HOME | DD

SplitSecondStudioF-18 Tearing Through

Published: 2008-09-24 04:22:53 +0000 UTC; Views: 25110; Favourites: 610; Downloads: 0
Redirect to original
Description a high speed shot of the F-18 Super Hornet just tearing up the sky. the unique design of the F-18 makes it possible to get shots like this where the air is crushed so much around it, that it looks as though it is flying inside a cloud.

high spped camera and mad skillz as a photo guy (me) also needed.

4-24-09 EDIT:

thanks to all for the nice comments and favs. I WILL BE RE-WORKING THIS FOR A LARGER AND CLEANER IMAGE.

to all concerned with the watermark: IT IS THERE FOR A REASON. I DO NOT TAKE KIND TO MY IMAGES BEING STOLEN. THE WATERMARK PREVENTS A LOT OF THAT. I USED TO SHOW PICTURES WITHOUT THE WATERMARK, AND I LOST A LOT OF WORK TO THIEVES. please respect my decision on that. if there was actual web coding that would prevent any and all stealing of the image, I will gladly remove the mark.
Related content
Comments: 266

SzandorDuBois In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 16:11:08 +0000 UTC]

Watermark exactly on the motive... not so clever :/

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

SplitSecondStudio In reply to SzandorDuBois [2009-04-25 02:29:18 +0000 UTC]

it would be nice if DA had an option for it to be located as a choice.....

but until then, it keeps it from being stolen ya know.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

KaciHPfanatic In reply to SzandorDuBois [2009-04-24 22:54:14 +0000 UTC]

theres no choice if you put a standard DA watermark, they just stick it in the middle ><

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SzandorDuBois In reply to KaciHPfanatic [2009-04-25 09:23:07 +0000 UTC]

maybe fot those motives it might be better then to show it only 800px wide but without watermark? It's really sad here because you can't enjoy the picture!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

SuperiorGraphics In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 16:05:54 +0000 UTC]

Brilliant work on this. I love it.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SplitSecondStudio In reply to SuperiorGraphics [2009-04-25 02:29:26 +0000 UTC]

thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

paravex In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 16:03:31 +0000 UTC]

Ugh. Watermark is annoying.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Pitus-Nikon In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 15:32:18 +0000 UTC]

w-o-w.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ZeMargouillat In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 15:28:10 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ErickCarjes In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 15:10:37 +0000 UTC]

The watermark killed, but its awesome!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SplitSecondStudio In reply to ErickCarjes [2009-04-26 02:57:04 +0000 UTC]

but the jet flew right through may watermark! that was the stunt! LOL

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Dousky In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 15:08:48 +0000 UTC]

The plane just breake the sound barrier that's all. But very, very Noice shot

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

miha9000 In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 14:46:04 +0000 UTC]

if you really need to put the watermark, at least it cold be everywhere else except in the center

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

SplitSecondStudio In reply to miha9000 [2009-04-26 02:55:01 +0000 UTC]

i think i am gonna ask DA for options on watermark placement and size.....if it already hasnt been discussed?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

miha9000 In reply to SplitSecondStudio [2009-04-26 09:50:19 +0000 UTC]

good idea, or even better you can simply just not use it, or make a small one by yourself one the corner

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

oibyrd In reply to miha9000 [2009-04-24 17:42:04 +0000 UTC]

They don't give you the option of putting it anywhere else - it is a standard dA watermark.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

miha9000 In reply to oibyrd [2009-04-24 18:57:31 +0000 UTC]

don't put it then, it ruins a good photo

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

oibyrd In reply to miha9000 [2009-04-25 01:46:39 +0000 UTC]

to each his own - he's protecting his work it may ruin your perception of the image - but it doesn't ruin the work itself.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

miha9000 In reply to oibyrd [2009-04-25 18:54:14 +0000 UTC]

it runs a good photo, but anyway it's your decision if you want to ruin it with a shitty watermark

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Meerin [2009-04-24 14:24:55 +0000 UTC]

This is truely messing with my eyes o_O

I have watched a lot of F-18's flying at airshows. But you never see something like this unless you catch it on camera. Great shot

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SplitSecondStudio In reply to Meerin [2009-04-26 02:56:24 +0000 UTC]

ya need humidity...and i dont think ya get the super muggy stuff up north where you are.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Tomatogrower In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 14:10:02 +0000 UTC]

woah you were definitely at the right place at the right time

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SplitSecondStudio In reply to Tomatogrower [2009-04-26 02:55:33 +0000 UTC]

yep, thats how all the good crap in my life happens!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

tExTuReMaTtIc In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 14:09:22 +0000 UTC]

I don't think I've ever seen so much negativity surrounding a Daily Deviation. It's absolutely disgusting.

