PDA

View Full Version : First tries at AP


eflight-ray
07-18-2006, 04:30 PM
Here are some aerial shots from two of my models. This was my first attempts at AP, and as expected there was a lot of shots that were not worth showing.

Things to remember when not to take a shot are - :(
- not when banked with the camera pointing at the sky
- not when looking at the sun
- not when climbing steeply.

But I'm getting there. :)

The first model was my Majestic Major and the second was my o.d. lightweight still with no proper name, but has a WattFlyer sticker, so Watt Flyer will do for now.

I'll add pic's of the camera and mount later.

adhoc
07-18-2006, 04:37 PM
Very sweet pics! I'm so envious of your flying area... large and beautiful!

Nice job!

eflight-ray
07-18-2006, 06:29 PM
Well the camera I used is a Casio Elexim EX-S2 2.0 mega pixel and weighs in at 3.75oz. I didn't choose it for AP but for easy carrying, it slips in to a shirt pocket where my bigger cameras tended to get left at home.

The mount is made from lightply, balsa wood and sticky tape, weighs .75oz, and its retained in/on the models with velcro. There's a micro servo fitted so that one way switches the camera on or off, and the other way takes the shot.
Biggest problem is remembering whether it on or off after a while. :confused:

Currently I use the lefthand stick left right for action.

So here's some pics -

Edit - just noticed the the picture of the camera on the blue fuz is mirror image, used my web cam and forgot to reverse it, (and no one spotted my 'deliberate' mistake?).

eflight-ray
07-18-2006, 06:38 PM
Here is what I have used for AP

The Majestic Major 88" span, Magnetic Mayhem with 7 cell nimh powered, and the Watt Flyer, 48" span, BP21 motor with 2s1p lipo power.

aviatordave
07-18-2006, 06:45 PM
Nice pics, I like seeing pics of the UK, its so green where you live.

Neat idea with the camera mounts...is the sticky tape your refering to the black foam in the camera box....used for vibration?

If its possible you could angle your mount down about 10-20 degrees to get rid of the wing in your pictures, the camera will focus better and you will get more of an oblique photo. Something to try out if you have the time, the camera seems to take nice pics already.

just curious, what kind of motor/esc/battery did you go with? Did you get good flight times? <edit...just saw you posted it above>

Thanks for sharing, looking forward to more shots from you UK guys-

Dave

dmmalish
07-18-2006, 06:46 PM
those are awsome photos what a beautiful flying area keep up the good work that is my next adventure is AP need to find an inexpensive camera that is small and light weight.

eflight-ray
07-18-2006, 07:03 PM
Dave the 'sticky tape' acts as the hinge so that I can drop the back panel for camera removal. You can't beat the simple methods :D

I agree about dropping the camera angle, though it is interesting to see the wing panel, especially when you show someone the pictures and tell them it was done from a model plane.

If I can keep the interest in AP, (too many other models and ideas on my mind and building board), I would like to build a dedicated model with possibly a rotatable mount. I would like to do side, angled and straight down shots.


Another type of shot I must practice is low(ish) level, perhaps some of the local sea cliffs.

Eric_N57105
07-18-2006, 09:34 PM
If its possible you could angle your mount down about 10-20 degrees to get rid of the wing in your pictures, the camera will focus better and you will get more of an oblique photo. Something to try out if you have the time, the camera seems to take nice pics already.
Dave
Though your own photos are spectacular (esp. the Pleasant Creek Park photos in another thread), I disagree about eliminating the wing. For me, seeing a small part of the aircraft provides needed perspective and enhances the photos. I actually said "WOW" out loud when I saw ray's first posted photo with the yellow overarching wingtip. Both of you do great work. I've been to Wales and Iowa and both are great subjects for AP. Competed at the Balloon Nationals at Simpson College in Indianola. Saw lots of interesting cornfields, but no lakes like Pleasant Creek.

