Back to Basics

[Colin Southern]

(Click on image for best view)

[Tony M]

Back to Basics??? I can show you basic! Unless you mean "back to perfecting the basics".

A lovely picture. I like the razor-sharp lights illuminating the scene from below. Taken with a fast shutter-speed and an impossibly high ISO (for my camera anyway). Did you have to do any "basic" PP?

Tony

[Colin Southern]

Back to Basics??? I can show you basic! Unless you mean "back to perfecting the basics".

A lovely picture. I like the razor-sharp lights illuminating the scene from below. Taken with a fast shutter-speed and an impossibly high ISO (for my camera anyway). Did you have to do any "basic" PP?

Tony

Thanks Tony

I'll let some others comment on the shutter speed and ISO a bit before I reveal too much more

[Carl in Louisiana]

what a clean and beautiful image for such a high ISO. Would love to know how you did it and the PP steps taken. I think a big part of it was the camera and lens used. And of course coupled with the skill level of the photographer using the camera and lens and the same skill during PP. I can only dream of such equipment and skills.
I would say that the aperture and high ISO was the culprit for the fast shutter speed, but with you that could be all wrong.

[Colin Southern]

what a clean and beautiful image for such a high ISO. Would love to know how you did it and the PP steps taken. I think a big part of it was the camera and lens used. And of course coupled with the skill level of the photographer using the camera and lens and the same skill during PP. I can only dream of such equipment and skills.
I would say that the aperture and high ISO was the culprit for the fast shutter speed, but with you that could be all wrong.

Thanks Carl,

Pretty much wrong on all accounts though

Folks are going to have to think some more about it I'm afraid

[Carl in Louisiana]

That came as no surprise. That makes me two for two now. Well some of the other pro's will be along soon I hope. Inquiring minds would like to know.

Thanks Carl,

Pretty much wrong on all accounts though

Folks are going to have to think some more about it I'm afraid

[FrankMi]

LOL! What do you guys 'see' when you look at this image?

[Colin Southern]

Ah - getting warmer

[Carl in Louisiana]

LOL! What do you guys 'see' when you look at this image?

This is my last attempt as I feel I have already lost all my dignity. "It's a plane landing at an airport."

[Stagecoach]

I see an airport, I see landing lights, I see a plane coming in to land (or is it taking off), I see the EXIF data with shutter speed and aperture

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm I then see I do not have the answer yet

[FrankMi]

Hmmmm... If I were to merge two images into one, what would the EXIF data tell me?

By the way, nice capture Colin! I need to get out to an airport at night and get some shots!

[Stagecoach]

Ok, I'll have a go for the prize now, expanding on my post 10 .................

As a guess (quick google search) the plane landing speed at touchdown was 180 mph.

So going metric this equates to 280 Km/hr which with a bit of maths ends up at around 1008 mtrs travelled in 1 second.

With your shutter speed at 1/800th that equates to the plane moving approx 80 mts whilst the shutter was open.

You were using an 85mm lens so your shooting distance could be calculated BUT this would not be very accurate as the shooting angle to the planes path of travel is unknown !

Is that basic enough or more importantly anywhere near the response you were after Colin ?

[Colin Southern]

As a guess (quick google search) the plane landing speed at touchdown was 180 mph.

So going metric this equates to 280 Km/hr which with a bit of maths ends up at around 1008 mtrs travelled in 1 second.

With your shutter speed at 1/800th that equates to the plane moving approx 80 mts whilst the shutter was open.

A little warmer too - although you need to check your maths !!

[Colin Southern]

This is my last attempt as I feel I have already lost all my dignity. "It's a plane landing at an airport."

Yes - but what are those things behind the landing plane?

[Carl in Louisiana]

Yes - but what are those things behind the landing plane?

Would it be turbulence trail from the props and landing lights?

[Stagecoach]

Colin, you are correct and I found the error in the maths.

At 280 Km/hr (rough average landing speed for a comercial flight) this would equate to a speed of 80 mtrs/sec. With the shutter speed of 1/800th sec distance traveled (length of light trail) whilst shutter open would be 0.1 mtr (100mm).

From the image that trail is way greater that 100mm so suspecting some clever PPing, possibly two shots stacked ?

[Colin Southern]

Would it be turbulence trail from the props and landing lights?

Um, no

[Colin Southern]

Colin, you are correct and I found the error in the maths.

At 280 Km/hr (rough average landing speed for a comercial flight) this would equate to a speed of 80 mtrs/sec. With the shutter speed of 1/800th sec distance traveled (length of light trail) whilst shutter open would be 0.1 mtr (100mm).

From the image that trail is way greater that 100mm so suspecting some clever PPing, possibly two shots stacked ?

Bingo

Taken with 2 different cameras at the some time though -I'll upload a photo of the rig when I get home.

[Colin Southern]

PS: Their landing speed is also MUCH slower - under 100 knots over the fence, stall speed much lower.

[Carl in Louisiana]

Um, no

I think I'll stick with the basic's of beginner for now as this is way over my head. Off to take my tylenol now!