Megis Field. Just how many airfields have there been in this state? I am interested to know. I know JFK, LGA, RFG, ISP and EWR. What have I missed in my life?Originally Posted by lijk604
Megis Field. Just how many airfields have there been in this state? I am interested to know. I know JFK, LGA, RFG, ISP and EWR. What have I missed in my life?
MEIGS field was in Chicago...which is in Illinois....EWR is in NJ genius.Megis Field. Just how many airfields have there been in this state? I am interested to know. I know JFK, LGA, RFG, ISP and EWR. What have I missed in my life?
Have you ever seen a grown man naked?
Oh chicago. Sry I never even knew Meigs ever existed till now. I meant NY area but my bad on my mistake.
there are a TON of airports in NY state. just google it.Oh chicago. Sry I never even knew Meigs ever existed till now. I meant NY area but my bad on my mistake.
Like I was telling Senga, that Meigs field shot is awesome! even with the prop on the way. With a little editing it would be a beauty.
This might be a little late but I have to totally disagree with the advise to go get a DSLR (which will lead to an avalanche of uploads to the photo sites). That has ruined JetPhotos and every online database with every kid getting a digital these days then uploading the same 'ol planes over and over without checking there's already 500 photos of that same aircraft.
Before even thinking of a DSLR or Photoshop, you should 1st: stop shooting with the sun in your face (unless it's a mega-rare plane you will not see again). 2nd learn not to cut off nose nose and tails and 3rd follow the plane so there's no blur. 4th: Common stuff, keep it to yourself for your collection.
Nick, you'll get it buddy. If you want PM me your camera model to see if there's any settings you can play with.
And what does it matter to you how many photos of a particular aircraft are on JP or A.net? You're not paying for their server storage space, are you? If you don't like something there, don't click on the thumbnail. Personally, I have no interest in all the cabin photos that seem to be so popular, so I don't open them. That doesn't mean I think people should stop uploading them.
Your first three points are pretty standard photography concepts, but if you are serious about photography, what's wrong with using an entry-level DSLR to learn? It provides immediate feedback, and the flexibility to experiment with different settings and techniques. You can take a dozen pictures, send the film (and a check) off for processing, see how it looks when you get it back (a week or two later...) and then try to remember what you did. If your photos didn't turn out well, you can start the process all over again. With a DSLR, you can immediately see if you framed the shot correctly and if it is in focus, you can view the histogram to see if you over/under exposed the shot, and you can try different settings for shutter speed, f/stop and ISO to see how each interacts to arrive at the finished picture. And you can take hundreds of photos to try all of that without it costing you a penny for film or developing. And I say all this as someone who shot slides for 25+ years before moving to digital, and I haven't shot a frame of film since.
As to your last point, may I refer to my response to your first comment...
KC-135 - Passing gas & taking names!
http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=15086
http://moose135.smugmug.com
Bingo. Not that film doesn't have it's place. I wish I spent more time with a film camera to get the manual settings down solidly...I feel like I lost of the intuitive settings by relying on the camera to do it for me. Only recently have I begun to work toward setting the exposure completely manually.our first three points are pretty standard photography concepts, but if you are serious about photography, what's wrong with using an entry-level DSLR to learn? It provides immediate feedback, and the flexibility to experiment with different settings and techniques. You can take a dozen pictures, send the film (and a check) off for processing, see how it looks when you get it back (a week or two later...) and then try to remember what you did. If your photos didn't turn out well, you can start the process all over again. With a DSLR, you can immediately see if you framed the shot correctly and if it is in focus, you can view the histogram to see if you over/under exposed the shot, and you can try different settings for shutter speed, f/stop and ISO to see how each interacts to arrive at the finished picture. And you can take hundreds of photos to try all of that without it costing you a penny for film or developing. And I say all this as someone who shot slides for 25+ years before moving to digital, and I haven't shot a frame of film since.
If you do stick with film and want to get serious about kicking it up a notch bring a notepad and a pencil...write down the settings as you take the shots. Even now with the 7D I've started doing that with the AF settings so I can compare in detail each shot in comparison to others.
Also, Senga that Meigs field shot is just great. Don't ever get rid of that thing.
Amen! They only bother me if they keep my shot from making the top 5 shots of the day.
Fasten your seatbelts for my long, nerdy response..And what does it matter to you how many photos of a particular aircraft are on JP or A.net? You're not paying for their server storage space, are you? If you don't like something there, don't click on the thumbnail. Personally, I have no interest in all the cabin photos that seem to be so popular, so I don't open them. That doesn't mean I think people should stop uploading them.
