Any photographers in here?

Do you work at the SC airport?

No actually... I just kinda go there with my buddy all the time and pretend I own the place. They really don't say anything as long as I ask permission to go out on the ramp and take the pictures. As soon as I tell them I have my pilot license, they just open the door and say: "Have fun!"

It also helps that I don't exactly fit the terrorist profile...

I fly only Oceanic Airlines. ;)

hahahaha... I feel bad for them, they get such negative publicity for their numerous incidences. On the other hand, their in-flight entertainment system is second to none!
 
Hey Jeff, any luck getting permission to bring the protege on the APL lot to take pictures? I tried my sources, no luck :(
 
I hate you guys with nice weather. Here's one of my brother. I was fooling around with my own PP technique.

2231450203_d288eb0901_b.jpg
 
Here are a few sequence shots that i tried to shoot about a month ago...These were hard to put together but i'm pretty pleased with the outcome.

anyone else ever tried a shot like this?

Sequence1.jpg


Sequence2.jpg


Sequence3.jpg
 
I like the angle of your last one the best. The other ones had too much sequence. There was no real "gap" between the moving object. Now all you have to do is some color correction and some PP then crop it. You're good to go.
 
nice work with the camera. How good is your buddy at doing a ptex weld on his base after running over that rock all those times? (eek2)
 
Funky: Ya I just basically stitched them all together and I do still have a little work to do.

dred: Actually it’s pretty clean...I hit it a few times also and there are no rocks around just the small cliff.

Tekkie: I did a few on burst mode on a tripod but I thought that a panned shot would be more interesting. I took all of these on burst mode.

I kind of like how it shows the edges of all the photos rather than cropping it so it’s a perfect rectangle. I was just interested to see if I could fit them together. Still have a little work to do on them but thanks for the thoughts on them.
 
Funky: Ya I just basically stitched them all together and I do still have a little work to do.

dred: Actually its pretty clean...I hit it a few times also and there are no rocks around just the small cliff.

Tekkie: I did a few on burst mode on a tripod but I thought that a panned shot would be more interesting. I took all of these on burst mode.

I kind of like how it shows the edges of all the photos rather than cropping it so its a perfect rectangle. I was just interested to see if I could fit them together. Still have a little work to do on them but thanks for the thoughts on them.


If you do a pan shot..slow your shutter speed down so you get a blurry background with the subject clearly imposed. Try it. I think you might like the effect. haha
 
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/beavizzle/2237832663/" title="DSC_4353 c_filtered by beavizzle, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2400/2237832663_09f935c969.jpg" width="318" height="500" alt="DSC_4353 c_filtered" /></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/beavizzle/2237838749/" title="DSC_4406 c_filtered by beavizzle, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2402/2237838749_1d5577fb05.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="DSC_4406 c_filtered" /></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/beavizzle/2237831365/" title="DSC_4330 c_filtered by beavizzle, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2292/2237831365_3d32a721f7.jpg" width="333" height="500" alt="DSC_4330 c_filtered" /></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/beavizzle/2238621128/" title="DSC_4320 c_filtered by beavizzle, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2235/2238621128_0e6d103efe.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="DSC_4320 c_filtered" /></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/beavizzle/2237829627/" title="DSC_4317 c_filtered by beavizzle, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2407/2237829627_b8467be4c1.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="DSC_4317 c_filtered" /></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/beavizzle/2238620464/" title="DSC_4314 c_filtered by beavizzle, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2219/2238620464_7d2aed2bac.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="DSC_4314 c_filtered" /></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/beavizzle/2237828249/" title="DSC_4297 c_filtered by beavizzle, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2142/2237828249_abf81d1788.jpg" width="378" height="500" alt="DSC_4297 c_filtered" /></a>

Here is a link to the rest of the album:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/beavizzle/sets/72157603845040655/

Any input is appreciated, although I can see my photos improved from the first time I went last month.
 
Tekkie: I did a few on burst mode on a tripod but I thought that a panned shot would be more interesting. I took all of these on burst mode.

It was a nice experiment but I don't think the uneven edge ads any interest at all. In fact it makes it look rather unfinished. If you don't need the resolution of a panning image then I would put the camera on the tripod. If you were more zoomed-in then it might make a different but since you're not...

If you do a pan shot..slow your shutter speed down so you get a blurry background with the subject clearly imposed. Try it. I think you might like the effect. haha

This is a good idea but it won't work as you intend. Since the subject is a spinning flailing person instead of a car you'll get blurry body parts instead of a clean image of a person.
 
Well this isn't near the quality of everyone else's pics, but I need some help.
Why is this image so grainy? It was on a tri-pod as well.

100_2122.jpg


I'm shooting with a 7.1 megapix Kodak P712. Shutter speed was 1/8, F stop 3.2 ISO is 320
 
Well this isn't near the quality of everyone else's pics, but I need some help.
Why is this image so grainy? It was on a tri-pod as well.

I'm shooting with a 7.1 megapix Kodak P712. Shutter speed was 1/8, F stop 3.2 ISO is 320



Higher ISO's will start to produce noisier pictures especially in low light conditions, since you were 1/8 at F/3.2, it must have been fairly dark. I don't know anything about that particular camera but better cameras have better noise handling at higher ISO levels. Since you were already at F/3.2, you'd either need to use some flash or a better lit area, you wouldn't want to go much slower than 1/8.
 
I figured it was the ISO, but 320 isn't very high correct? I guess I just need to play more. Thanks for the quick response.
 
well 320's not that high but that image isn't that noisy, as compared to what it would have looked like at maybe 800. However, that picture is pretty dark, and noise is more of a problem at lower levels. You can try zooming the lens out to open the aperture up a little more, taking the picture in a brighter spot, or turning the flash on (bounce it if you can). Also it looks like your subject is out of focus, but I suspect this is due to subject movement. 1/8 s is pretty long, you might actually get better results at ISO 400 with a faster shutter. A properly exposed image at a higher ISO will look much better than an underexposed image at lower ISO.
 
If I remember correctly, I didn't use any flash. The more look at the pic, it looks like the camera focused more on the couch behind the subject then on the baby. Thanks again for the info.
 

New Threads and Articles

Back