Aerial Abstracts

HIMUPNORTH

HIMUPNORTH

Messages
5,178
Name
Gary
Edit My Images
Yes
All these shots were taken yesterday. The light and cloud was not good for the more typical aerial shot so concentrated on ground features.

The first on is on the mouth of the river Conon. I upped the contrast and saturation to give a "satellite" type shot which it reminded me of.
IMG_1520_River_Abstract.jpg



Not sure if this one is the aftermath of a ploughing match but there was only one tractor in the field and the resulting shapes were interesting:

IMG_1562_Tractor_Abstract.jpg



This is a close-up which gave a pleasing abstract:

IMG_1568_Field_Abstract.jpg


Liked this one but was badly exposed. I played around in PS then went B&W to try to improve it. Still a bit disappointing as this had the best potential. Should have shot a few more!

IMG_1570_Trees_Abstract.jpg


Gary W
 
That first shot's a cracker :thumb:

Just a heads up though, CT will be along soon moaning about the file sizes :rules: ;)
 
Oh Dear! :hissyfit:

I concentrated on the dimensions and missed the file size.:banghead:

Many thanks Dod and apologies to all. Will try harder.
 
LOL As predicated, here I am like the grim reaper! :D

Waaay oversize Gaz. I've broken your links. You can either leave them as they are or resize your images and put the IMG tags back.

Please tell me those shots weren't taken from a parachute!!
 
Right then!

What a job I had. I could not understand how the files that were the correct size on my PC were all wrong once uploaded.:confused-

It turns out that JAlbum, which I used to upload the shots was INCREASING the size to fit inside the bounding box limits that are normally used to decrease file size!?!! :dizzy:

Hopefully that is all sorted now CT (It appears OK as I have emptied my cache, reloaded and they seem to be correct).

Powered paraglider actually not strictly a parachute but definitely a derivative. Now that we have the technicailties sorted what about the photos CT?

:exit:
 
File sizes are fine now. :)

Gary - what I know about aerial photography could be written on the back of a very small postage stamp.:D

I'd imagine you have an advantage in that with the camera pointing down you're avoiding sky luminance so easier exposure, but focusing must be interesting? :suspect1: Exposure-wise the shots look fine.

A girl I used to work with went on a one day hang glider course in Buxton IIRC, towards the end of the day while trying to land she hit a dry stone wall and broke both legs. Really bad breaks too - she ended up in hospital for weeks with really bad scarring. :shock:
 
That was a nice bed-time story CT thanks, now i hope that puts all you potential hang gliders off!

I like the 3rd one best not sure why, just like looking at it(v.technical of me)!
 
Morning all! Don't worry CT I have heard all the horror stories. Being doing this for 8 years now so getting the "hang" of it.

Arthus Bertrand is the funny french bloke. Sells for megabucks (idea!).
Closer to home Scottish landscape photographer Colin Baxter spend last year going around Scotland in a helicopter doing something similar. It cost him a reported £80,000 in helicopter charter fees. At 3litres per hour I am a bit cheaper :D

Lolyton, I have mucked about with number 3 further, what do you think?
IMG_1568_Ploughed_Field.jpg
 
Super shsots - especially #1, it would do justice to National Geographic.

regards
 
First one is my fav too. Excellent stuff :)
 
Sammy

I have wrecked sooo many cameras over the years but all were cheap(ish) point and shoot varietals. First being 35mm then digital. In 2002 I went to Brazil with a Canon EOS 600 and a borrowed 14mm lens and was converted to better quality.

Last year I bought my 20D (in California to save a few bucks) and want to upgrade from my staple lens 24-85 to a L series 16-35 but the purchase price is scarey. I now fly with it round my neck (standard Canon strap) after realising that most camera losses were down to methods of securing/mounting.

Once in the air everything is easy but launch and landing are the tricky parts:shock:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top