# Arsenal of Democracy World War II Victory Capitol Flyover



## Braineack

I was able to get access to a really cool vantage for the VE day flyover.  It was a really awesome sight to see.

The lighting was crummy as hell. It was humid and hazy and the flyover started at 12 noon.  Each shot got progressively better as the sun became more and more directional and the sky became more and more blue and clear.  Had the flyover been at 3pm it would have been SO much better.

I had lots of sucess at 1/1600sec without VC vs. 1/1250sec with or w/o VC in terms of sharp captures and keepers.  Only the mustangs flew the correct path and height so I was hand holding since the planes were very unpredictable from the direction of approach and my building I was on prevented you from being able to see them coming.

Here's a couple of my favorite shots of the hour, along with the full set:

Arsenal of Democracy World War II Victory Capitol Flyover - an album on Flickr




Trainer Formation - North American AT-6 Texan by The Braineack, on Flickr




Curtiss P-40 Warhawks by The Braineack, on Flickr




Consolidated B-24 Liberator "Diamond Lil" by The Braineack, on Flickr




North American P-51 Mustangs by The Braineack, on Flickr




North American P-51 Mustangs over D.C. by The Braineack, on Flickr




Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress "Aluminum Overcast" by The Braineack, on Flickr




Douglas C-47 Skytrain "Miss Virginia" by The Braineack, on Flickr




Boeing B-29 Superfortress "FiFi" by The Braineack, on Flickr




Boeing B-29 Superfortress "FiFi" by The Braineack, on Flickr




Missing Man Formation by The Braineack, on Flickr

My parents went and saw them yesterday at the airport and got to get inside a few of them.  I might go after work tomorrow and see them in person as well.  For $500 I can even fly in one


----------



## waday

Very nice shots! I like the Warhawks and Mustangs, as well as FiFi!


----------



## PropilotBW

I would have loved to see this formation flyover.  Nice pics!


----------



## tirediron

Great shots...  do you have any with a slightly slower shutter speed and a bit of motion blur on the propellers?


----------



## bribrius

tirediron said:


> Great shots...  do you have any with a slightly slower shutter speed and a bit of motion blur on the propellers?


lol. i wondered that too. But the shots seem about spot on, he did great imo and made that comment on the ss in the original post. ..


----------



## JoeW

Great event.  I was there too (between the Lincoln Memorial and the Potomac on the steps).  Very nice work Braineac--well done!


----------



## Braineack

tirediron said:


> Great shots...  do you have any with a slightly slower shutter speed and a bit of motion blur on the propellers?



No I don't unfortunately.  I started at 1/1250 and went to 1/1600sec.  I wanted to make sure I got crisp clear shots as this was a once in a lifetime thing.  Had they all flown over like the formation of Mustangs I would have kept the monopod on and tried a few slightly slower shutter pans.  But my keeper rate are even 1/1250 at 600mm was significantly less than at 1/1600.  When It's apparent in the LCD you know you got issues.


----------



## gsgary

Shutter speed way too fast, static props is a big minus


----------



## runnah

Arsenal of Democracy?! Lol that is like "Chainsaw of Peace"

I like the one with the Washington monument in the background.


----------



## Braineack

Yeah I was really happy that they flew low and was able to catch them with Georgetown and DC behind them--they were eye-level to me.

Were were expecting them all to flew that same route and elevation, but it was a bit random from formation to formation.  Some cut the corner, some flew directly overhead, some came from my right.  Made it hard to maintain a starting position for my lens, and I couldn't see the approach.

A few of the planes that did fly directly overhead, I wish I was able to go to the other side of my building for.  The two formations I moved for they flew so far away from my building that I was able to get any keepers of them.

The Tamron did a bang-up job nailing and maintaining focus--granted most were flying slow.


----------



## Braineack

gsgary said:


> Shutter speed way too fast, static props is a big minus



I was more than willing to freeze the props in order to achieve crisp clear shots.  Doesn't bother me at all.

I haven't much practice with the lens and the approaches were too random to fool around with panning and slow shutters.  Even at 1/1250sec I was getting a lot of blurred shots as I was handholding at 600mm.  My keeper rate jumped significantly once I bumped up to 1/1600.

Granted I should have tried a few at 1/1000 or 1/500, but there was nothing to practice on and I wanted to make sure I was able to capture them all.


----------



## gsgary

1/320 for props, static prop kills them


----------



## Braineack

in your opinion.


