Photographing Aircraft.

[SuperStreaker]

This is probably a stupid question, but here goes.

I am planning to take a trip to Pearson (YYZ) to take shots (Photo's) of aircraft landing. I intend to do this mid afternoon early evening and will be using a flash. Is this something that could distract a pilot trying to concerntrate, or is it done so often that you have all learned to ignore it? Any advice to help make this safe, I don't want to stun any pilots and become acquainted with the pointy part of an Airbus.

Thanks.


Graham

[GlueBall]

Flash shots at night are good only at close range; 10 meters at best for optimum resolution. It's not realistic to expect the flash of a camera to light up your piece of the sky.

[Mad (Flt) Scientist]

Not a pilot, from from purely photographic considerations:

Why are you going to use a flash? Unless you are either going to be alarming close to the subject (given your concern about being struck by an errant Airbus) or you'd have to be using one enormous flash to have any effect on the photos.

Typical SLR flashes are nominally good to 100ft or so - but I wouldn't bet on any useful effect past 25ft. Not only would any effect on the pilot be minimal at typical airport photo ranges, but I doubt the flash will help you much either. (I doubt the flash is much worse than any of the many strobes etc around the airport environment)

If you are planning to use a more 'industrial' flash set up then maybe it is a concern - but I suspect the airport perimeter security may have words with you as you set up the flash antenna/trailer. :)

Glueball was a faster typist

[SuperStreaker]

Mad Scientist:

Thanks for the perspective. Seems like a stupid concern considering I'm only using a Cannon Digital Camera, and compared to anything else they are pointed at it is really small fry. Talk of a more "industrial" setup cunjures up images of those old movies and the flash powder.

The location is incredibly close to the threshold, you can usually see people in the windows.

I'll only consider using the flash if I do see myself and the business end of something coming quite close :-)

Glueball:

I think I have other concerns if my flash is enough to stun members of the flight deck. What was I thinking?

Thanks for the outside thoughts.

Graham

[PaperTiger]

On something as large and fast as a landing airliner, your camera's flash will be totally useless. Worse, it will fool the automatic exposure into thinking the subject is illuminated more than it actually is. Result - dark pictures.
Turn it off and leave it off.

Same if you take shots through the terminal windows. Turn the flash off AND set the focus to infinity. I estimate there are millions of photos in the world showing a bright reflection with the dim, fuzzy outline of an airplane in the background :D

[chiglet]

Graham
IF your Canon digi-cam is anything like my Fuji, forget it:rolleyes:
Seriously, try this experiment. Ask a friend to pose for you, with one arm vertical. Ask them to lower the arm as you say "now" and press the button at the same time .
I think that you will be surprised just how far the arm has moved before the pic is taken.
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[GS-Alpha]

I'm afraid the size and speed of a landing airliner has nothing to do with the fact that the intensity of the flash will be insignificant. (Light travels quite fast). The only problem is the distance. The power of the light from a point source (the flash), decreases inversely with the square of the distance from source. As has already been mentioned, this means that anything futher than about 10 ft away from your camera will not be illuminated adequately. Try taking a photo of an outdoor object at this range if you do not believe the physics. (Indoors you will get a slightly higher range due to light reflection from walls etc..)

I would suggest that if you ever find yourself within ten feet of a landing airliner, that you are too close and you should be moving your legs as fast as possible. (Obviously this only applies to those not onboard the aircraft).

With a modern automatic camera, you would indeed produce a much better picture without the fash than you would if you tried to use one.

Unfortunately the speed of the aircraft will srew your pictures in the dark though (as mentioned in a previous post), because your camera's apperture will remain open for a relatively long time and you will get a blured moving object as a result.

I am not a photographer so I could be talking rubbish, but I do know the laws of Physics. And as Scottie says... you canna change them.:p

[BayAreaLondoner]

SuperStreaker,

I'm not sure which Canon digital you have (I have an S40). If it doesn't have manual settings of some sort, just don't bother. If it does have manual settings:
1. As others have said, set it so that it never fires the flash.
2. Turn up the "ISO setting" - mine goes to 400. The Auto setting just toggles between 50 and 100, which will be useless. At ISO 400 you will get more grain but more grain is better than no picture.
3. Set the camera to "shutter priority" (Tv mode) if possible. You want quite a fast shutter speed, but slow enough to get enough light in. Since it is digital you can experiment with this setting. If you don't have a shutter priority mode but do have a program mode, just make whatever adjustment you can to crank the shutter speed up (which will also increase the aperture).
4. Use a tripod.

Good luck and post some of what you take :)

[PaperTiger]

I'm afraid the size and speed of a landing airliner has nothing to do with the fact that the intensity of the flash will be insignificant.
Well probably semantics, but both factors negate any possible advantage of typical flash. A stationary Piper Cub might benefit from being so illuminated because it is a) small and b) not moving. Even if you stood right next to an airliner, the flash would reach maybe the first 10ft of fuselage, the rest would be in darkness. Since it is moving (landing) automatic flash would slow the shutter sufficiently to seriously blur the subject. If the camera has an 'action' setting that might work, but for really sharp photos you'll need to pan at at least 1/250th sec. in daylight

[SuperStreaker]

It's a Cannon PowerShot Pro 90 IS, and I'm pretty sure it will allow me to adjust the Shutter speed (should do for what they cost :-( ). I never had any desire to photograph aircraft until I saw airliners.net.

Thanks everyone for the info and advice. I'll post when I get something that's not too embarrasing.

[BayAreaLondoner]

Yup, the Pro90 definitely has manual controls.
We now expect nothing less than David Bailey standard photos :)

[L1011PFE]

For what it's worth, if its not too late. Don't bother taking any night pictures of large aircraft. Unless you're a professional with the right equipment, you'll be wasting your time. Digital Cameras are great for some applications, but dark scenes is not one.

If you really want good pictures you can buy an inexpensive 35mm SLR and use a higher-speed film (ISO 400 should work), leave the flash off. Shoot your pictures about 1- 2 hours before sunset (or an hour or two after sunrise). First, try the highest shutter speed you can, this should be enough to stop the action. Make sure the sun is not in front of you (unless you want a sihouette, which could be very dramatic) The best angle of the sun would be about 35-45 degrees off your position. If it is behind your back you might get unwanted glare from windows, etc.

Next keeping the same shutter speed, try changing the f stop +1 for the next shot and -1 for the shot after that (this is called bracketing your exposure), thus one of the 3 shots should be a good one.

You can also try this technique; Set the shutter speed to about 1/250th or slower down to about 1/60th, as the aircraft approaches try panning along with the aircraft and pressing the shutter release (keep panning as you do). It takes practice, but if done right, you'll get a nice effect; focused aircraft and blurred background.

Hope it works out.
:)

[under_exposed]

Yep L1011PFE, thats his best bet. But to go with the inexpensive 35mm SLR, get an expensive lens. A good lens makes a lot of difference at low light levels.

SuperStreaker, if you wish to enlarge the pictures then forget the digital camera, not enough resolution.