Gabriel3630 From Brazil, joined Jul 2008, 43 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1639 times:
Hello,
I'd like your opinion about these photos.
I have tried to improve my abilities shooting and editing, since my camera is low (Sony H-50).
Bonanza.
ISO 80, 1/2000sec, f/4.5, with some flash.
Some times I'm not sure about motive. I think that is controversial subject.
Hold point, RWY 10, SBSV.
ISO 200, 1/200sec, f/6.3.
The quality is not good, (with a H-50, a ISO greater than 80 is a disaster), the question is what I did right and wrong editing, could be better?
Original:
Edited:
I did a Black/White, what may you say about black/white pictures?
Koryo From Vatican City, joined Feb 2009, 285 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1635 times:
for the 737 the black and white doesn't work and the black and white and the color 737's are both very grainy and you may also have a motif rejection going there also
This forum is as good as you make it. Never post a message in anger. Take the high road and others will follow.
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2968 posts, RR: 60 Reply 4, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1602 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 2): should have moved the bricks
- Nik - I am not sure that the aircraft owners etc would have been too chuffed to see a photographer come along and take the 'chocks' off a plane's wheels simply to reduce the likelihood of a motive rejection on A.net - safety might just take priority there!
I think the 'chocks' are not the key issue here - it is the general motive you are trying to display, Gabriel. Remember that your shot has to have an aspect ratio between 3:2 and 4:3, so this photo is too 'square'. It depends on the crop of your original, but you may be able to focus more on just the nose/prop. Otherwise is it looking slightly awkward and unlevel.
The guys are right about the 737s - far too much heat haze to affect the quality, together with grain, softness etc. If you submitted that one it would end up with a long list of rejection reasons. The black and white one might just be seen as 'arty' by some (not here though) if it was even darker, but otherwise forget it, I am afraid.
NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1522 times:
Quoting Psych (Reply 4): Nik - I am not sure that the aircraft owners etc would have been too chuffed to see a photographer come along and take the 'chocks' off a plane's wheels simply to reduce the likelihood of a motive rejection on A.net - safety might just take priority there!
Granted but I doubt he would have had to worry if he removed them for the 30 seconds or so to get the shot. It not doing so he mostly guaranteed himself a motive rejection.
Quoting Psych (Reply 4): I think the 'chocks' are not the key issue here - it is the general motive you are trying to display
Hmmm the wheel an gear being blocked is pretty clear cut in the rules here.
DiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1294 posts, RR: 3 Reply 10, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1513 times:
I very much like the first shot. In regards to moving the chocks, I think you made the right call, not moving them. You never know what happens when you move them. Where do we draw the line guys? I mean, alright, we start moving chocks on the GA planes. Next thing you know, someone is going to move them on a large jet, and it'll start rolling. Trust me, even on what appears to be a level surface, allows for even jets like a Cessna Citation to start rolling (I know from experience).
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2968 posts, RR: 60 Reply 11, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1511 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9): I doubt he would have had to worry if he removed them for the 30 seconds or so to get the shot
You are serious aren't you !
I reckon he might have had to worry if the aircraft started to roll towards him as he set the shot up. And then there would have been the expletives ringing in his ears, coming at him from all angles.....
I agree that those bricks (if that is what they are) are a problem, not least because of the relative focus they play in the shot as it is cropped. But I don't believe chocks per se are a problem - I have checked and there are countless examples of light aircraft photos accepted where the wheels have chocks in place. Granted, they tend not to have such prominence as in Gabriel's current motive.
Gabriel - whilst silhouette shots can be very popular, yours has a major problem in that the flare caused by the sun is far too significant in the forward fuselage area, guaranteeing a rejection.
Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4538 posts, RR: 26 Reply 12, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1478 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9): Granted but I doubt he would have had to worry if he removed them for the 30 seconds or so to get the shot. It not doing so he mostly guaranteed himself a motive rejection.
Quoting Psych (Reply 11): You are serious aren't you
Well, if chocks were only on the nose gear I would never pull them, especially just for a photo. You could have a real problem on your hands by doing so! On the other hand, if chocks were also placed on one or both of the mains, I would consider pulling the nose chocks...or I would chock the mains first, then remove the nose chocks. Of course though, I wouldn't do any of this without checking first with the owner or whoever is in charge!
I don't think chocks result in an automatic rejection, but in this particular photo, they are prominent enough that they could be a problem.
[Edited 2009-03-01 18:15:34]
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
Brasila684 From United States of America, joined May 2008, 98 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 1454 times:
Quoting Gabriel3630 (Thread starter): Bonanza.
ISO 80, 1/2000sec, f/4.5, with some flash.
Some times I'm not sure about motive. I think that is controversial subject.
If there is any way you can sharpen the nose a little bit, I would do so, because that chrome nose would really stand out in that pic.
NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1424 times:
Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 10): Where do we draw the line guys? I mean, alright, we start moving chocks on the GA planes. Next thing you know, someone is going to move them on a large jet, and it'll start rolling.
Hmmm I doubt we will have photogs ghostriding 737s down the taxiway but there is ways of doing things.
Quoting Psych (Reply 11): You are serious aren't you !
As I said there is ways of doing things, whether you wanted to move the chocks or maybe ask someone or whatever this is all semantics. Fact remains it will probably get a motive rejection. So rather than have a situation where we have to discuss why those chocks are a cause for rejection I am trying to explain why you need to keep this in mind when you shoot. All the other stuff is irrevelant.
Koryo From Vatican City, joined Feb 2009, 285 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 1424 times:
For future references, lower the ISO to 100 or lower for daytime shots like the Gol 737 also work on sharpening and try to avoid spotting on days where it is extremely hazy and smoggy to get better results.
Hope this helped,
Koryo
This forum is as good as you make it. Never post a message in anger. Take the high road and others will follow.
Gabriel3630 From Brazil, joined Jul 2008, 43 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1397 times:
Quoting Koryo (Reply 17): For future references, lower the ISO to 100 or lower for daytime shots like the Gol 737 also work on sharpening and try to avoid spotting on days where it is extremely hazy and smoggy to get better results.
Hope this helped,
Koryo
Thank you all for the advices.
In that case (B737) it was very dark, and some times the camera's preview is not accuracy.
Here in Brazil, specially at NE It is very difficult to take a photo without overexpose or hazy heat. the Sun illuminates very directly, compared to the northern hemisphere and places of temperate climates, where the light is more oblique and homogeneous.
About B737 photo my concern is about edition.
About Bonanza photo I really not remember that rule, in my opinion all that thins chocks ... are part of the whole aeronautics atmosphere. I understand the obstruction rules about thins like stairs, trucks etc. But I guess that is not the case.
About the backlit shot I must to say that is a montage, I just wanna to know if someone will realize that.
. ps: I never try to upload a fake photo.
Thank you all again for the advices.
Gabriel Nogueira.
Sponsor Message: 
From Brazil, joined Jul 2008, 43 posts, 
From Vatican City, joined Feb 2009, 285 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 1610 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2968 posts, 
- Nik - I am not sure that the aircraft owners etc would have been too chuffed to see a photographer come along and take the 'chocks' off a plane's wheels simply to reduce the likelihood of a motive rejection on A.net - safety might just take priority there!
From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1854 posts, 
! 
Printer friendly format 
