Photography and Aviation buffs may find this photo interesting. I think it's beautiful

[A HERETIC I AM]

http://www.airliners.net/photo/1595413/L/

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. It IS beautiful!

Thanks for sharing...

[A HERETIC I AM]

3. Glad you liked it, Peggy. n/t

:-)

[givemebackmycountry]

2. Can SOMEONE explain why SOMEONE would unrec this post?

That's a great pic and to the usurper, BITE ME!

[A HERETIC I AM]

4. Please don't.

I'm glad you liked it. People are free to rec or unrec (or neither) this as they see fit with no need for explanation.

[givemebackmycountry]

25. Here's a hug - you are good peeps...

:pals:

[A HERETIC I AM]

27. Aw, thanks man!

:toast: Backatya!

[SoCalDem]

5. because they are an asshole who has an anonymous "piss on poster" button

:grr:

[Liberal_in_LA]

7. some are unrecing everything.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

38. Probably Because It's Lounge Material And This Ain't The Lounge.

Personally, I don't care and wouldn't feel the need to unrec it for such a reason. Are there people here who would? Probably. You'd be amazed at the petty reasons as to why someone unrecs something.

[DWilliamsamh]

47. Who CARES? What possible difference could it make to know the why or who?

The question of "why and "who" would dare unrec this or that thread is exponentially more annoying that the fact that people might unrec something. Get over it.

[Liberal_in_LA]

6. nice!

[WillyT]

8. K & R !!!

Way cool!!!

:kick:

[inna]

9. beautiful and AWFULL, at the same time. i'm not sure if this can be defined...

[Throd]

10. thank you. it is lovely.

[Fridays Child]

11. I love it.

[immoderate]

12. About an hour of exposure.

Judging from the arcs of the stars. B-)

--imm

[A HERETIC I AM]

13. I was going to ask, so I'm glad you said so.

Not having any kind of deep knowledge of the art, I was curious how long of an exposure that was.

Is that technically called a "time lapse" shot or is time lapse photography always referring to a sequence of closely shot stills made into a film?

[anigbrowl]

18. Time lapse is a series of pictures, yes.

[druidity33]

32. not time lapse...

Probably just a Bulb exposure on a tripod. Shutter stays open for 'an hour' or so. Time lapse would be single frames taken at intervals... say every second or 10 seconds.

:)

[A HERETIC I AM]

33. I understand how the pic was made....

I was curious of the common name for that technique.

Thanks though!

:)

[druidity33]

41. common name would be

timed exposure. No big whoop. Stars look excellent that way though...

:)

[immoderate]

35. On second thought...

I want to amend that to 2+ hours. I was reading the sky as a 12 hour clock, when it's really a 24 hour clock. Remember, a clock keeps track of the sun's position in the sky.

Now the center of the rotation of stars, that should be Polaris, the North Star. So the sun is setting at the beginning of the exposure -- that's west.

I see that others have tackled the time lapse question. This is just a long exposure. I would apply that to anything longer than 1/15 second. That is, longer than what can be done "hand held." (Though, as a photographer, I recommend a tripod whenever possible, no matter what the exposure. :))

--imm

[A HERETIC I AM]

37. Thanks.

I've always loved these kinds of shots - we all have seen them of highways at night for instance, where the constant stream of car headlights makes a ribbon of light.

I always thought there was another name for the technique, but "long exposure" is perfectly appropriate, obviously.

[muriel_volestrangler]

45. I agree with the 2 hours for the stars; I think the setting sun is an earlier exposure

because the clouds in the sunset are stationary, and there's no way they'd stay that still for 2 hours (and the light of the sun and twilit sky would show up as pure white for an hours-long exposure). So I think this is a combination of a relatively short exposure at sunset to get the sun and clouds, and then a 2 hour exposure from some time later when the sky is properly dark (and, I'd guess, cloud free), so that only the aircraft lights and stars show up (and no moon).

[NashVegas]

46. Longer, And Some Shopping

Not that that detracts from it, it's still damn cool. I just don't the lens could have been left open that long without entirely over-exposing, where this was set. I think you'd have to go far, far away from any place where there's other light.

