I hope you guys would have interest in this, because it is fun to shoot these aircraft! Just have patience when shooting these planes, because one will show up in front of your lens that will blow you away by...oohs and ahhhs.
Blackened From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2778 times:
I wish there were more pictures of bizjets here. They're cool planes and I usually take a picture of any bj I see. An airport like Centennial must be great for watching them. I'm at Basel sometimes and they're a welcome addition to the lots of Crossair regional props.
AndyEastMids From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 998 posts, RR: 2 Reply 2, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2773 times:
Biz-jets are OK, but some of them are a bit bland and boring as far as colours are concerned. It'd be nice if they had the name or logo of the company that owned them on the side - like the KFC Challenger which has their logo on the tail (can't miss who owns that one!).
Be careful if you are tempted to photograph Biz Jets in Las Vegas in particular - I believe that there is a city ordanance prohibiting it, because the owners get upset when their aircraft are seen on corporate junkets to the gaming city!
Lindy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2763 times:
I'm taking pictures of every Biz Jet I see.
After the pics are developed I like to search who is owner, how old is this plane etc. I have over 300-350 pictures of Biz Jets but I'm not uploading them anymore on Airliners.net.
I've uploaded 4 pictures of Gambia New Millennium Air IL-62 over 2 weeks ago when that picture was very hot and I'm still waiting for confirmation.
Tomh From United States of America, joined May 1999, 960 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2739 times:
I shoot all types of aircraft, including corporate jets, turboprops and piston types.
Proper etiquette, in my view, is to not publish the identity of the aircraft owner with the photo. There is often a need for anonymity. This can be for security reasons, business reasons, or for reasons unknown to us. Photographers should respect this desire for privacy.
If, on the other hand, the corporate identity is visible in the titles on the aircraft, or in graphics applied to the aircraft, there is no need to refrain from identifying the operator.
We should also understand that leasing is very common. Even if the corporate identity is clearly shown, it does not mean that company XYZ actually owns that particular aircraft.
In this way, we will not run afoul of the owner's need for anonymity.
That's how I see this issue, which is important to anyone out there who cares to shoot corporate aircraft.
Lindy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2737 times:
I totaly disagree with you Tomh. As long as I can see reg. numbers I can mention owner while uploading pictures. Do they run drugs that the aircraft should be misterious?
I think its very nice to see Gulfstream IV that belongs to Taco Bell Chains. Or Gulfstream V which is for private use of IBM CEO.
Its nothing wrong with that. Thats not military equipment, and it wont harm anyone if they see picture of Cessna Citation with owner name remark.
AndyEastMids From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 998 posts, RR: 2 Reply 8, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2736 times:
Sorry Rafal but I agree with TomH.
To blatantly publish details of the owners of these aircraft runs the risk of more restrictions being placed on photography of them. I know that that the details are publicly available, including on the web, but do the majority of the public know the details are available? I suspect not! And how many people care who own an anonymous bizjet, except their owners?
The word on the street is that it was corporate pressure that got the city ordanance passed in Las Vegas to make photography round the exec FBO illegal - lets not let that happen elsewhere.