So who knows how this was done?

Magic (lantern) springs to mind..

Similar to the Bracketing function maybe..
Manually set so that the first shot is the plane in perfect exposure then the second shot is a long exposure for the trail.. Then wizardry in PS pop the two images together..
 
I'd say its higher ISO and front sync flash, it's likely to be a fairly strong likely full power flash...never done it myself but see no reason why it wouldn't work at the right location, if your really cute you'd use a couple of OCF guns wand wireless triggers...

You might find it more likely to p*** of airport security and police, so expect to be answering questions but strictly speaking nothing wrong if you time it correctly so that your not firing too early and potentially even if its a .001% chance of startling the pilots
 
BennyBoo said:
Magic (lantern) springs to mind..

Similar to the Bracketing function maybe..
Manually set so that the first shot is the plane in perfect exposure then the second shot is a long exposure for the trail.. Then wizardry in PS pop the two images together..
Click to expand...

That would violate that particular websites editing policy
 
MWHCVT said:
That would violate that particular websites editing policy
Click to expand...

I had no experience of said webiste.. My bad..

Id say you're more on the money there then, one complete, long exposure with a powerfull flash at the start for the plane, then left open for the trail..
 
BennyBoo said:
I had no experience of said webiste.. My bad..

Id say you're more on the money there then, one complete, long exposure with a powerfull flash at the start for the plane, then left open for the trail..
Click to expand...

It's a website I've spent many an hour on, though I haven't ever added photos on there as frankly I don't do enough dedicated aviation stuff and if I'm honest the stuff I like doing would likely not get passed their screening anyway :lol:
 
Thats some powerful flash to light up an entire A319, but yet you can still see the stars?

Airliners.net is one of those websites which you can love to hate. The screeners are sometimes unrealistic in what is "passable" and at times they are a bit obnoxious but after 7 years of trying I now have shots on there though, even if my acceptance rate is around 10% :( Artistic and good composition doesn't seem to count for much!
 
cw318is said:
Thats some powerful flash to light up an entire A319, but yet you can still see the stars?

Airliners.net is one of those websites which you can love to hate. The screeners are sometimes unrealistic in what is "passable" and at times they are a bit obnoxious but after 7 years of trying I now have shots on there though, even if my acceptance rate is around 10% :( Artistic and good composition doesn't seem to count for much!
Click to expand...

I've seen it done with a 747 too so it is possible to get a light source powerful enough, I see no reason why you wouldn't still be able to see stars while using flash...it's helped by the fact it's white well (dirty white) it's AF afterall, I wouldn't expect nearly as good results with as a BA jet because of the dark blue of the lower
 
likely not get passed their screening anyway
Click to expand...

You have to be best buddies with someone in the screening team to get through it.
It's not exactly a shining light of aviation photography. The 'rules' are from the original owner who thought all aircraft photos should be that way, and no diviation is permitted. Sad thing is they people who now use it, and who are screeners think thats the only way too.
 
Interesting shot, if it was closer I'd say it was a flash at the opening of the shutter, then a long exposure.

I know wide shots can be deceiving in terms of subject distances, but to project that much light and dispersed over the entire 747 even on a long exposure....its too early for me to do the maths but that's some serious firepower.

I'd have thought that would be spotted quite quickly by security and they'd have you face down on the floor before a few shots were done...
 
desantnik said:
Interesting shot, if it was closer I'd say it was a flash at the opening of the shutter, then a long exposure.

I know wide shots can be deceiving in terms of subject distances, but to project that much light and dispersed over the entire 747 even on a long exposure....its too early for me to do the maths but that's some serious firepower.

I'd have thought that would be spotted quite quickly by security and they'd have you face down on the floor before a few shots were done...
Click to expand...

I'd estimate its well under 100m as its only a few seconds from touch down, also it's not a 747 far from it, it's an A320/1 so about 1/3 of the size plus its nearly all white/light grey glossy paint I think you'd be surprised how little power is needed I'd not be surprised if it were only a 530EX2 on about 1/8th power as you wouldn't want the flash duration to be too long

Security issues is a distinct possibility but probably not all that bad ;)
 
If we assume 100m, looks like you'd need full power (GN58), ISO 3200 and f2.8 - or some sort of combo arriving at the same.

You've still got to disperse the light across the whole aircraft though and a diffuser will take a lot of the power out of the flash...
 
Yeah more powerful or just more flash units
 
Similar, but it's the ghost look with the flash. This shot from the same chap is definate flash; http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/9/3/3/1977339.jpg

I think it was actually timed very carefully, using the reil lights - very high intensity omnidirectional strobes at the end of the runway to give the initial "flash" then a conventional 10 second exposure or whatever. If you look the light trails start just before the start point, even allowing for a sync flash delay or whatever I think thats the giveaway.....

The same guy has a few other shots done in a similar manner;
http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/6/3/6/1988636.jpg


And Bernie you've pretty much hit the nail on the head, thats way 90% of the shots on there are frame filling high aoa oversharpened departure shots of Southwestern!
 
Not done it with planes but done it with cars and you need very little flash power, even on ISO100 or 200. I've used about 20 secs on ISO200 to get the stars and sky exposed correctly, so I'm guessing a higher ISO and 5-10 secs exposure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top