqualified from
this contest.

--
Peter

----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =---