Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

[Peashooter]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

The parts falling off this car are the finest British quality...

LMAO!

[zaqwrx]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

We're not going off into the British car thing are we?

[440_Magnum]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

We're not going off into the British car thing are we?

Not without a push-start anyway...

[wolfee]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

It would take more then a push start to get my 59 Sunbeam Alpine moving....


Roflmao

[ignomini]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

We're not going off into the British car thing are we?

Oh yeah, bring it on baby. Anything is fair game as long as it has BOOST!

[zaqwrx]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

Oh yeah, bring it on baby. Anything is fair game as long as it has BOOST!

I coulda used one of those !

[Leo]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

Is'nt "British Automobile" an oxymoron kinda like "Military Intelligence"?

[ignomini]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

Is'nt "British Automobile" an oxymoron kinda like "Military Intelligence"?

I believe you meant to say "French automobile."

[Leo]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

I owned a Healy Sprite for a short time. It was fun, but either vomited parts or huge amounts of oil every time I drove it.

[fenceliner01]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

Ponder this for a minute. An unlimited flying at only 400mph is covering 586 feet per Second. So, even with a relatively fast shutter speed of 1/100, the aircraft will have moved almost six feet in the time the shutter is open. Slower shutter speeds for "prop blur" increases the distance traveled. Here's some other examples.

400mph - 586 ft/second

1/80 - 7.3 ft
1/60 - 9.8 ft


480mph - 704 ft/sec

1/100 - 7.04 ft
1/80 - 8.8 ft
1/60 - 11.7 ft


I don't have depth of field stats at hand for various lfocal length and f-stops combinations, but my theory is that in most head-on or 3/4 head on shots, there is going to be only a certain section of the airplane that has it's movement captured entirely within the depth of field zone during the exposure - that's the part of the plane that will be the sharpest, all other factors notwithstanding. I'm not taking into account panning techique - I'm sure this will widen that sharpness zone, similar to image motion compensation in aerial mapping cameras.

Conversley, panning and shooting an aicraft that is flying at a constant radius from the camera (such as during a turn around a pylon), will at times give you a sharper capture over the entire aircraft, because it's moivng parallel to the depth of field, not through it.

So, if I were out on a pylon and wanted to capture the most detail in combination with showing off as much of the aircraft as possible, I' pull back away from the pylon to the inside of the course, consistent with safety.

[Mike51]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

I'd agree with most of that, Mike. However, the side-on, banking shots of racers going around the pylon, whilst easier to achieve, don't have the same 'in yer face' drama of Victor's compressed, long lens near-head-on shots.

[fenceliner01]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

I'd agree with most of that, Mike. However, the side-on, banking shots of racers going around the pylon, whilst easier to achieve, don't have the same 'in yer face' drama of Victor's compressed, long lens near-head-on shots.

Just differetn styles, I suppose. there's room for both.

https://www.pbase.com/mikearnold/prs2007

[Leo]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

I just point the magic picture box at the flying thingy and take what I get.

[Skyracer]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

What type of shutter do the digital SLR's have? I know from my 35mm days that focal plane (vertical and horizontal plane) and iris shutters each contributed their "uniqueness" to my pictures.

[Skyracer]

Re: Jason Somes - CAF Bearcat

Has anyone actually tested their lens on a stationary object? Could just be edge fall-off.