Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Deaner @ 100  
User currently offlineDeaner From Canada, joined Sep 2002, 42 posts, RR: 7
Posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2062 times:

I feel a little like a dog, being a hundred when I’m only 34.

And seeing as how I have hit the century mark, I like others here, have the opportunity to look back on many things, to muse, and to ask myself things like: have I improved in any way as a photographer? What have I learned from others here? What do I think of the screeners? And do I really want to open that kind of worm can? So I ask you, move on to something more enlightening or sit a while and listen to Deaner’s thoughts as they move awkwardly to the page.

Limits. They seem to be all four sides of me. For the most part, I cannot take photos of moving aircraft. I need a lot of time to set up my camera. The number of airlines that use my airport is relatively small. I cannot afford long lenses, cannot use very long lenses and the lenses I do use do not function very well at small apertures. Needless to say, the shutter speeds I require are usually marked in seconds, the depth of field is usually very deep and hence the scope of photographs in my portfolio is still pretty narrow. But I thank all of those who have emailed me with their kind remarks despite the limited variety of my shots. I think the most profound observation of my photos made by an a.net commentator was that in them aircraft seem to live in a world without humans. The kindest thing anyone ever said about my ramp shots was that he felt like he was walking out on to the tarmac when he looked at them. I wish like the Dickens that I could take photos of flying aircraft like Joe Pries and others do. I wish I could take photos of Vancouver’s tower with a full moon beside it—the way I’ve seen it on many a gorgeous Vancouver night. What’s left to me is to record the most technically proficient photos I can on the ground, rain or shine, day or night. I love walking around aircraft and following their lines. I love the wide-open spaces of the airfield and how each arriving aircraft carries with it a different story. I have just purchased a 90mm Schneider Super Angulon so I promise to tell a different kind of story in the near future.

Self-assessment is one of the hardest things in this world to do; that’s why I always laugh at myself when I think, “I could write a book.” Anyone who is willing to put his thoughts on paper and have them willingly criticized by someone else is a strong character in my opinion. And it’s no more difficult for a photographer to submit to a screener; otherwise there wouldn’t be as much rancour as there is on the boards over rejection. I’m no stranger to the feeling and I understand objective comments like “image is too small” but I hate subjective comments like “image is too dark.” But photographs are like children and when someone tells you your child has a funny face you take exception. Like many a writer and photographer of the past, though, when I have had the time to reflect, I have often agreed with the editor. There are times, indeed, when after I have placed them in the queue and had a chance to review them, I have prayed like anything that the photos would be rejected by Rindt, et al. A relieved sigh escapes me when they are. Someone out there will no doubt create a site that revels in the avant-garde of aircraft photography and when they do, many of us will find an outlet for our interestingly-framed, coloured, positioned, shaded, angled and in all other ways artistic photographs. ‘Till then, however, we’re just going to have to “bite the bullet,” “suck it up” or whatever other tired cliché we can find, fight the rectitude, and keep pushing Johan’s envelope and the screeners inside it.

One of the greatest things about the Internet, and perhaps it’s the greatest, is that if you like something, be it hockey, cooking, Care Bears, or slivovitz, there are thousands of others world-wide who will put up on the Web all that they know and love about it for free. And airliners.net is no exception. A lazy afternoon can in a few ways (apart from actually taking photographs) better be served than by a quick glance at the site—the latest photographs and latest word on them. There are obviously some professional photographers in here and there are obviously some not-so-professional photographers but the interplay between them is always entertaining, if not downright informative. The site, though not dedicated in any way solely to aircraft photography, is nevertheless a fine place to see real-world examples from, say, the latest digital technology. What to me is the most interesting thing about the diatribe and discussion here is how it plays out in relation to the historical perspective—how it makes us very much people of our own time.

Photographers of the distant past, who made contact prints from negatives as large as 20 X 24 inches, would frown with consternation that we were even talking here about our so-called photos and high-quality prints be they made from 35mm or 12 megapixel cameras. To them our much faster shutter speeds, colour films, ability to see the images instantly and the all-around superior convenience of the modern camera would have been too high a price to pay for such tiny images. Even today, photographers like Clyde Butcher are happiest when they produce five-foot wide prints that show no grain.

“Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” Never has that been as aptly said as when it has been said of photography. ‘Pin sharp.’ ‘Tack sharp.’ If you had hung around this place long enough, you would have thought that those two descriptors were all it took to make a beautiful photograph. Famous photographers there have been who have indeed despaired when they could not count every needle on their print of a Bristlecone Pine. But award-winning photographers there have been who have gone out of their way to fill their photos with grain or to blur them subtly or dramatically. Ansel Adams prints with which one could have once walked away for twenty-five dollars now run into the hundreds of thousands. Who’s to say why? The same person who would pay ten bucks for a rotating 777 wouldn’t pay a fig for yet another shot of El Capitan by the American master. I’ve seen award-winning photographs taken with the very best equipment whose subject matter is indecipherable. I’ve seen much-lauded but blurry-on-purpose shots taken with the world’s sharpest and most expensive ‘digital’ lenses. I’ve seen museum pieces which look like they were taken by accident or by someone who couldn’t see and I’ve heard highly-thought-of artistic photographers denigrate the work of those who make their living photographing industrial machines or retail products. Some folks are proudest when they take that great opportunistic photo; others beam when they sweat for that perfect shot; others are happiest when they use the best equipment money can buy; others chuckle when on a shoestring they capture that once-in-a-lifetime image. The best image each of us has taken is the purest and most unassailable because we haven’t taken it yet.

“Yes, but this photo is more impressive because it was a lot harder to take.” Has anyone ever heard this as an argument or defence in these discussion groups? What does it mean? Mark Garfinkel’s name has come up numerous times because you can see both registration numbers and the Sea of Tranquility in his gothic telephoto shots of aircraft and the moon-goddess. He has modern lenses, high-speed film, a steady hand, a sharp eye, spare time and composition proficiency: does that mean his photos are ‘better,’ ‘more beautiful,’ or ‘superior’ to the less well-known a.net holiday snapper who shoots a cock-eyed DC-3 on some ancient airfield in rural Kentucky? I remember the first photograph I ever saw of a doomed airliner, American Airlines flight 191, which slammed into the ground after losing its number one engine in 1979. This photograph is poorly composed, chalk-full of grain, out-of-focus and overexposed but it is beautiful and terrifying. What if Mr. Garfinkel one day finds that his photos are no longer hard to take? What if they become routine to him? Does this make them any less striking? I do not believe that if two people build an identical cherry wood French provincial dining room table that the one more beautiful is the one whose builder struggled to build it.

The truly amazing thing to me is the fact that we are still are fascinated with this centuries old thing called photography—engaging in conversation with others, forming clubs, organizing swap meets, venturing out on eco-shoots, angered at those who disparage our work, frustrated with the computers and the chemistry, bragging of megapixels or autowinders, bemoaning dead batteries, crying when our children open the darkroom door, discovering aspherics, or shouting “Yes!” when we nail that all important or lucky shot. In the end we are often humbled by a world that laughingly defies our supposed ability to take pictures of anything anytime.

It is a sobering thought, really, that memories once lived on only in peoples’ dreams, that before 1824, when Joseph-Nicéphore Niepce made what most people consider history’s first true photograph, our Great Aunt Angela and our 19th century cousin Roderick looked like our little baby Lynn only in our Grandpa George’s mind. We couldn’t actually see it. I think we take it ever so for granted that we can visually follow genetic lines, reminisce about past gatherings, smell the fields of a bygone day, weep once more over tragic events, and vow that, “Things are going to be different,” all by looking at a photograph on or off our monitors.

As I pass the century mark and push for the millennium in years to come, I want to pay tribute to all those scientists, dreamers, artists, businessmen and probably billions of photographers who have made this process of light-writing the finest, toughest, frustrating, rewarding—coolest hobby in the world.

Phew

Deaner


24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJoe pries From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1957 posts, RR: 53
Reply 1, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1980 times:

excellent stuff Deaner, really good, you should submit it as an article. I especially liked this:

"Anyone who is willing to put his thoughts on paper and have them willingly criticized by someone else is a strong character in my opinion. "

-you are 150% right. I am one who is never afraid to open my mouth about what I believe is right and Unmuth and Hunt can tell me a million times that a 757 going downhill but the poles in the background are straight is the proper way to have a photo accepted but i'll tell them a billion times back they are dead wrong
bwaaaaaaaahahahahahaha

happy thanksgiving to all

Joe


User currently offlinePhotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2747 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1964 times:

A writer of words..... a poet with a camera.

Thanks Deaner

Stephen Liard
a.k.a. Photopilot


User currently offlineExitRow From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1957 times:



Of course, there will always be those who look only at technique, who ask "how," while others of a more curious nature will ask "why." Personally, I have always preferred inspiration to information. -- Man Ray





Deaner. Thanks for the reminder of what it's all about. Your post was the most positive thing I've read here in the past few days...