----------



## lambertpix

What a great opportunity.  Nice to see Fifi again -- I understand there's a chance another B29 will join her in Oshkosh this year.  It would be amazing to see two in the air together.


----------



## Gary A.

The Washington Monument is a big plus. Prop blur would have been nice. The B-29 looks elegant the B-24, (from your angle), doesn't even look airworthy.


----------



## Gary A.

The title is very appropriate as it was the US who armed most of the Allies. At the height of the German and Japanese conquests there were only a handful of democracies left in the world. Of those democracies, only the US and Britain could stand toe-to-toe against the Axis powers.


----------



## gsgary

Braineack said:


> in your opinion.


Post them on an aviation forum and find out if it is only my opinion


----------



## Braineack

The thing is: I couldn't care less.

This is exactly why I didn't shoot at 1/320sec: DCL 2628 Flickr - Photo Sharing 

all his shots are blurry; mine arent.


----------



## gsgary

Braineack said:


> The thing is: I couldn't care less.
> 
> This is exactly why I didn't shoot at 1/320sec: DCL 2628 Flickr - Photo Sharing
> 
> all his shots are blurry; mine arent.


They look like the engines have stopped


----------



## Braineack

I had to rotate the images 90° to make them appear they were actually flying, not falling, too!


----------



## waday

<sarcasm>
@Braineack, you should be ashamed that you weren't able to get perfect images and share them with us, especially since we weren't all able to be there and get perfect images. 
</sarcasm>

I appreciate the images!


----------



## astroNikon

waday said:


> <sarcasm>
> @Braineack, you should be ashamed that you weren't able to get perfect images and share them with us, especially since we weren't all able to be there and get perfect images.
> </sarcasm>
> 
> I appreciate the images!


I was thinking that he could politely ask them to do it again so he can get the shots right this time


----------



## waday

astroNikon said:


> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> <sarcasm>
> @Braineack, you should be ashamed that you weren't able to get perfect images and share them with us, especially since we weren't all able to be there and get perfect images.
> </sarcasm>
> 
> I appreciate the images!
> 
> 
> 
> I was thinking that he could politely ask them to do it again so he can get the shots right this time
Click to expand...

Oh, that would probably be better. I'm sure they'd do it no problem.


----------



## Gary A.

Take a picture of your pictures ... but this time shoot at a slower speed.


----------



## Braineack

I'll make sure to bring my handtruck stablizing rig this time.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/ufiles/26/1131526.png


----------



## bribrius

Braineack said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shutter speed way too fast, static props is a big minus
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was more than willing to freeze the props in order to achieve crisp clear shots.  Doesn't bother me at all.
> 
> I haven't much practice with the lens and the approaches were too random to fool around with panning and slow shutters.  Even at 1/1250sec I was getting a lot of blurred shots as I was handholding at 600mm.  My keeper rate jumped significantly once I bumped up to 1/1600.
> 
> Granted I should have tried a few at 1/1000 or 1/500, but there was nothing to practice on and *I wanted to make sure I was able to capture them all*.
Click to expand...

 this.
When faced with a situation when you question if you can get the shot. Just make sure you get it. Otherwise there is no shot at all.


----------



## gsgary

bribrius said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shutter speed way too fast, static props is a big minus
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was more than willing to freeze the props in order to achieve crisp clear shots.  Doesn't bother me at all.
> 
> I haven't much practice with the lens and the approaches were too random to fool around with panning and slow shutters.  Even at 1/1250sec I was getting a lot of blurred shots as I was handholding at 600mm.  My keeper rate jumped significantly once I bumped up to 1/1600.
> 
> Granted I should have tried a few at 1/1000 or 1/500, but there was nothing to practice on and *I wanted to make sure I was able to capture them all*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> this.
> When faced with a situation when you question if you can get the shot. Just make sure you get it. Otherwise there is no shot at all.
Click to expand...

Thats a cop out


----------



## Braineack

I didn't shoot 50mm either.  I'm surprised you haven't deducted points for that as well...


----------



## astroNikon

Braineack said:


> I didn't shoot 50mm either.  I'm surprised you haven't deducted points for that as well...


you did shoot a multiple of 50mm ...


