Planeboy From India, joined May 2005, 199 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1016 times:
You are a "lucky dog" !!!! However, I must say you are very good in what you do. You captured a nice photo here. The human eye does not have ZOOM capabilities as do the cameras we all like to use. Had you captured this image from the vantage point it suggests - it would have looked different. I realize I am stating the obvious, maybe I have TOO MUCH TIME on my hands. However, one thing is certain, ZOOM is a true gift that should not be taken for granted - and you have used it well in this instance by capturing the energy of an airliner...
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (14 years 2 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 1002 times:
That's a pretty cool photo. It might have been better without the surface heat distortion, but hey, it's a different flavor, and the tire smoke looks good, and the fact that the cockpit area looks good compared to the rest of the plane.
I'm glad Johan accepted it. I would class it as an "artsey" photo.
AndyEastMids From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 1062 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (14 years 2 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 974 times:
Normally, I hate heat haze in a picture as it distracts from the image of the aircraft and makes the aircraft appear soft. However, in this case the heat haze makes the picture - it is different and rather imposing. Obviously, the photo would not have worked without the long-lens view.
Cliffie From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (14 years 2 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 959 times:
I think that makes the bottom line, Andy. I thought about uploading this candidate too, cause it shows half of the runway on the lower fuselage, including Rwy number, stripes, wing reflection and some more details (sorry Gary ), but that just makes not up for the overall (lack of?) quality.