...and for that, thank you.

William


User currently offlineAndyhunt From Singapore, joined Jan 2001, 1306 posts, RR: 52
Reply 4, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1952 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Beautifully written. That was a great article and I really enjoyed the read. Well done!!!!

Joe: you still letting that pole thread bug you. I'd long forgotten about that. Big grin

Andrew



Full frame always beats post processing
User currently offlineJoe pries From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1957 posts, RR: 53
Reply 5, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1941 times:

Andy, i'll never forget when you, one of the most respected guys here, told me that in your eyes a 757 sliding downhill should be accepted- this you will have to live with for the rest of your life until you publicly admit you erred

bwaaaaaaaaahahahahaha

 Big grin i love it


User currently offlineAndyhunt From Singapore, joined Jan 2001, 1306 posts, RR: 52
Reply 6, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1939 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Me, admit???? Never, I'm a screener you see. Big grin Big grin Big grin

Andrew

Lovin' it too!




Full frame always beats post processing
User currently offlineAndyhunt From Singapore, joined Jan 2001, 1306 posts, RR: 52
Reply 7, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1926 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

After reading this wonderful article, and then doing some screening, I saw this and I think you all agree, it deserves an instant upload:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dean Allchin



Well done Dean, I'm in awe.

Andrew



Full frame always beats post processing
User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 35
Reply 8, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 1905 times:

I woulda just said, "hey I gott 100 photo on this site!!!" and then posted every single one of them on the thread, but I am not you!

Well done, you are an inspiration to us all.


User currently offlineTappan From United States of America, joined Oct 1999, 1538 posts, RR: 41
Reply 9, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 1892 times:

Deaner,
You missed my point....
I said I think my rejected photos ARE grainy and a bit out of focus...My arguement is PASSION over technique!
Mark Garfinkel


User currently offlineTimdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 10, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 1886 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Very Inspiring article Deaner!

"This photograph is poorly composed, chalk-full of grain, out-of-focus and overexposed but it is beautiful and terrifying"

I have the same thing with some of my older photographs I took when I was learning the basics of photography from my father. The quality is horrific to be frank, but I treasure them as much as my present Kodachomres. They are a part of my life, and really show the progress I have made in 10 years of aviation photography.

And Inspiring photography as well!

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 11, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1863 times:

Thanks Dean, It's always nice to put things in perspective. Well done!

I just think of all the images that got away, or I did not take, and I regret every one.

v/r
Jeff


User currently offlineThomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3963 posts, RR: 22
Reply 12, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1849 times:

WOW........

Certainly one of the most thoughtful, articulate and enjoyable posts that I have read here in recent memory. I believe you have stated in 11 paragraphs what I and many others have wanted to say for sometime, but the words and courage were hard to find.

Nicely done and thanks for putting the art of photography back into some perspective.

Thomas



"Show me the Braniffs"
User currently offline2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 1840 times:

Well said Deaner...

Perhaps this should be required reading for anyone who wants to post a photo or comment on one.

Cheers. Tony


User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 1769 times:

Dean,

Some time ago, I brought some of your earlier pictures to the attention of this forum. At that time, I was well aware that the pictures you were delivering went far beyond what the rest of us were squabbling about. Whilst this may sound arrogant (but isn't meant that way) I'm very pleased that the respect I personally reserve for your photography is reflected in the words of wisdom you've provided to us all in this topic today.

There has been a lot of antaganism on this forum recently which has discouraged me to an extent from performing my duties as part of the airliners.net crew. It is like a breath of fresh air to me to see a positive topic like this - so Joe and Andy, please don't go spoiling it with your "debate" about vertical poles!!!!

Andy



User currently offlineDripstick From Canada, joined Dec 2001, 2364 posts, RR: 21
Reply 15, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1726 times:



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dean Allchin
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dean Allchin



Your words are as inspiring as your stunning images.

Long live the Deaner!




What's another word for thesaurus?
User currently offlineJoe pries From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1957 posts, RR: 53
Reply 16, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1705 times:

Andy, take it easy, Andy and I are just breaking each others balls for fun. You actually took it seriously?

Joe


User currently offlineAndyhunt From Singapore, joined Jan 2001, 1306 posts, RR: 52
Reply 17, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1697 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Andy,

No more posts on this, but as Joe says, it was a bit of light hearted fun. No malice between us.

I don't think that it spoils this thread. Not at all. I agree fully, this was a great post.