----------



## bribrius

gsgary said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shutter speed way too fast, static props is a big minus
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was more than willing to freeze the props in order to achieve crisp clear shots.  Doesn't bother me at all.
> 
> I haven't much practice with the lens and the approaches were too random to fool around with panning and slow shutters.  Even at 1/1250sec I was getting a lot of blurred shots as I was handholding at 600mm.  My keeper rate jumped significantly once I bumped up to 1/1600.
> 
> Granted I should have tried a few at 1/1000 or 1/500, but there was nothing to practice on and *I wanted to make sure I was able to capture them all*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> this.
> When faced with a situation when you question if you can get the shot. Just make sure you get it. Otherwise there is no shot at all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Thats a cop out
Click to expand...

It is true, and you know it.
I think the o.p wished he could have used a lower speed, maybe wished he had on some of these. But since he already knows this. Why go round and round? His first priority was getting them in focus without camera shake blur, He did that.


Braineack said:


> I didn't shoot 50mm either.  I'm surprised you haven't deducted points for that as well...


already deducted because you didn't shoot film. But once i deducted that hundred points for it being digital the prop issue was nolonger a issue.

(just kidding)


----------



## Braineack

partial credit?


----------



## astroNikon

FYI,
I've shot incoming twin engine Beechcrafts at 1/1250 and have gotten prop blur.
On slow single engine Cessna's I'm at 1/400
faster single engine's 1/400 has plane blur and I'm at 1/640)
I've gotten motion blur on a B17 at 1/500s

So I would think the higher speeds would have been better.  It all varies.


----------



## gsgary

If you were not getting as good keeper rate at 1/1250 your panning must have been a bit up and down you should be able to hand hold and pan at 1/1250 @ 600mm


----------



## Designer

I don't mind crispy props.  

Yes, it does look a little unusual, but having  the planes in focus is worth having crispy props, IMO.


----------



## funwitha7d

really great to see these, the sound would have been impressive I bet


----------



## bribrius

astroNikon said:


> FYI,
> I've shot incoming twin engine Beechcrafts at 1/1250 and have gotten prop blur.
> On slow single engine Cessna's I'm at 1/400
> faster single engine's 1/400 has plane blur and I'm at 1/640)
> I've gotten motion blur on a B17 at 1/500s
> 
> So I would think the higher speeds would have been better.  It all varies.


i just want to know if you remembered that off the top of your head or you went through your archives and looked. Because i really can't remember what i shot at what exactly and don't have the ambition to go back and look at my own. LOL.


----------



## Derrel

Braineack said:
			
		

> I didn't shoot 50mm either.  I'm surprised you haven't deducted points for that as well...



Not to mention, these were not shot with a rangefinder...or a Leica...or on outdated B&W film...

RARE, AS IN once-in-a fricking LIFETIME events change the priorities when making photographs. Prop blur would have been nice, sure, but maybe could be added later in post. Blurred fuselages, fuzzy decals, can't-see-chit insignias...no good at all...better to go for the 1/1600 and capture the event crisply rather than get all artsy...this wasn't some three-day airshow that repeats every summer.


----------



## bribrius

gsgary said:


> If you were not getting as good keeper rate at 1/1250 your panning must have been a bit up and down you should be able to hand hold and pan at 1/1250 @ 600mm


maybe he had too much coffee that morning. Little jittery......


----------



## petrochemist

I'd have liked to see blurred props too, but I'm guessing that unlike at an airshow these only came past once or at best twice. Static props is better than no shot. At least the side on shots with the prop don't show the static props quite so much...


----------



## bribrius

Derrel said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't shoot 50mm either.  I'm surprised you haven't deducted points for that as well...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention, these were not shot with a rangefinder...or a Leica...or on outdated B&W film...
> 
> RARE, AS IN once-in-a fricking LIFETIME events change the priorities when making photographs. Prop blur would have been nice, sure, but maybe could be added later in post. Blurred fuselages, fuzzy decals, can't-see-chit insignias...no good at all...better to go for the 1/1600 and capture the event crisply rather than get all artsy...this wasn't some three-day airshow that repeats every summer.
Click to expand...

if these were shot on a rangefinder the props wouldn't even be a issue. And i don't even think the really old cameras even went up to 1/1600.  LOL


----------



## Braineack

When I pan cars I tend to start the day at 1/500 or 1/250 and work my way down.  I have hundreds and hundreds of chances to hone in.  After a while I'm consistently getting keepers at 1/40sec.

I did not have this luxury with these planes--I had 14 chances.

Next time I'm flying in a chaser plane that's matching speeds with the plane I'm shooting it for an hour, I'll knock the shutter speed down to blur the props.


