|
Yesterday I visited the NASM on the Mall, The Postal Museum (Curtiss Biplane?, Stinson, and DH-4), and the Museum of American History (UH-1)...It would have been ok...had my pictures got screwed up. I'm buying a new camera. *throws camera out the window* I went to the Udvar-Hazy Center today (I think I took around 400 pictures--1 and a half 512 mb cards, but my battery died so I switched cameras, and took a few on that.). I'll need to go back, I didn't even visit the modern military part or the hangar or the space section (yeah--most of my pics are WWII). I think something's screwey on my lens, it likes to be blurry). But I got to spend hours sitting on the floor, leaning on rails, etc. taking pictures...
I brought my monopod in and almost every guard (especially in the American History Museum) told me: "You can't use that tripod in here." After explanations of what a monopod was and that it doesn't stick out into the paths of the visitors, they all let me use it, except for one particularly dense woman who insisted that "I don't care what other guards say, whatever it is isn't allowed." She wouldn't even let me leave it hooked on the camera (I wasn't using it at the time, I just had it hanging off the bottom). Oh well...The guards at the postal museum didn't seem to care at all, and upon my second trip to the NASM that day, no guard stopped me. Security in the Smithsonian is much tighter than I remembered.
I have an appointment to go to the Navy Museum tomorrow, so that makes another Corsair and Ohka!
I have a phone call in to a Curator at the Garber Facility (the guards that gave me that number were very nice and helpful people), so maybe just maybe I might possibly (with a one in a million chance) make it. If not, well, I can't complain to much...
I asked the people at the Udvar-Hazy Center if they had the P-61 there (I assumed there was some temporary storage facility out back or something, but there isn't). I was informed that "If it isn't on the floor, it's still at Garber." So apparently the P-61 isn't there.
I have a question: would it be possible to convince the people at the NASM to reposition some of their aircraft so that they are viewable/photographable? (is that even a word?)
My reasoning is as follows: In the WWII Hangar, it is impossible to take a good picture of Flak Bait; without a wide angle lens or ingenuity the Me 109 cannot be photographed in its entirety; the Navy room is waaaaay too dark to take proper non-blurry photographs; The lighting on the displays in the WWI room as well as the position of the Pfalz and Snipe are nigh on impossible to get a decent shot of anything but the underside; the DH-4 cannot be photographed in its entirety (also, the window makes it hard to take a good photograph; one cannot get back and high enough to take a picture of the Me 262; the M2-F2 is facing away from the visitors on the balcony; the Voyager is in a dark spot with bright windows on either side; the lighting each aviation gallery is poor; The XP-59 (the aircraft I have recently fallen hopelessly in love with) is behind the X-15 (and the Spirit of St. Louis if you try to take a head on shot); the F-104 is blocked by the portable ticket-booth to the Planetarium; the Pitts (?) in the Gift Shop can only be seen through glass on the escalator or from directly underneath; there is a nearly unviewable aircraft behind the DC-3 (again only through glass or underneath); The Vin Fiz is behind the Fokker T-2 and the Douglas World Cruiser is behind a pillar;and Ol' Miss is also hard to take a picture of. I think I listed them all
(I've been feeling a bit stressed and homesick--don't ask--so please don't take any great offense at my rantings)
I get the impression that someone wanted the aircraft to look like they were simpl flying through the museum because many are facing away from the viewers. This is not the case in the air transportation gallery (which probably looks better from a bird's eye view) or the Milestones of flight gallery because all those planes were faced towards the Wright Flyer (which was facing outside). In my opinion, facing incredibly significant aircraft towards another aircraft and facing them so as to look like they were flying out of the building is, well...silly. The "dramatic lighting" is ok, but makes for horrible photography. Putting aircraft behind plexiglass is also bad. I made very few good pictures of the Zero and no good pictures of Flak Bait.
Am I sounding too harsh? Well, I believe the USAF Museum was painted black inside to attain a dramatic effect (I heard that somewhere, can't remember where, I might very well be wrong). Well, because of that, I have no decent pictures of anything in there (maybe my digital camera would rectify that a small bit, but I didn't have it at the time). Facing a WWII fighter at a mural to acheive an effect is all well and good, but the airplane should be much farther from the mural, this makes one of only two MC. 202's look like an old man trying to read a newspaper without his glasses.
I could keep ranting, but I probably shouldn't... Therefore, I rest my case.
As much as it sounds like I'm hating DC, please note that I'm not. I love it. The Udvar-Hazy center is probably the best museum facility I've been in and only a few aircraft were placed in bad spots (two of the Hortens, the Enola Gay, the Dash 80, and the Concorde). If the Enola Gay was moved back 30 feet, you could place an aircraft where its nose is currently (instead of putting it in the massive open space behind the Japanese aircraft and the Hurricane, P-38, R-4, and N9M. This would make it much easier to take a photograph of the Enola Gay off of the bridge in the middle. It would also make it easier to take pictures of the George and take side and rear shots of the P-47. Unless one has a wide-angle lens, please give up hope of taking a head-on or left-side shot of the Concorde, it's impossible. Head-on shots of the Dash-80 are impossible because its nose is under the bridge and side shots are impossible because they put aircraft in the way so you can't take a shot from off the other bridge.
But hey, that's only 3 aircraft. The placement of all the others, especially the German aircraft, helicopters, the Modern Military aircraft, and the ones hanging from the ceiling (yes, all of them--it looks much better in person) is great. I'll have to get up close to the Modern ones on Saturday.
The metro really isn't hard to get lost on (only been confused once, and I had just woken up), but I wish they'd get a metro out to Dulles, Quantico, and Andrews (historic aviation enthusiasts should read that as: Udvar-Hazy, Marine Air Museum, and Hellcat).
I am enjoying myself greatly and am not sure where to go next (probably back to the NASM, shooting ISO 200 instead of 400). Of course, if the phone calls to Garber pan out...
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