I think we all need to smile a bit, laugh a bit, and share in what to me is the greatest hobby on earth, with the greatest people around the world to share it with.

Andrew



Full frame always beats post processing
User currently offlineShawn Patrick From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2608 posts, RR: 16
Reply 18, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1695 times:

Dean, I thank you for taking the time to write all that up, it was definetly inspiring. I think I'm going to think of my photography in a whole new light now.

As mentioned, it's great that at least someone here knows how to take a step back to try to understand the big picture. To put a steadfast label on a piece of art is impossible. To attempt to define such a term as photography is futile. Something that is absolutely universal, that breaks language barriers, and that breaks psychological barriers is impossible to define. It's defined differently by every single soul that will encounter it.

There is no absolute truth to be defined in even the most remotely abstract thought or idea. That extends to many things beyond photography, and if people would understand that, the would would certainly be a different (dare I say better) place.

Shawn


User currently offlineManzoori From UK - England, joined Sep 2002, 1516 posts, RR: 34
Reply 19, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1683 times:

Dean,

An insightful and thought provoking post to celebrate 100 accepted images? I commend you sir! I and I suspect a lot of others would simply be happy to post a quick "Hooray for me!"

Keep up the excellent work... you are an inspiration to us all!

Cheers

Rez



Flightlineimages DOT Com Photographer & Web Editor. RR Turbines Specialist
User currently offlineCarlos borda From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 538 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1691 times:

Well said Andy... I'll raise a glass and drink to that!

And Dean... very beautifully written your post. Your quite the writer.... this post from you is probably one of the most thought provoking ones I've ever read on here. Reading it... I feel the passion for photography in your words.

One line in particular that you wrote >> others chuckle when on a shoestring they capture that once-in-a-lifetime image << provoked me to sit back and think for a while... have I already taken my personal "once in a lifetime" image? Anyone here feel they already have...?

~Carlos


Andy Hunt writes:

>>I think we all need to smile a bit, laugh a bit, and share in what to me is the greatest hobby on earth, with the greatest people around the world to share it with.<<


User currently offlineGlenn From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1692 times:

Wow

Very impressive Deaner


User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1686 times:

Andy, take it easy, Andy and I are just breaking each others balls for fun. You actually took it seriously?
No more posts on this, but as Joe says, it was a bit of light hearted fun. No malice between us. I don't think that it spoils this thread. Not at all. I agree fully, this was a great post.


Joe, Andy,

No I didn't take it seriously... I missed the smiley off the end of my entry, probably because it was late and I was tired and I'd had one too many gin and tonics! Big grin

Andy


User currently offlinePRM From Burkina Faso, joined Apr 2002, 351 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1687 times:

Terrific work Dean (getting to 100 and moreso the article  Big thumbs up), I know we'll see at lot more memorable shots in the future

Regards
Paul


User currently offlineJetTrader From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2001, 586 posts, RR: 11
Reply 24, posted (11 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1679 times:


"The best image each of us has taken is the purest and most unassailable because we haven’t taken it yet."

This, for me, is what it's all about. This is what makes us go out time and time again in all conditions striving for that elusive killer shot. You put it so succinctly and beautifully Dean.

Great piece and sentiments everyone here would do well to heed and remember. As another contributor already stated, this is the most positive thing to appear in this forum for a long time and for that I thank you.

Keep up the terrific work!
JT/Dean



Life's dangerous. Get a f**king helmet!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Canon 100-400mm Is Autofocus Problem posted Mon Oct 23 2006 17:33:10 by Singel09
I Bought The 100-400mm! posted Fri Sep 29 2006 22:06:51 by FighterPilot
Sony A-100 Or Canon EOS 400D posted Thu Sep 14 2006 06:07:10 by Bill142
Canon Converter 1,4x With 100-400 L Is F/5,6 posted Tue Aug 15 2006 19:35:56 by Coninpa
Finally, I Have My 100-400mm posted Sat Aug 12 2006 19:42:50 by Singel09
Canon 100-400 Seizing Up. posted Mon Jul 31 2006 09:54:09 by Spencer
100-400 With 2.0X Extender? posted Mon Jul 31 2006 06:56:49 by Prat
Sigma 50-500 Or Canon 100-400L Is posted Mon Jul 10 2006 07:52:38 by Franzloew
Lense Thoughts: Canon EF 100-400mm F/2.8L Is USM posted Thu Jun 29 2006 21:56:02 by Aero145
Another Photographer Reaches 100 posted Fri Jun 16 2006 15:01:39 by TransIsland