Congratulations to the artist, this is a shot I'd be very proud to have taken and it's a worthy DD indeed.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

SplitSecondStudio In reply to tExTuReMaTtIc [2009-04-26 02:54:00 +0000 UTC]

thanks a bunch man.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

oibyrd In reply to tExTuReMaTtIc [2009-04-24 17:42:18 +0000 UTC]

well said. fucking ridiculous to complain about protecting your work.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

lazysummerday In reply to oibyrd [2009-04-24 18:22:31 +0000 UTC]

I don't think the majority is against protecting the artwork itself. But as some said, there are so much more subtle ways to do so. Just look at [link] for example. Why ruin it if there's no need to?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

BlazinBushido In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 14:08:35 +0000 UTC]

Yes. The watermark is destroying the beauty in the pic ..
There are more subtle ways to mark/protect ur artwork.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

basilisk113 [2009-04-24 13:59:40 +0000 UTC]

Is that a sonic boom or is it just coming out of clouds? Nice shot!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

grafxdesign In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 13:43:31 +0000 UTC]

... wouldn't the time frame in that of which you took that shot be phenomenally small?

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

SplitSecondStudio In reply to grafxdesign [2009-04-26 02:50:25 +0000 UTC]

yep...like 10/12500ths of a second.



( i have no idea why cameras dont do the math and make that 1/1250th)

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

BlazinBushido In reply to grafxdesign [2009-04-24 14:10:08 +0000 UTC]

Hmm, and when i think about it ..
Shouldn't the angle come fron the ground, i mean as if the camera's looking up?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

grafxdesign In reply to BlazinBushido [2009-04-25 18:10:15 +0000 UTC]

yeah that too.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

BlazinBushido In reply to grafxdesign [2009-04-26 11:22:57 +0000 UTC]

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

ForceOfReason In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 13:14:17 +0000 UTC]

i believe this is the moment when the aircraft breaks the sound barrier.

if i am incorrect, please inform me. meanwhile, i will be faving this.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SplitSecondStudio In reply to ForceOfReason [2009-04-26 02:50:48 +0000 UTC]

very close to it, and thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

ForceOfReason In reply to SplitSecondStudio [2009-04-26 07:01:35 +0000 UTC]

not a problem!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

CrimzonAeternis In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 13:13:21 +0000 UTC]

Nice shot. Getting tight-framed views is tricky on moving aircraft (long lenses work against you doing this), unless you are in another plane.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SplitSecondStudio In reply to CrimzonAeternis [2009-04-25 01:05:29 +0000 UTC]

thanks

i am still working on that part about being in another plane.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

FullMetalMono In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 13:05:52 +0000 UTC]

I always find photos like this fascinating. Physics is brilliant like that.

I admit the watermark makes it a little difficult to see the image properly, but it's not really an issue. I personally am more concerned about the fact that the shades of the sky and the (what does one call it?) part that shows the breaking of the sound barrier are so similar that it's really hard to distinguish between them and makes the entire effect rather difficult to see. Maybe some playing with contrasts would have made the border clearer? Though, I understand on some days it's really hard to capture something like this, and you'd probably need a really bright blue sky.

Congrats on the DD, by the way.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SplitSecondStudio In reply to FullMetalMono [2009-04-25 01:00:16 +0000 UTC]

yeah...it was a fight against a dreary overcast sky. it had rained just hours before this. i have tried a lot of different ways to work it and clean it up, but each way you go takes away from something good.

thanks!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

HumAnno In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 13:00:34 +0000 UTC]

gr8 watermark

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

bigbadronin [2009-04-24 12:48:09 +0000 UTC]

I would love to be in the cockpit of a F-18 when it breaks the sound barrier.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SplitSecondStudio In reply to bigbadronin [2009-04-25 01:01:26 +0000 UTC]

nah...riding on the wings! just watch for the bugs, they'd go through your head.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

bigbadronin In reply to SplitSecondStudio [2009-04-27 12:28:03 +0000 UTC]

more like your body lol

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SplitSecondStudio In reply to bigbadronin [2009-04-27 18:33:47 +0000 UTC]

i was counting on that being protected by laying on the wing....but i dont think it would matter much at 600knots.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Lamprea-R In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 12:44:26 +0000 UTC]

Wow. I'm speechless.

All i can think of is "How da heck did he get that shot?" and "Holy fuck, that is so cool".

Technical perfection has been achieved. Instant classic.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SplitSecondStudio In reply to Lamprea-R [2009-04-25 01:03:47 +0000 UTC]

thanks. zoomed in like i was, it was anticipation and timing. since i grew up on military bases, i am used to how they fly, and what lines they take. then its just up to aiming the camera and having the right settings. to get this without blur you have a high ISO and shutter, but that can of course leave it a little noisy......

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

straszak In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 12:44:13 +0000 UTC]

hehe "high spped camera and mad skillz as a photo guy (me) also needed" nice shot man anyway

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

damien-c In reply to ??? [2009-04-24 12:43:48 +0000 UTC]

stunning

👍: 0 ⏩: 0


<= Prev | | Next =>