----------



## astroNikon

bribrius said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> 
> FYI,
> I've shot incoming twin engine Beechcrafts at 1/1250 and have gotten prop blur.
> On slow single engine Cessna's I'm at 1/400
> faster single engine's 1/400 has plane blur and I'm at 1/640)
> I've gotten motion blur on a B17 at 1/500s
> 
> So I would think the higher speeds would have been better.  It all varies.
> 
> 
> 
> i just want to know if you remembered that off the top of your head or you went through your archives and looked. Because i really can't remember what i shot at what exactly and don't have the ambition to go back and look at my own. LOL.
Click to expand...

most off the top of my head because I'm in the center of 4 airports.

the single and double engine private planes go right over my house all the time.  So I get plenty of practice.
The larger commercial prop planes pass by to an airport NW of me.
Commercial Jets are essentially at 1/2000  and pass when the weather/time and wind is right.
Lear type .. depending upon how fast they are going past - 1/1250 to 1/2000

I did have to go check the twin engine beechcraft at 1/640 because I wasn't sure it was 1/640

The B17 the other day I was mowing my lawn when I noticed it doing circles.  After I ran to my basement I was putting my camera together as I was running up the stairs and started shooting just as I was turning my camera on, then made adjustments as I checked the shutter speed.  I haven't checked their flight days lately so I was surprised.


----------



## runnah

The problem with aviation photography is that a lot of it goes over your head.


----------



## gsgary

bribrius said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't shoot 50mm either.  I'm surprised you haven't deducted points for that as well...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention, these were not shot with a rangefinder...or a Leica...or on outdated B&W film...
> 
> RARE, AS IN once-in-a fricking LIFETIME events change the priorities when making photographs. Prop blur would have been nice, sure, but maybe could be added later in post. Blurred fuselages, fuzzy decals, can't-see-chit insignias...no good at all...better to go for the 1/1600 and capture the event crisply rather than get all artsy...this wasn't some three-day airshow that repeats every summer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> if these were shot on a rangefinder the props wouldn't even be a issue. And i don't even think the really old cameras even went up to 1/1600.  LOL
Click to expand...

My M's only go to 1/1000 but I wouldn't be shooting that fast


----------



## waday

gsgary said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't shoot 50mm either.  I'm surprised you haven't deducted points for that as well...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention, these were not shot with a rangefinder...or a Leica...or on outdated B&W film...
> 
> RARE, AS IN once-in-a fricking LIFETIME events change the priorities when making photographs. Prop blur would have been nice, sure, but maybe could be added later in post. Blurred fuselages, fuzzy decals, can't-see-chit insignias...no good at all...better to go for the 1/1600 and capture the event crisply rather than get all artsy...this wasn't some three-day airshow that repeats every summer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> if these were shot on a rangefinder the props wouldn't even be a issue. And i don't even think the really old cameras even went up to 1/1600.  LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My M's only go to 1/1000 but I wouldn't be shooting that fast
Click to expand...

My M&M's go that fast, too. I always eat them too quickly.


----------



## Gary A.

bribrius said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't shoot 50mm either.  I'm surprised you haven't deducted points for that as well...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention, these were not shot with a rangefinder...or a Leica...or on outdated B&W film...
> 
> RARE, AS IN once-in-a fricking LIFETIME events change the priorities when making photographs. Prop blur would have been nice, sure, but maybe could be added later in post. Blurred fuselages, fuzzy decals, can't-see-chit insignias...no good at all...better to go for the 1/1600 and capture the event crisply rather than get all artsy...this wasn't some three-day airshow that repeats every summer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> if these were shot on a rangefinder the props wouldn't even be a issue. And i don't even think the really old cameras even went up to 1/1600.  LOL
Click to expand...

Try shooting with a rangefinder and with a 600mm affixed ... gonna have a bit of a parallax problem.


----------



## Derrel

Gary A. said:
			
		

> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't shoot 50mm either.  I'm surprised you haven't deducted points for that as well...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention, these were not shot with a rangefinder...or a Leica...or on outdated B&W film...
> 
> RARE, AS IN once-in-a fricking LIFETIME events change the priorities when making photographs. Prop blur would have been nice, sure, but maybe could be added later in post. Blurred fuselages, fuzzy decals, can't-see-chit insignias...no good at all...better to go for the 1/1600 and capture the event crisply rather than get all artsy...this wasn't some three-day airshow that repeats every summer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> if these were shot on a rangefinder the props wouldn't even be a issue. And i don't even think the really old cameras even went up to 1/1600.  LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Try shooting with a rangefinder with a 600mm affixed ... gonna have a bit of a parallax problem.
Click to expand...


