Airplane Landing Time Lapse (hi-res)

Airplane Landing Hi Res.jpg (96 KB)


| Send to Facebook | Send To Twitter
  • Leave A Comment

    Subscribe
    Notify of
    21 Comments
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    jascas_

    neat shot.

    FWIW, a more accurate title would be Airplane Landing Long Exposure. Time Lapse is generally used to refer to a video made of several stills taken at specific intervals which, in this case, would show the plane several times during the landing. But hey, it’s a cool find whether you call it Long Exposure, Time Lapse, or William.

    dieAntagonista

    I also thought you’d call this Long Exposure. But you can’t take pictures like that with a normal camera right? I know that the typical (or popular) Long Exposure pictures are the ones taken at night in a big city with lots of cars. I can’t imagine how this works out for a plane landing.

    MrX

    Actually, it’s a plane taking off. The pulses in the light lines are the wingtip strobes while the center pulse is the tail light. The incline is far too steep for a landing approach, but fairly common for a take-off.

    peatpunk

    Yah…I was going to ask, which airport has that short of a flight path where you would need to drop that sharp in such a short distance…

    kuTTer

    looks like a cool ride!

    Alec Dalek

    I don’t like the angle. It makes it look steeper.

    outofocus

    @dieAntagonista: I think this would work fine. The plane is moving pretty quickly. The photographer could adjust the f-stop to limit the amount of light coming in so that they could keep the shutter open the length of time needed without blowing out the image.

    SumoSnipe

    :Hong Kong and San Diego come to mind.

    jascas_

    @diaAntagonista outofocus is (ironically) correct about the image. It’s not difficult to do with a camera with manual controls. You would set your ISO (camera sensitivity to light) as low as possible, set your shutter speed to however long you think it will take (in this case, maybe 1 or 2 minutes?), then set your aperture (aka f-stop, the hole in the camera that lets in light) as small as necessary to reduce the amount of light coming in until the image will be balanced. I have a few shots like these just playing around in both my personal and… Read more »

    jascas_

    ^ what I meant to add about my comment above is that it’s actually a blast to “paint” with light, whether you’re controlling where the light is coming from (flashlight or even light from a cell phone, etc) or you’re not (car lights, lightning bugs). If you can get your hands on a camera that will do long shutter speeds, go for it!

    jascas_

    ^ and what I mean with that comment is that another one above it is awaiting moderation with a bunch of info in it, so until it shows up, you see nothing.

    tiki?

    one more thing about long-exposure shots is that the stationary light points in the photo (runway & airport lights, in this case) will “bleed” and the star shape will get bigger and bigger the longer the shutter is open.

    Fen

    Hah, good thing someone pointed out it was a take-off, not a landing. Otherwise I’d have shat my pants.

    outofocus

    @jascas_: What do you mean by “ironically”?

    jascas_

    “ironically” because of your s/n being something you usually try to avoid in photography – being out of focus. that’s all.

    you a photo person? “f-stop” isn’t usually a term thrown around by the general public.

    outofocus

    @jascas_: I guess I’m a photo person. I just shot a wedding today.

    jascas_

    Depends on what you shot it with…Canon 5d, Panasonic AG-DVX100B, or an AR-15.

    outofocus

    @jascas_: I said “photo person”. Not “gun person” or “video person”. (this would have been easy to figure out by simply clicking on my user name and boring yourself with my website)

    I have the 20D (i’ve had it since shortly after it was released) but I actually rented equipment to shoot the wedding. I’m not a wedding photographer. I only do it for friends so I don’t own the things generally needed for weddings.

    jascas_

    oh, but you said you “shot” the wedding…just wanted to make sure. 😉

    yeah, I tend to get a lot of “for friends” gigs, too – funny how that happens, huh? 20D is a good camera – will usually get the job done. I think too many people focus on equipment (having the latest/greatest) and not enough on talent, but that’s just me.

    outofocus

    @jascas_: I agree completely. I’ve grabbed people’s point and shoots and taken high quality images to prove to them that it’s not the camera’s fault that their pictures suck. I’m not a pro and I have a lot to learn … I still shoot by feel but I have a good natural eye.

    jascas_

    Yeah, I have always shot by feel, as well. Like you, I have no formal eduction in photography (only a very very helpful mentor and a strong desire to take a good photograph) and rely on my eye to get the shot I need – seldomly does my equipment limit me.

    Nice website, btw. It’ll be quite nice when you have everything up – I’ll be checking back.

    outofocus

    @jascas_: Thanks. I just put that up so there was something there… after 6 years of a blank page, I decided it was time. I probably won’t add much more… maybe occasionally update photos as they get better. I wouldn’t mind having a mentor. I tend to mentor others. I equipment limits me from time to time but I do the best I can. The wedding I did was so bad lighting wise that I would have needed several assistants and a full lighting set up to have worked around it. Talk about a total nightmare. I can usually get… Read more »