Your first three points are pretty standard photography concepts, but if you are serious about photography, what's wrong with using an entry-level DSLR to learn? It provides immediate feedback, and the flexibility to experiment with different settings and techniques. You can take a dozen pictures, send the film (and a check) off for processing, see how it looks when you get it back (a week or two later...) and then try to remember what you did. If your photos didn't turn out well, you can start the process all over again. With a DSLR, you can immediately see if you framed the shot correctly and if it is in focus, you can view the histogram to see if you over/under exposed the shot, and you can try different settings for shutter speed, f/stop and ISO to see how each interacts to arrive at the finished picture. And you can take hundreds of photos to try all of that without it costing you a penny for film or developing. And I say all this as someone who shot slides for 25+ years before moving to digital, and I haven't shot a frame of film since.
As to your last point, may I refer to my response to your first comment...
1st and principal: This has nothing to do with film vs digital, just because you know I like to shoot film? I actually shoot digital most of the time these days for the common stuff and as backup. If you haven't shot film since, that's your choice and isn't anything new. 99% of the public happily traded the beauty & quality of slide film for 2mp digitals ever since they first came out. But, when did I tell anyone to stop shooting digital?
2nd and most principal: Yes he will be able to play with a $1000+ DSLR & Lens and delete some photos. The shots will be a little sharper, but he'll still upload cut off noses, backlit shots and such. How is getting a DSLR/photoshop the way to learn to shoot aircraft if he cannot handle neither his film or point & shoot DIGITAL?
3rd: What does it matter if I say plane databases these days are POLLUTED with the same stuff over and over plus all the gliders, balloons and bicycle with wings people upload these days? (I don't care for seat or interior shots either). As I see it film was an effective DETERRENT. Back in the days nobody would waste film to upload garbage.
- Sorry but even when I was a clueless nooby I always knew it was common sense to not waste a roll of film on every common aircraft that passed by or went crazy uploading the same 'ol thing everyone already has. Not even after getting my hands on a digital. You might disagree with my view, but there are others too who wish civil aviation sites main focus was on having a QUALITY collection of airliner/airlines like a.net and others were originally created for. Fine if you don't, but I DO WISH they would've stopped taking every common plane over and over, seats, APU shots, and such. That would have driven out the "elitist digital celebrities" and "777 cabin shot hit contests" and all that CRAP! Why CabinShots and AirplaneSeat.net doesn't exist yet is a total mystery.
- Before the new generation of robotic mass uploading, the GOOD, original aircraft photographers were more willing to upload their amazing airliner collections. Do you think they're gonna want to scan their photo gems to see only 200 cared to view them? While a silly seat gets 50,000 clicks by the typical 15-year old a.net/JP user these days, who's also a mass photo spammer with a D-something, who also thinks the 777 is AWESOME! Maybe you're not aware photogs with great historic photos have pulled their entire collections from a.net already. But maybe you can care less..
- Personally, it's a royal PAIN to check through the latest... say MIA uploads and having to scroll down through a page full of AA & LAN shots all in the same angle by every kid who has a DSLR and does nothing but aim, shoot, upload, aim, shoot, upload. Look HERE"S MY 100.000th SHOT!!!! I have to scroll through pages to find something new that might be flying there or sometimes just a SINGLE interesting subject. If I bother to upload something interesting, the next day it's BURIED by a foreign kid visiting who sent 30 shots of common local aircraft in bad light.
- Instead of the whole too-good-of-a-photog act after going digital because "sites started accepting everything I threw at them ever since my $2000 DSLR" I would like to see more willingness in helping others and quit being so rude to NLovis or anyone else. How difficult is it to show the kid IN PERSON a few photo basics? Of course, it's more fun to just make fun of him...
Last and most principal: If anybody takes personal my wish photo sites were more about quality subjects than the avalanche of generic stuff you might be sending -if the shoe fits-, then don't complain everytime NLovis uploads his 5 photos here... At least a blurred 767 with an apparent UFO next to it is funny to look at.
Moose told you.. Feedback. Feedback is the biggest tool in improving and if you have that quick a method of feedback it helps bigtime. Sure Nick will still have to read some book and take good advice and put in the hours at the airport applying this but if he can delete a shot instantly and see the EXIF data and shoot again and have easier ways to adjust settings he will improve.2nd and most principal: Yes he will be able to play with a $1000+ DSLR & Lens and delete some photos. The shots will be a little sharper, but he'll still upload cut off noses, backlit shots and such. How is getting a DSLR/photoshop the way to learn to shoot aircraft if he cannot handle neither his film or point & shoot DIGITAL
This statement is silly, why are cabin shots, ballons, gliders and doubles garbage? Just because you don't like them? This is very self serving. Didn't I hear that people here like to enjoy the hobby in their own way? So if you shoot one day and get some nice shots you can't upload them because they are already a few in the DB of the sites that host photos?3rd: What does it matter if I say plane databases these days are POLLUTED with the same stuff over and over plus all the gliders, balloons and bicycle with wings people upload these days? (I don't care for seat or interior shots either). As I see it film was an effective DETERRENT. Back in the days nobody would waste film to upload garbage.