I bet the old-time Leica and Graphic guys were FURIOUS when Jimmy Stewart used a 35mm SLR, and Exakta, in the Movie "Rear Window" in the mid-1950's! Lol! The Exakta (also spelled as Exacta at times!) was a well-made camera, VERY tank-like and solid as nails. Even had a built-in mid-roll film cutter system which was super-cool! You could take it into the darkroom, or a changing bag, and pull up on this small knob that lifted the rod, on the bottom of which was "the kinfe", and this hooked knife inside the camera would slice the film off; immediately to the side of the film gate/aperture, as I recall.

RearWindow1.jpg


----------



## bribrius

gsgary said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't shoot 50mm either.  I'm surprised you haven't deducted points for that as well...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention, these were not shot with a rangefinder...or a Leica...or on outdated B&W film...
> 
> RARE, AS IN once-in-a fricking LIFETIME events change the priorities when making photographs. Prop blur would have been nice, sure, but maybe could be added later in post. Blurred fuselages, fuzzy decals, can't-see-chit insignias...no good at all...better to go for the 1/1600 and capture the event crisply rather than get all artsy...this wasn't some three-day airshow that repeats every summer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> if these were shot on a rangefinder the props wouldn't even be a issue. And i don't even think the really old cameras even went up to 1/1600.  LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My M's only go to 1/1000 but I wouldn't be shooting that fast
Click to expand...

same here 1/1000 highest i go on my films (til the f100 shows up)
this has actually turned into a pretty amusing thread.


----------



## gsgary

bribrius said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't shoot 50mm either.  I'm surprised you haven't deducted points for that as well...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention, these were not shot with a rangefinder...or a Leica...or on outdated B&W film...
> 
> RARE, AS IN once-in-a fricking LIFETIME events change the priorities when making photographs. Prop blur would have been nice, sure, but maybe could be added later in post. Blurred fuselages, fuzzy decals, can't-see-chit insignias...no good at all...better to go for the 1/1600 and capture the event crisply rather than get all artsy...this wasn't some three-day airshow that repeats every summer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> if these were shot on a rangefinder the props wouldn't even be a issue. And i don't even think the really old cameras even went up to 1/1600.  LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My M's only go to 1/1000 but I wouldn't be shooting that fast
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> same here 1/1000 highest i go on my films (til the f100 shows up)
> this has actually turned into a pretty amusing thread.
Click to expand...

No need for anything faster not sure I have even used 1/1000


----------



## bribrius

gsgary said:


> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bribrius said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't shoot 50mm either.  I'm surprised you haven't deducted points for that as well...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not to mention, these were not shot with a rangefinder...or a Leica...or on outdated B&W film...
> 
> RARE, AS IN once-in-a fricking LIFETIME events change the priorities when making photographs. Prop blur would have been nice, sure, but maybe could be added later in post. Blurred fuselages, fuzzy decals, can't-see-chit insignias...no good at all...better to go for the 1/1600 and capture the event crisply rather than get all artsy...this wasn't some three-day airshow that repeats every summer.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> if these were shot on a rangefinder the props wouldn't even be a issue. And i don't even think the really old cameras even went up to 1/1600.  LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> My M's only go to 1/1000 but I wouldn't be shooting that fast
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> same here 1/1000 highest i go on my films (til the f100 shows up)
> this has actually turned into a pretty amusing thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No need for anything faster not sure I have even used 1/1000
Click to expand...

i haven't, but i haven't tried shooting asa 3200 in the mid day sun either. I haven't shot over 800 ASA in a long time..


----------



## Tailgunner

lambertpix said:


> What a great opportunity.  Nice to see Fifi again -- I understand there's a chance another B29 will join her in Oshkosh this year.  It would be amazing to see two in the air together.



I believe you're talking about "Doc". They was hoping to have him restored and flying last year but no luck. Hopefully soon though. 

Doc s Friends - Restoring History


----------



## Ron Smith

Wow, just looked through the whole collection on flickr - cool shots.  You know, on the prop blur thing- just "whatever."  I like that these are crisp, and those are some amazing aircraft to see in the air again.  You clearly know your vintage warplanes and you got some killer photos of them.


----------