[RKP5637]

14. Absolutely Incredible!!! Glad you posted this! n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. Beautiful

[slipslidingaway]

16. knr thanks nt

[Schema Thing]

17. I guess I didn't realize/remember that airplanes have strobe lights on landing.

[A HERETIC I AM]

20. The picture has picked up wingtip lights as well as strobes...

that's why the trail has more red toward the right, as most tip lighting systems have both a colored light (red for port or left and green for starboard) mounted so that it is more visible forward and a white strobe that is more visible to the rear. That explains why as the light trail descends to the runway, almost all of the red is replaced by white light.

Here's a short .pdf doc that describes lighting requirements;

http://www.whiskeyvictor.com/_inst/requirements.pdf

On edit to add that the pic has picked up primary landing lights as well, (obviously) which can be mounted on the nose gear, main gear, leading edge of the wings, and bottom of the fuselage.

[Schema Thing]

23. thanks for the link

very cool.


although I think the strobes are all represented by the dots (which is what confused me at first "wth are those?"). I think the even the red lights becomes white as all the various airplane's colored lights converge into the same lines on the image, and therefore blow out the exposure.

[The_Casual_Observer]

19. It looks just like an Ed Ruscha painting to me.

[A HERETIC I AM]

49. Sort of like this?

[petronius]

21. Amazing photo! I don't know how one would go about selecting

the proper aperture for something like that...

[BrklynLiberal]

22. Wow! that is incredible.....

[stevedeshazer]

24. I like it very much.

Nice combination of an air corridor, cirrus clouds, and the circumpolar stars in the Northern Hemisphere.

[Mugu]

26. Very nicely done indeed. Bravo.

I'm guessing that this is a stack of like 25 long exposures. If you don't wish to divulge your methodology I'll understand.

K&R

[A HERETIC I AM]

28. I absolutely DO NOT TAKE CREDIT for this!!! Photographer is Szabo Gabor and it was shot in Budapest

Info on the photo here;

http://www.airliners.net/photo/1595413/L/

[Mugu]

29. OK. I'm a bit slow at times, but I get it now.

Thank you for the link.

[immoderate]

36. Interesting. Have you ever heard of this jazz guitarist?

--imm

[A HERETIC I AM]

39. No I haven't.

Hmm... Wiki says he passed away in 1982.

Not the same guy, no doubt.

[blue sky at night]

30. Hey thanks for the inspiration....

I am a shooter and ALWAYS like looking at others work; this guy is really something. I have messed around with some long shutter stuff with my DSLR and it is NOT the same as shooting with Film. I have so much to learn, and I have been at this game for 32 years!! BTW, saw all the hoops you have to jump through to use their images...they are strict and get mad if you don't follow the rules.

[A HERETIC I AM]

31. Yes, I know about the hoops....

and I am actually surprised the pic showed up on my OP. That's why I included the link just in case.

Hopefully, this little thread will go un-noticed by the mean people at Airliners.net!

Out of curiosity on your Digital SLR, how long of an exposure can you take before it starts looking goofy? I don't know if I've ever seen a digital shot with an exposure of longer than a few seconds. As I indicated upthread, I'm no photog so my knowledge of the art form is limited. I understand the mechanics of a camera lens, etc., but I have never studied the finer points of making artful photographs.

[Blue_Tires]

34. ttt

[pleah]

40. Cool!

K&R

[swishyfeet]

42. Great shot!

I love the little strobe light flashes

[ddeclue]

43. Way cool! and astronomy buffs too!

:applause:

[Bozita]

44. Eyeball magnet!

Yes it is.

[mdmc]

48. yes

[winyanstaz]

50. K & R....

nicely done and very lovely... :)

[bertman]

51. Quite magnificent!!! I'm imagining seeing this reproduced on a wall thirty feet wide

by twenty feet high.

Thanks Heretic I Am.

Rec

[A HERETIC I AM]

53. That would be cool!

Glad you enjoyed it.

If you are an aviation enthusiast at all, that website can keep you busy for hours and hours!

Here's another one of my favorites;

[Redstone]

52. Ya-hooey! EXCELLENT time-exposure. One of the best I've seen.

Redstone

[juajen]

54. Lovely. Thanks for posting this. NT