ELinder wrote:
Jay, I'm truly glad for you that you have clients willing to pay for a shot like that. In today's market keeping clients happy is a major achievement in and of itself.
Unfortunately that doesn't change what I said about the image you posted. Actually, quite a few of the images you've posted suffer the same problems. As you say, there are some days we don't have much to work with and have to make the best of a bad situation. However, if you're willing to post the original shot I'm sure the many talented photographers and post production artists here could make suggestions of things to try in the future to make the results more realistic when you're again faced with this situation. I've learned a great deal from the vast base of knowledge from the people here, all you need do is ask.
I'll bite........you pick out two to four shots that you find that I have posted, that suffer from the same problems that you mention, and we will let other photographers and post production artists make their suggestions.
I'm all for learning, no damage to my ego, at all.
There are numerous times I take a job where there is no ability to move the jet to another spot on the ramp and I have to make the best of a bad situation. Love Field is a perfect example of that. You cannot tow a jet all over Love Field or Teterboro, for example to get a "good background" behind it, one that is natural. Actually, there is one place at Teterboro, but if you aren't at a certain FBO's location, you can forget about that one location, too.
So, let's all learn something from your comments. Pick out two to four of my shots and I'll be happy to post the original shot and let everyone critique them to their hearts content.......won't bother me at all and yes, I could certainly learn something in the process.
I've never claimed to be an "expert" with this field. I am always trying to learn new techniques in order to hone my craft even further. Truthfully, if one quits wanting to learn, I think they might as well "throw in the towel".
I am posting the original shot from the Falcon 8X. It was taken in horrible conditions that I had no control over, and I only had my Sony Point and Shoot. This was not a "planned session".
JayDavis wrote:
Here is the King Air that I photographed yesterday. This has to be the CLEANEST King Air I've ever photographed! Looks like it just came fresh out of the factory. When you have deep pocket owners, who truly understand the value of their aircraft, they take care of them and spare no expense.
They need Raisbeck Lockers, Strakes, Leading Edge, Ram Air Recovery, and Swept Props on that thing. Make it a full EPIC!!
I'll bite........you pick out two to four shots that you find that I have posted, that suffer from the same problems that you mention, and we will let other photographers and post production artists make their suggestions.
I'm all for learning, no damage to my ego, at all.
There are numerous times I take a job where there is no ability to move the jet to another spot on the ramp and I have to make the best of a bad situation. Love Field is a perfect example of that. You cannot tow a jet all over Love Field or Teterboro, for example to get a "good background" behind it, one that is natural. Actually, there is one place at Teterboro, but if you aren't at a certain FBO's location, you can forget about that one location, too.
So, let's all learn something from your comments. Pick out two to four of my shots and I'll be happy to post the original shot and let everyone critique them to their hearts content.......won't bother me at all and yes, I could certainly learn something in the process.
I've never claimed to be an "expert" with this field. I am always trying to learn new techniques in order to hone my craft even further. Truthfully, if one quits wanting to learn, I think they might as well "throw in the towel".
I am posting the original shot from the Falcon 8X. It was taken in horrible conditions that I had no control over, and I only had my Sony Point and Shoot. This was not a "planned session". ...Show more →
Great, let's take a look, maybe we can all learn something together. First off, I hope you're shooting that Sony in RAW, or at least raw+jpg. It's a great one inch sensor camera. Especially in tough conditions why not give yourself as much leeway in pushing the file as possible? A couple other recent examples that jumped out at me are:
You have to have the confidence, your own & the client's, along with the gravitas to ask the aircraft be moved to a suitable location. That is something that should be requested and understood from the first planning stages. I've had aircraft relocated on most major and a great many smaller airports over the past 37 years. You get zip if you don't ask. When I show up to shoot a project all of that has been decided, right down to the time the aircraft needs to be repositioned so there's plenty of time to deal with the unexpected. One can't be expected to do the best work when the tail is wagging the dog.
JWilsonphoto wrote:
You have to have the confidence, your own & the client's, along with the gravitas to ask the aircraft be moved to a suitable location. That is something that should be requested and understood from the first planning stages. I've had aircraft relocated on most major and a great many smaller airports over the past 37 years. You get zip if you don't ask. When I show up to shoot a project all of that has been decided, right down to the time the aircraft needs to be repositioned so there's plenty of time to deal with the unexpected. One can't be expected to do the best work when the tail is wagging the dog....Show more →
I HAVE the confidence in my own ability and the client has confidence in me as well, or they wouldn't have hired me for the job. Yet to try and get a jet moved to a suitable location at Love Field, Teterboro, Fort Lauderdale Executive and Bedford, MA is almost impossible. Believe me, I've tried. There are NO suitable locations as far as I am concerned at Love Field.....shot there enough times to realize that in the six years I've been doing this full time.
Believe me, I ask and I try as courteously as possible to get the aircraft moved to better locations whenever possible. The tail is NOT wagging the dog, by any means!!
I also tell the client what time I'd like the aircraft to be pulled out on the ramp and where, yet sometimes that just isn't possible. Especially when I am flying in and out of a city in a two day or even one day period. The jets also have their own schedule. I've had to shoot at jet at 2p.m. in Houston before, because the jet was only going to be in Houston for four to five hours before jetting off to Mexico.
I don't claim to "know it all" as I am still learning, yet I do know what times are the best to shoot an aircraft outside and I do know where to position an aircraft, when it is possible. In some circumstances, it just isn't possible and since the client is PAYING me to photograph the jet, sometimes I have to make lemonade out of lemons.
This thread or particular part of this thread hasn't gone anywhere since I posted the original shots........I agreed to post the original shots for a "learning experience for me, and others. That hasn't happened.
Jay, I've been a (sometimes absentee) member of this particular family for (I think) 7-8 years now, and I can tell you two things: Erich and Jim have only the best of intentions, and time is unpredictable.
The conversations around here sometimes move in a flash and things get said and done at speeds that seem unreal, but sometimes it takes a while. We've done the "learning experience" thing several times and it usually yields wonderful results for us all, but it does take a week or two. You must remember that the ones who can usually teach us the most are also generally the busiest ones.
That being said, I took a look at the two images in question here; and while I'm certainly not one of the most experienced shooters around here, I am at least old enough to have developed an opinion on nearly anything.
I would classify the two finished images you posted as "digital art" rather than photography. It is abundantly clear to any but the most untrained eye that the airframes have been digitally placed onto completely different backgrounds. The small pools of light below the fuselage help to underscore this effect, since those would never exist in real life. Now, if this was the effect you are going for, it was the kind of image you promised the client, and the client liked it, then hey… I have nothing against digital art.
Now let me switch gears into photography. To me, perhaps the single most defining characteristic of a photograph is that it looks realistic; and based on that metric, I'm not fond of these two images at all. The effect is so dramatic and so exaggerated that the realism is largely lost. The post-processing work done on these images is also very aggressive… which is a personal choice, but again one with which I disagree because it tends to reduce the realism of the image even further. The whites are too white, the contrast is pushed too far, and so on. These images would improve a great deal with an injection of subtlety.
