 | This is the forum to share your recent aviation photos with the rest of the community, being photos not older than six months at the moment of topic opening. Theme-based topics, not about recent events, should go into the sub-forum. Although we will not screen beforehand, we reserve the right to delete any images, especially if clearly unsharp or otherwise low in quality. For more information on how to upload you images, check this post. In topic titles, please use airfield names in stead of just codes, and be clear about what kind of photos your viewers can expect (e.g. CIV/MIL, location etc.). Finally, bring any photo criticism understandable and to the point, not cynical or offensive! Simultaneously, do not feel offended by criticism per se, but simply explain your motives, taste et cetera, or ignore if you wish so. |
, but boy did my legs ache when we finally got off the Skyvan after more that three hours, almost ready to 
!
, like the pic by Tom. So...Piet Luijken wrote:Not the best serie I have seen recently.
Some pictures are perfect, but some other could use some adjustments.
However, in my opinion, the back of the Skyvan is too small and too low to fully explore all the possibilities of air-to-air photography, leading to this surplus of 'boring head-on shots' ( not my words ).
Try to look more outside the box
Enlighten us Piet: What photo-ship would be better than the Skyvan? Without plexi-glass to shoot through, slow enough to shoot helicopters and bi-planes, fast enough to keep-up with jets, able to shoot subjects at any angle (head-on, top-side, belly, 90° side-shots - all angles and subjects have been posted, so you know it can be done)?
So we are going to criticize instead of share and enjoy. Well, that's going to be fun 
! .
?
Absolutely agree on that one! All photoships have pro's and con's ; I have flown the jetstuff as well ( will make some posts later ) but their is the limitation speed as well, as they can not go slow enough for some of the anglesAlfakilo 03 wrote:Dear Eric, Piet and all others,
Coming to aid of the private airline of the Aviation Photo Crew; when you are "only" able to use an air-to-air platform as the Skyvan, An-26, C-130, KC-135 etc, one is very limited in what you can do. Not only the "boring" head-on shots pose a problem but also you depend very much to what the pilots are wiling/daring to do for you. When you are able to change photo ships from cargo to fighters or trainers and back is the best solution, however, both have their limitations. Photographing through plexiglass has its problems but it comes with no limitations with regard to airspeed and capabilities but limits to you to what photo equipment you can use. I have flown the ramp on a large variety of occasions and I have to note that personally I did become bored as well and thinking out of the box while on the ramp is difficult e.g., noise, no communication etc.. Air-to-air photography looks very easy form the pictures but is actually quite difficult to organize and to do. In either both ways, one has to take risks with regard to shutter speeds and aperture settings.
For Mickey; as noted in one of Eric's other posts, it is as shame that one can not criticize the work of others. When you post on this media, expect to receive comments: positive and negative! That is also what sharing is about. If you can only endure slimy comments, don't use this site!!
Good luck to all,
CJ
/chinasouth.gif)
As a member you get access to all our
premium content and benefits learn more
