Anna @ DX Rain v Crosswind

Oh dear, oh dear…

Oh dear….

Paul

And me ;):)

light looks ok on the VC-10 to me:confused:

Nice selection, always like to see the VC-10!

I have to agree with Paul…runs for cover…:diablo:

Come and live in Kidlington then we get plenty of them over here.

Actually, I like the VC10 too.

A nice atmospheric shot, even if it isn’t technically perfect.

Well for my money, I liked your set. Always nice to see a VC10 in the air.

😉 Cheers Martin 😉 Anna 🙂

Hi

With over 1300 hits so far, you have certainly had a lot of exposure 🙂
I look forward even better pics from you the next time you post:)

Cheers

Martin

Thankyou Neal look forward to seeing you and the family at an air show soon.:)

Great pics Anna

I totally forgot about this show, thats what having a new baby does to you.:rolleyes:

Good to see Grumpy around.

Neal

I too am looking forward to Legends. Roll on Jul 12.

Ok Cheers Huw.;)

And all because the lady loves the VC-10 :rolleyes::D On a lighter side “lol” I will be looking forward to Legends !

Great pics again Anna, and I must agree with you on the light / exposure thing, I don’t understand the need to manipulate an image to the point where it’s not representative of conditions of the time.

In that case, should we also remove unwanted items, such as spectators, vegetation, structures?

Cheers,

Kev.

Well that would be entirely up to the photographer wouldn’t it?

Some people have different views about photography and doing such things as removing unwanted items is mainstream for some photographers, their style of photography just involves more image manipulation and imaging. This does not mean they are wrong, they just have a different style. Perfect examples of this can be found in some Photography magazines nowadays, with tutorials on cloning cars and unwanted modern objects from in front of say an old building and even blending two different photographs together to create an image that is pleasing.

Photography means ‘to paint with light’ essentially and this painting must be done by the photogrpher, not the camera, by telling the camera what to do in order to produce a photo. The photographer is very much in the driving seat. As Paul quite rightly said in his spot on response, cameras do not produce photos showing ‘what it was really like’, that just doesn’t happen. As a photogrphy student I’ve had the pleasure of learning how to shoot and develop film. There simply is no leaving the photo as it is and producing a print, the photographer has to find the correct exposure and do some dodging/burning under the enlarger in order to produce the print, these skills translate right into the digital darkroom as well. The photograher has to find the correct exposure.

Putting those two extreeme ends of photoraphy together is blowing things out of proportion, something as simple as adjusting exposure to something as complex as removing unwanted items in editing sorfware.

And Anna, I nor Paul never said we hated your photos. We praised your set but had one piece of constructive criticism about one photo. If you post your photos on a public forum you open your self to this, so don’t blow things out of proportion and put words in our mouths saying that we ‘hate’ your photos. That simply isn’t true, I enjoyed viewing them!

Cheers, Huw:)

Great pics again Anna, and I must agree with you on the light / exposure thing, I don’t understand the need to manipulate an image to the point where it’s not representative of conditions of the time.

In that case, should we also remove unwanted items, such as spectators, vegetation, structures?

Cheers,

Kev.

😀 Thanks Kev.

In that case, should we also remove unwanted items, such as spectators, vegetation, structures?

You’re taking my comments comepletely out of context. Brightening an image and setting your camera to make the best of dull conditions isn’t manipulation. People have been darkening, brightening, dodging and burning on film for decades, it isn’t something that’s come about since the dawning of the digital era (as many ignorant anti-digital folk believe). The camera (whether digital or film) doesnt naturally have the ability to ‘fairly represent the circumstances’, cameras simply don’t do that. They have a dynamic range roughly half that of the human eye; they see things differently and they all meter differently, which is why you need to tell them what to do in difficult circumstances. I have 3 film SLR’s and 3 DSLR’s, they all have exposure compensation and it’s there for a very good reason. Hell… Even the camera on my mobile phone has exposure compensation. :rolleyes:

And no, things shouldn’t be taken out of scenes; at least I don’t believe so. If there’s something in a scene I don’t want then I try to work around it and find a different way of capturing it. I don’t even remove things from my non aviation photography (although I may process slightly more than when shooting aviaiton).

Let’s not get overly cynical about this. All I said is they were a little on the dark side (and not many experienced photographers would disagree) but they’re still nice, enjoyable photos and I’m thankful they were posted. You have to accept that when you post images in a forum like this you’re opening yourself up to the opinions of others. If you can’t deal with that, you really shouldn’t be posting. I’m very heavily into photography and have been for a good few years, and I’ve had people criticise images I’ve posted and it’s made me a better photographer because I’ve learned something; people have actually ripped my work apart, but that’s a good thing. The links in my signature lead to around 4,400 images I have online and when people look at them and criticise, I learn things. It’s great when people praise, but criticism is never a bad thing. Some people here really should learn that.

Paul

Great pics again Anna, and I must agree with you on the light / exposure thing, I don’t understand the need to manipulate an image to the point where it’s not representative of conditions of the time.

In that case, should we also remove unwanted items, such as spectators, vegetation, structures?

Cheers,

Kev.

JR could not have flown the Blenheim without one! 🙂

Thx for posting the pics Anna, takes me back.

Had forgot he flew the Blenheim too, Mind is giving way lately lol, remember John Webb more as Blenheim pilot

If only I could be somewhere near that good, I would be happy !
Realy like the Chinook with green light !!!! But thats just me !!!

Keith.

😉 Cheers Keith 🙂 Oh well they either like or hate my pic’s 😀 who cares really 😉 not I, I just post what I like.;) Anna

and yes hard conditions for taking pictures

I agree it was a bit tricky for numerous things including getting correct exposure, however editing software can improve underexposure after the taking the shot;)

Cheers, Huw:)