Rubbish photo that turned out ok?
 

Under the excuse that I'm new to this site and testing my photo attachments I give you what turned out to be a good pic of the Reds at Waddo during their 50 year season. Any more takers , go on be brave ?

Your pictures need to be smaller.

1000 pixels wide max.

Landlocked, apart from the posted size, that's a pretty cool photo.:ok:

Landlocked, try using the preview post button, you can experiment to your hearts content :ok:

No you were right the first time, it's a rubbish photo. Not that I could take much better.

Good point, although mods have repeatedly requested a maximum size of 850 x 850. There used to be a sticky about this, but I can't find it right now.

Edit:- Found it

http://www.pprune.org/spectators-bal...your-pics.html

That request was five years ago and, even then, it didn't apply in all forums.

eg The Rotorheads forum max width used to be 900 pixels (2004):

It has been 1024 in Rotorheads for quite a long time.
Computer screens are generally bigger now than they used to be.

Apart from the size of image on the forum, am I missing something here?

All I can see is a photograph where everything is well out of focus.

I'd be playing with photoshop to get rid of the sign, then get rid of the out of focus aircraft and then it would be ok.

http://s5.postimg.org/p0vzfcnw7/FIFT..._REDS_LOGO.jpg
Ok, another go then. The 50 (years ) sign is a fluke part of the cr*p snap you see guys. Always the same when you have to explain the joke innit, well done Tom for spotting .....:ugh:

Good effort, but without sounding too harsh, one needs to have a decent photo to be able to work with to improve

Unfortunately, I don't think the out of focus can be improved on this image. Furthermore, as the sign is so prominent, there really is no point in trying to eliminate it. It's definitely the sign that is the prominent feature in this photo - if that was the aim, then you achieved it, however the light on top of the sign spoils the effect.

Also, there is a little pointy red thing on the right side of the pic? Is that an Arrow, or just some random pointy thing. My point (pardon the pun) being, it does nothing to add to the photo. This is an example of something that could easily have been cloned out.

Last but not least, manual settings are always the best, for fast moving subjects. I dabble a bit in bird/aviation photography, and believe me, birds are probably the worse subject to photograph. :)

Good idea though, with the sign etc.

Feel free to browse my album, below. All taken at either RIAT or Farnborough.
https://flic.kr/s/aHsk3B5LzM

I hope you do not mind, I ran it through lightroom to improve it a little ( I hope ) though it gets grainy as you can see.


You need to try to pan a bit quicker ( Or Slower ) with the aircraft, it's a pain, I still get more bad than good images.
Nice try though and a cool idea :) keep plugging away and you will get it cracked.


http://i536.photobucket.com/albums/f...k.jpg~original

...but in the meanwhile Landlocked I wouldn't give up the day job:ok:

I can't argue with what the OP was trying to achieve with the composition of the photo. I tried much the same idea in 2009 at Shoreham...

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4143/...d6261c08_z.jpg

Regarding image sizes, it is, of course, the responsibility of the individual forum moderator to order in my experience on other sites unless there is a general ruling (which I do not see on PPrune).

Heliport - you need to understand that '1024' includes the side bars on a forum display, and even viewing your forum on a 1440 screen, images at 1024 are 'off the side'. 850 is a far better size. On PPR I guess the available width would be about 8-900?

600 x 400 or 800 x 600 are ideal sizes for a forum image. VBulletin allows for a setting that permits a max sixe to be posted without distorting the thread.