I understand the potential problem of autofocusing with a portion of the aircraft in the frame. My Olympus (13 oz porker not suited to AP) C2040 allows setting either a near-full frame autofocus zone or a spot zone. It also allows manual focus. I don't know if you and ray have cameras with that feature, but if they did, couldn't you use a spot mode for AF or just manually focus on "infinity" to prevent the near-field aircraft part from confusing the AF?

Eric
www.ke6us.com (http://www.ke6us.com)

Grasshopper
07-18-2006, 10:13 PM
Those are great photos! I think as far as the wing goes, it's really what the photographer is trying to show. Some photographers take photos for others to enjoy and some take them mearly for their own pleasure. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and fortunately we all like different things. Otherwise, it would be a really boring world. From a purely compositional aspect, in my little opionion, I would leave the wing out. I feel the eye is drawn to the wing tip instead of the true center of interest. On most of those photos, they could be cropped to remove the wing tip and you could have the photos both ways. One important aspect of taking landscape photos is to have the horizon level in the picture. That's not easily done when you're not actually holding the camera but you've done a great job!

Keep up the good work!

eflight-ray
07-19-2006, 10:37 AM
......... One important aspect of taking landscape photos is to have the horizon level in the picture. That's not easily done when you're not actually holding the camera but you've done a great job!

Keep up the good work!
Horizontal? That's why I haven't shown all the other pictures, someone might get air-sick :D

Have found the freeware Picas2 from Google brilliant for straightening horizons, but of course it also does crop the picture quite a bit if it's a bad one.

I have installed a mount for my video camera in the Majestic Major, but still need to do some testing regarding possible interference, (lot of electronics and motors in the camera), as it will sit right next to the rx. Also need to fathom a method of switching it on/off as well......one day....:)

P.S. note the edit on #3, dooooh!

aviatordave
07-19-2006, 01:55 PM
Though your own photos are spectacular (esp. the Pleasant Creek Park photos in another thread), I disagree about eliminating the wing. For me, seeing a small part of the aircraft provides needed perspective and enhances the photos. I actually said "WOW" out loud when I saw ray's first posted photo with the yellow overarching wingtip. Both of you do great work. I've been to Wales and Iowa and both are great subjects for AP. Competed at the Balloon Nationals at Simpson College in Indianola. Saw lots of interesting cornfields, but no lakes like Pleasant Creek.

I understand the potential problem of autofocusing with a portion of the aircraft in the frame. My Olympus (13 oz porker not suited to AP) C2040 allows setting either a near-full frame autofocus zone or a spot zone. It also allows manual focus. I don't know if you and ray have cameras with that feature, but if they did, couldn't you use a spot mode for AF or just manually focus on "infinity" to prevent the near-field aircraft part from confusing the AF?

Eric
www.ke6us.com (http://www.ke6us.com)


Eric,

I did a video once of my kids school which turned out ok, but I had part of the landing gear and wheel in the bottom right hand corner for the entire video. I thought I wasted my time because I wanted an unobstructed view, but when I showed everyone they thought that was the coolest thing - to be able to regognize that it was a RC plane doing this......So I can def. understand your point of view. Its just personal preference on my part.

As far as taking pictures with the wing in the picture, the light reflected from the wing covering can change the shutter speed thus create more blurry pics of objects on the ground. A fix could be to have a flat black covering...but that dont always look so good on an airplane.

- level horizons do make better pictures.....there are some editing programs that will work better than Picasa but may cost a little $$. I suggest trying out the 30 day free trials. (Photoshop CS, Corel Paintshop Pro X)

Dave

Eric_N57105
07-19-2006, 05:40 PM
Eric,
As far as taking pictures with the wing in the picture, the light reflected from the wing covering can change the shutter speed thus create more blurry pics of objects on the ground. A fix could be to have a flat black covering...but that dont always look so good on an airplane.
Dave

Yeah, I agree. It depends on what you are doing with the images. Like every other aspect of photography, it depends on what you are trying to express.

Maybe because AP is more novel to me (since I have yet to do it), I prefer seeing the aircraft, and hearing the slipstream and motor.

Anyway, you do some great work.

Eric
www.ke6us.com