Sunday, February 04, 2007
Danger
Comments:
Quite so! At least there aren't two flags either side outside the cockpit! I'm not sure what your angle is Johnjo but outside the political point I don't glean much else although the curve of the canopy with its reflections is quite nice.
Aside from any political reading, the colors are stunning; bright, sunny, with just a hint of tarnish around the edges. The composition seems a little off, but I'd be hard pressed to say what would improve it. Perhaps my eye just wants to see a bit more of the scene.
The top curve of the canopy and the blue with reflections hold my eye, but the slope of the body and the various signs and symbols don't.
Either closer, or futher back, is what I want to see. Is this shot about the aircraft, or is it about the line and colour at the top? As it is, I'm left hanging between the two.
Given the current headlines in the UK I saw this immediately as showing irony around the words 'friendly fire' which I prefer to call "Blue on Blue".
Danger indeed.
I don't expect that you intended the irony but it hit me hard.
Along the same lines I listened with horror this morning to the plans for the military expansion in Iraqi where the news reader just casually mentioned that the planned activity would result in an increase in civilian casualties (euphemism for deaths), more Blue on Blue, more danger?
Thanks for the comments all. I’ve had this one on disk for some time and was never really sure what to do with it or how “interesting” it was. I just kept going back to it.
I remember taking it very well, during my period of taking images of parts of airplanes. Not as easy as one might think. People do this a great deal, usually as a forced compromise due to cramped conditions, equipment restrictions and clutter. Me too, in part, but I would continue with the “bit shots” regardless.
When I came across this F-15 I was taken with the canopy and the flag. I saw it as a strong patriotic image and not at all as a negative political one. Yes, the reflections in the canopy were a factor.
It soon became obvious that this image of “patriotism” could be interpreted in a number of ways and it’s been interesting to see the reactions here.
I only wish that I had left the thing untitled or, perhaps, just F-15. I rushed it.
I'll skip on the political statement. I'm more interested in the perceived motion created by the cloud reflecting in the cockpit canopy and the complete stillness of the flag. I want a little closer in to lose the struttings(?) right and left.
Post a Comment
Either closer, or futher back, is what I want to see. Is this shot about the aircraft, or is it about the line and colour at the top? As it is, I'm left hanging between the two.
Danger indeed.
I don't expect that you intended the irony but it hit me hard.
Along the same lines I listened with horror this morning to the plans for the military expansion in Iraqi where the news reader just casually mentioned that the planned activity would result in an increase in civilian casualties (euphemism for deaths), more Blue on Blue, more danger?
I remember taking it very well, during my period of taking images of parts of airplanes. Not as easy as one might think. People do this a great deal, usually as a forced compromise due to cramped conditions, equipment restrictions and clutter. Me too, in part, but I would continue with the “bit shots” regardless.
When I came across this F-15 I was taken with the canopy and the flag. I saw it as a strong patriotic image and not at all as a negative political one. Yes, the reflections in the canopy were a factor.
It soon became obvious that this image of “patriotism” could be interpreted in a number of ways and it’s been interesting to see the reactions here.
I only wish that I had left the thing untitled or, perhaps, just F-15. I rushed it.