"Fighter 25"

[Kleen Harry]

[Mitch.]

I certainly wouldn't want to be on-coming traffic, right about now!

Another great composite!

[Layne.]

WOOOOOOW 8-) now that's something else!

[The-Black-Sheep]

Thats borderline insane!!  :D

I love it!  ;D

Black Sheep  8-)

[fighter25]

HECK YEAH! That is amazing! Thanks Harry! 8-)

[mustang666]

Lol very cool

[NDSP]

Its ok, but I don't really like it that much. I'm sorry. It just doesn't seem like it was blended that well and the aircraft looks more like a sticker posted on a picture rather than being a part of the picture. For example, the background looks pretty soft, and yet the aircraft is very sharp.

[Tjw2]

tight fit

[mustang666]

Looking again and thinking that's a great way to avoid radar.

[Kleen Harry]

Hee heeeeeeeeeee! Thanks a lot, Guyz! Yes, I've finally gone completely over the edge. There's no going back now. The thing is, I like it over here! Muhuhahahahahehehehehe!  ;D

You're most welcome, fighter25! My pleasure. Glad that you like it and that you didn't find it to be too far out for you!  :)

Yeah, Paul! Gives a whole new meaning to "terrain masking", hee, hee!  ;D

[spitfire boy]

[quote]Hee heeeeeeeeeee! Thanks a lot, Guyz! Yes, I've finally gone completely over the edge. There's no going back now. The thing is, I like it over here! Muhuhahahahahehehehehe!

[john_uk]

what is this don, come on, i know you are capable of a a much higher quality in your composites. this looks so false, stuck on.
get your head down lad and blend things that bit better. its a cool idea poorly executed.

now dont come back until things are back to your odl standard...

john

[Kleen Harry]

I take that as a compliment, Spitfire Boy!  ;)

Nick and John:

There are four basic ways of depicting a moving object:

1) Subject sharp, background sharp.

2) Subject sharp, background blurred.

3) Subject blurred, background blurred.

4) Subject blurred, background sharp.

This is a "subject sharp, background blurred". I put a lot of blur on the background, to suggest motion, and only a little blur on the subject. That's why it's not, "blended". It isn't supposed to "blend". In "Layne Suhr", the subject is also sharp and the background blurred, although there it's most noticeable in the foreground.  ;)

I can't help but notice that whenever I start to get too many compliments on images that those who have otherwise been silent tend to come out of the woodwork with critique. Just can't stand it, eh?  ;D

[john_uk]

ok don, i suppose i should have been more specific,

in a tunnel with loads of lights on the walls, ceilings. the the lights giving an orange/orange glow

i wouldnt expect the plane to look as if it was in broad daylight. so yes the blending is crap so to speak.

[spitfire boy]

Heeeeere we go again....

C'mon guys, can we stay civil here please?