More efforts at aircraft for the collective critique.

[Crotal Bell]

Managed another stop at Shuttleworth today and decided to try the panning with slower shutter speeds for prop blur, as suggested by the more experienced toggers on here.

I had plenty of blurry shots and fair enough the chosen subjects are not the hardest, nevertheless I was pleased to make some progress and get a few I liked, even some in the air ! I stuck with SS125 and SS250 for these aircraft. I did notice that it makes a difference if the aircraft are taxiing to the runway or in full throttle as the prop is moving faster at take off (another lesson)

The good thing about slower shutter speeds, very low ISO, however, the skies were blowing out. Is this something you have to accept sometimes or do you drop the exposure compensation and try to lift the shadows after in edit? I guess a lot depends on the weather, the position of the sun, and the type/speed of the aircraft?

 

[Baloo]

Nice set Keith, number two is my favourite but for the life of me I cannot figure out what it is, maybe a C.A.P. 21?

 

[lindsay]

RV9 I believe Roger. Beautiful metal kit plane, faster than most light aircraft and slightly aerobatic too.

 

[Baloo]

RV9 I believe Roger. Beautiful metal kit plane, faster than most light aircraft and slightly aerobatic too.

Thanks Lindsay, it was driving me mad.

 

[Crotal Bell]

Nice set Keith, number two is my favourite but for the life of me I cannot figure out what it is, maybe a C.A.P. 21?

Thanks Roger. I'm finding this aircraft photography a lot of fun and makes a nice change from the local wildlife walks.

 

[Crotal Bell]

Think I should have put this in as number 1 instead.

 

[Sangoma]

Thanks Lindsay, it was driving me mad.

You can look most up here https://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/G-XXRV.html and there are other sites that will give you all the details from the registration.

Lovely photos, used to be one of my favourite topics.
Was building a KR2 in the early 80s, airframe and wing spars signed off, engine rebuilt, but then I lost my building space,
Since then, have gone from liking sleek and fast to slow and fun, my favourite being a CH 701, they feel more like an extension to your body than a vehicle. Moving back to the UK put paid to that though, just too costly here

You could probably under expose a bit to get some more detail in the sky, then mask the sky area and enhance it a bit, then invert the mask and bring the plane up a bit.

 

[lindsay]

Similar here Steve, I used to fly, got my licence in Texas and loved flying in the USA but it's too expensive and too much hassle here. I started building a CH750, completed rudder and flaperons, I still have the tail kit in my garage but buying the whole kit and engine was going to be too expensive so I gave up. I still have the plans for a Bowers FlyBaby that I'd like to build (in wood) but probably won't.

 

[Brazo]

Assuming your at base iso there are two ways to get correct exposure in such circumstances, the first is to make the aperture smaller I.e a bigger number although you don’t want to go mad as diffraction will eventually kick in.

Second is to fit an ND filter which reduces the light coming into the lens.

 

[Crotal Bell]

Assuming your at base iso there are two ways to get correct exposure in such circumstances, the first is to make the aperture smaller I.e a bigger number although you don’t want to go mad as diffraction will eventually kick in.

Second is to fit an ND filter which reduces the light coming into the lens.

Thanks Mark