Linco22 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1380 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (9 years 15 hours ago) and read 1202 times:
What gets me thinking is all that equipment, all that manufacturing time, all the testing, and most of all the price of a 773. I can never get my head round the cost of such things. When airlines advertise low fares I always think to myself, how do they actually make money? With all the other fees involved in running an airline.
P.S. Kudos to Royal, great insite to the building of the 773
JumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2465 posts, RR: 42
Reply 4, posted (9 years 10 hours ago) and read 1099 times:
Quoting Linco22 (Reply 1): When airlines advertise low fares I always think to myself, how do they actually make money? With all the other fees involved in running an airline.
One way they claim equipment back on tax.
They must be doing something right to stay in business.
Edit to congratulate Royal on a stunning shot well done mate.
A little off topic, but the day will come when phone take very high quality shots. Imagine the can of worms that will open up?
Okay.... I'll put my hand up for being naughty.
I bent over in the Sistine Chapel in Rome, tied my shoelace whilst my 10D was facing towards the ceiling on timer. Got a neat shot, but I doubt the Pope would have been happy.
In the future, we'll be sneaking mobile phone cameras into all sorts of forbidden areas.
Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
Do not bring your confessions to the Forum and expect absolution, you should go to a Confessional and have to do a penance my son.
(This is not meant to upset Catholics)
Temptation is a Sin but anyone who has been to the Sistine Chapel can understand your temptation. (I managed more than one photo every time I went)
Go away and press the accept button ten times on marginal shots (preferrably mine)
Quoting Glennstewart (Reply 8): A little off topic, but the day will come when phone take very high quality shots. Imagine the can of worms that will open up?
Seriously though, what harm does it do, a few personal photos in an amazing place like the Sistine Chapel?
It is money talking again, reduced postcard sales etc and I bet if it was a for commercial purposes you could take them for a fee. Here, I am not being cynical about the Church, merely using Glenn's example. The situation with Royal's shot is more extreme in that it has been published, but my shots of the Sistine Chapel are only seen by friends and family. Nowhere will be safe from photos one day.
Walter2222 From Belgium, joined Sep 2005, 1306 posts, RR: 27
Reply 10, posted (9 years 2 hours ago) and read 1014 times:
When I looked at this picture of the aircraft under construction, it reminded me of a picture that I took of an engine (F-16) in a test-bench (during a Base-visit). Would this be an acceptable "motive" for A.net?
StealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5814 posts, RR: 42
Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 hour ago) and read 1010 times:
I guess this is OT but Glenn & Mick started it...
When was photography banned in the Sistine Chapel? I was there in '89 and was OK but that was before the restoration was finished.
The camera I had then would sit perfectly flat on it's back so I have many W/angle shots of ceilings etc.. put timer on lay it on the floor and stand back.. trick was keeping others away but it is easy to convince them you are a crazy Australian and they had better keep their distance.
Back on topic.. Great shot Royal, glad you got to share it with us.
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!