Aviation experts - is this worth it?

[geogphotos]

I have a heavily damaged slide, and made a start to see what is involved. It's never going to be a beauty but is it worth it?

 

It could be a cigarette burn 😟

 

 

 

 

I cleaned up the name a little but then thought that this is probably going to be a dead-end.

 

Is it of historic interest or just bin material?

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 11, 2020 by geogphotos

[spacecadet]

Ah, the Whispering Giant. Well there are about 300 "Bristol Britannias" showing on Alamy though some are cars and accidental hits, but I've had the occasional sale (ok, one sale, it may have been a PU) from my own 80s aviation images, so I'd put it up We have an aviation specialist here, avpics, and he'd probably say the same. Besides, you've done the work now. One of our great airliners, though that's not saying much.

I'd put the spiel up as well- it's an interesting story. My OH flew in a Britannia, and she's not that old.

Edited May 11, 2020 by spacecadet

[geogphotos]

There is still a lot more work to do, but I don't really think it is possible to correct this fully - the shadows and colour variations on the underside look impossible to me.

 

Or I could just put it up as it is pointing out the damage in the caption?

 

What do you think.

 

I'm grateful to you for your comments. It is not my field at all but I'd hate to chuck something away that was of some historic value. 

 

Hopefully, Avpics will chip in.

[Mr Standfast]

 

I used to live near Lyneham and used to see these everyday and VC10's from Brize Norton.

 

As for the picture? Well it's got no nose! All a bit "he who cannot be named"....

 

Stay safe.

[spacecadet]

Archival subs have a quality proviso as you know. It's not as if the damage isn't obvious. As to colour balance I would just have done an eyedropper on the fuselage and be done with it.

It looks OK when I try it in LR- tint just a bit towards the green compared with your version, although I'd say yours was usable as-is. I'd forget the shadows, they're probably gone.

[Allan Bell]

That looks suspiciously like a finger print. At leat at that size it does.

 

Allan

 

[spacecadet]

10 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

That looks suspiciously like a finger print. At leat at that size it does.

 

Allan

 

It's on a slide. So it's only about 4mm. across.

 

1 hour ago, geogphotos said:

It could be a cigarette burn

It does look like a burn..........maybe from the projector lamp?

Edited May 11, 2020 by spacecadet

[geogphotos]

Then again I could always just help myself to one from Wikipedia. I see one on Alamy.

[spacecadet]

21 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

Then again I could always just help myself to one from Wikipedia. I see one on Alamy.

The one on wikipedia is pretty crummy, but publishers always can find images somewhere else. The question is do they want one of ours or even the particular one. Of the half dozen or so I have up, all in flight, two have crashed and none is still airworthy. In only two cases is any example of the type still flying.

Yours would be the only image of a Britannia on active service in the RAF. There's your USP. It's a decent image and should be available IMO.

Edited May 11, 2020 by spacecadet

[geogphotos]

59 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

The one on wikipedia is pretty crummy, but publishers always can find images somewhere else. The question is do they want one of ours or even the particular one. Of the half dozen or so I have up, all in flight, two have crashed and none is still airworthy. In only two cases is any example of the type still flying.

Yours would be the only image of a Britannia on active service in the RAF. There's your USP. It's a decent image and should be available IMO.

 

That's what I was thinking. It might be the only one available of that plane which does have an interesting history. 

 

I think that I will stop what I was doing with the Clone stamp - perhaps just a little more tidying - and submit as is along with the history in the description.

 

I do find it interesting coming across images like this and doing a little research. 

Edited May 11, 2020 by geogphotos

[Harry Harrison]

Might the rest of the nose be hidden by the slide mount? The more nose the better I would think.

[spacecadet]

12 minutes ago, Harry Harrison said:

Might the rest of the nose be hidden by the slide mount? The more nose the better I would think.

Yes but dismembering a Kodachrome mount is not for the faint-hearted. I don't think I'd try it.

Anyway he'd only get another half millimetre either side- I've just measured one. It's probably not enough- the Britannia is quite pointy.

 

As an aside, it'd be a laugh to try to identify the airfield. XL660 once overnighted in Perth, WA in 170- could it be there? The trees look a tiny bit foreign, but the sky doesn't.

Edited May 11, 2020 by spacecadet

[Harry Harrison]

7 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

Anyway he'd only get another half millimetre either side

Yes, and then there would be the problem of 'scanning' it without a mount using Ian's current setup. Probably not worth the effort.

[geogphotos]

 

 

That's yer lot!

 

It was not in a Kodachrome mount so wasn't too hard to dismantle. I have spare clip-together mounts.

 

I hope that is sufficient nose for you 😀

 

Edited May 11, 2020 by geogphotos

[Harry Harrison]

Just now, geogphotos said:

That's yer lot!

Blimey, it was worth the effort then!

[Harry Harrison]

Definitely worth addressing the colour balance a bit, though it does give it a period feel.

Edited May 11, 2020 by Harry Harrison

[geogphotos]

1 minute ago, Harry Harrison said:

Blimey, it was worth the effort then!

 

 

Yes my initial screenshots were a rush job and I was not aware of the importance of the nose.

[geogphotos]

6 minutes ago, Harry Harrison said:

Definitely worth addressing the colour balance a bit, though it does give it a period feel.

 

I haven't got that far Harry. I only wanted to know whether it was worth bothering with or chucking. Normally something this damaged would be straight in the bin.

 

I had a play around removing some of the mark with the Clone Stamp and tried to rebuild the name Alphard. I could easily remove more of the mark but as I said above it is always going to look a mess so will probably, based on the feedback here, have another tidy and submit almost as is. But with max nose! 

Edited May 11, 2020 by geogphotos

[Mr Standfast]

1 hour ago, geogphotos said:

 

 

That's yer lot!

 

It was not in a Kodachrome mount so wasn't too hard to dismantle. I have spare clip-together mounts.

 

I hope that is sufficient nose for you 😀

 

Sorry to be sniffy....

[geogphotos]

12 hours ago, Mr Standfast said:

Sorry to be sniffy....

 

😀😜

[geogphotos]

Another aviation query. 

 

I think this is Bell 206 JetRanger.

 

Correcto? 

 

 

Edited May 13, 2020 by geogphotos

[spacecadet]

I should say so, but what about the turboprops in the distance........?

[geogphotos]

14 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

I should say so, but what about the turboprops in the distance........?

 

Thanks for that.

 

Those planes? Too far away.....

[Rob C]

Planes in the background are a De Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter, and two Fokker F-27s. Can't make out the airlines without a larger file.

Hope that is of some help.

Edited May 13, 2020 by Rob C

[geogphotos]

3 hours ago, Rob C said:

Planes in the background are a De Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter, and two Fokker F-27s. Can't make out the airlines without a larger file.

Hope that is of some help.

 

 

Thank you. I don't think I'll include them because they are so far in the background. 

 

I'm sure that I'll need some more plane pics identified before long!