Yea my last uploads of a B-17, 787, an Aladia 757 and a Nanchang CJ-6 are so generic. Look we are not asking Nick to improve his posts because of what we upload. We are asking him to do so because there has to be a line drawn when it comes to this. Remember if a newbie sees low quality posting they are not going to return. A forum in the aviation world is many things but one thing is it does take time out of our busy days to participate in. To open a thread constantly and see stuff like this it becomes a waste of time. I hope Nick doesn't feel we are coming down on him for personal reasons, we aren't. We are trying to give him somg good advice because it will most certainly help him if he continues in the hobby.Last and most principal: If anybody takes personal my wish photo sites were more about quality subjects than the avalanche of generic stuff you might be sending -if the shoe fits-, then don't complain everytime NLovis uploads his 5 photos here... At least a blurred 767 with an apparent UFO next to it is funny to look at
'My idea of a good picture is one that's in focus and of a famous person doing something unfamous.' Andy Warhol
Well I post so I can get feedback about these photo's and learn what to change/improve on. Its another learning method. If you keep it to yourself how will you learn what you did wrong from the experts? As for my recent film I got back this morning... blurry. I was fiddling with the settings a little on the lense while I was checking out Kodac 200 ISO. Needless to say the combo didnt turn out well. Maby 1 good shot out of that roll and a few from my digital. Though my highlight is definitly my night shot from last night on "strike eagle" N485EV. It didnt turn up blurry at all. A 1st for me in night time shots. :borat:
And I don't know of very many people on this forum who wouldn't be happy to give you advice. No one was born knowing everything there is to know about photography - well, except maybe Fred, I think he was born with a camera in his hand! I think I suggested in one of the photo threads a while back - post a couple of photos (no more than two or three of what you consider your best shots) in a thread - call it "NLovis Advice Thread" if you like. Let us take a look at a larger size photo (1024px wide works well) and tell us what (if any) post processing you are doing. That gives you and anyone offering help a place to start, and then let's go from there.
KC-135 - Passing gas & taking names!
http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=15086
http://moose135.smugmug.com
lol After reading it again I'm honestly still wondering the real reason Moose felt the need to throw a little attitude in there but.. lol whatever. NIKV: it's great to see you so eager to back up his questioning and judging of why I expect to see AIRLINER photos ....on AIRLINER sites. (sorry to have pointed out your advise wasn't that great brah)
The popular sites are riddled with crap -sorry lol just how I call it- that should not belong and is only allowed because they figured more uploaders, more traffic. It's a pain to sort through all these other subjects which would probably be better on a dedicated military site, general aviation, hobby site, or whatever fits. If you pretend to not understand that, the one being selfish is yourself.
The above concept is simple & logical. That doesn't mean whoever uploads the stuff is a bad photographer or anything, no need to take it personal.
About instant camera "Feedback": Maybe his digital p & s already has an LCD. Whichever camera, he clearly still doesn't know what a decent image is supposed to look like which is the point. Won't stop him from sharing the "bad" shots in these threads ...since some seem to be so bothered by it (especially you NIKV69)
Right my statement is "silly". Try reading the words AIRLINERS.net and JETPHOTOS.net a few times and you might discover what those words mean. You think you're the only one entitled to be opinionated here? We simply don't agree. Even the Snoopy balloon (no disrespect to Snoopy) and a crystal ball inside Madrid's airport are making it into the sites these days.This statement is silly, why are cabin shots, ballons, gliders and doubles garbage? Just because you don't like them? This is very self serving.
By the way my opinion of the photo sites wasn't even the topic. I was trying to help someone who clearly doesn't know the difference between a good and bad shot. Somehow it got dragged into some pointless digital vs film tangent and even a subtle insult or two sprinkled in. I've been checking out these sites ever since they came online and reality is they were much more enjoyable back in the days. Don't take it personal if neither of you were uploading then..
Send it to Everything-except-full-shots-of-commercial-aircraft.comYea my last uploads of a B-17, 787, an Aladia 757 and a Nanchang CJ-6 are so generic
The only thing there which adds anything of value to a civil aircraft site is the Aladia 757. What makes you think I'd go to an A I R L I N E R S photo site to see a Nanchang CJ-6??
Oh wait... so now looking at something you don't want to see is a waste of time? And how do you think I feel when I have to see all the non-airliner crap users like you upload?To open a thread constantly and see stuff like this it becomes a waste of time
It goes both ways.
Ok I think its time to chill out here before a full scale war breaks out.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks