For now, I'm keeping them on this server. There's just a bit too much going on in my schedule at the moment to try and figure out what's the best plan of attack for the future of our thread. I would just hate to see it fizzle though.
I wonder, if you were to put the images into a separate private gallery in Smugmug and then just link to them here - if the images wouldn't stay that way. I haven't gone back to see if any of my images have been deleted here or else where on FM - but it seems like unless you changed the status of your gallery - it should still be able to catch the link and stay fresh.
Are you uploading your images through FM Image Upload? If that is the problem - then why should we pay 45 bucks a year for it - if it doesn't work right?
Just as a data point for the whole "missing images" conundrum, I went back to check on my own images. I did not have time to check on every image I ever posted, but I did check on quite a few and they all appear to be intact. My first post with an image was on February 20th (see page 82), and those images are all present as well.
All my images are posted using links to external servers. In theory, URL's in the messages should never be affected since they're simply considered text, so this would probably be the best way to post images and make sure they never get lost by the system. Images uploaded to the FM server, on the other hand, could easily be "expired" or the pointer/image-number counter could roll over and effectively delete them. Or the server's capacity could be exceeded.
Or whatever. But my guess is that linking to images on an external server will keep them safe permanently while uploading them internally will not. I could be wrong and often am, but that's what my logic says...
Jim, You've got some amazing photo's. I have a feeling when it get closer to Christmas, I'll be buying some prints of the Mustang and sending it to my grandfather (retired Lt. Col. who was one of the first in the C-130) and my wife's grandfater (who was a Marine during WWII). As much as I love the F-22, I don't think it has as big of a place in my heart as the P-51.
I'm glad you're enjoying our thread. Let me know on your prints and I'll get them rolling for you. I'm with you on the 51. The technology and capability of the 22 is something, but I can't help thinking I'm watching some sci-fi remote control model. I'm supposed to go air to air with a 35 in the near future, we'll see if I can remain objective.
Hey Jim and everybody else. There is a good chance (80%+) that I will be going to the Red Bull air races in San Diego coming up.
As I do not have any good tele glass, I am thinking about renting something nice. I am really tempted to spend the hundred bucks and rent a 400 2.8 and a 1.4TC, but am worried that I will be limited by the fact that I will have nothing to cover me in the 100-400mm range. So I am thinking that I would be in good shape if I rented the 100-400 lens. I don't think I would rent both. Obviously I will get absolutely beautiful shots with the 400 2.8, but I don't know if I will get out there and find that the planes are always too close for a 400. I have no sense of what a 400mm lens can do from the distances involved in an air race like the San Diego one where you are limited to the parks surrounding the race over the water. I can see the shots that were just recently posted used a 400 2.8, but I have no idea how far off they were from.
Overall, I am looking for suggestions as to what lens I should rent for these upcoming air races. Would the 500mm be better than the 400? etc...
Lastly, is anybody else that reads this thread going to be down there shooting?
If its any help, at the GML, I plan to use a 300 2.8 with and without a 1.4tc on one body and a 100-400 on another - which I'll let my dad use and we'll swap off all day to rest my aging arms... I ain't built like Popeye anymore...;-) If I happen to have a new body by then - I'll probably bring something shorter like a 70-200 2.8 or 24-70 for up close with the parked planes.
The 100-400 is great for being able to frame quickly no matter how close or far away the subject is - though even in broad daylight you will notice its a bit slow. Plus it doesn't kill your arms in an all day shoot.
All my shots are with the 100-400 with and without a 1.4 Tc. Not sure with the RBAR if the planes will be close to shore, so you may want to opt for a 500mm and use a Tc to get to 720mm. This is my setup for Nellis AFB in November.
