|
n0n0 posted:Their uniforms are so bright and vibrant -- it would be a shame to lose that, IMHO. I loving love european sport leagues that do this. Some of the hockey leagues especially have the most batshit insane uniform/jersey colors and they look like they'd be a hoot to photograph.
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2012 14:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 15:37 |
|
|
DJExile posted:I loving love european sport leagues that do this. Some of the hockey leagues especially have the most batshit insane uniform/jersey colors and they look like they'd be a hoot to photograph. Some of us would disagree in that. The best shirts are the ones that doesn't stand out. Like the classic Juventus-shirt (black and white stripes) or the german national side (all white). Then you have the batshit insane shirts like the pink ones and hideous yellow ones. :/ Or Getafe who had a picture of the Burger King inside the shirt so you could take it over your head after you had scored and pretend it was a mask...
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2012 12:41
|
|
|
I can imagine it gets out of hand at times, and hockey seems to really get insane with it compared to soccer.azathosk posted:Or Getafe who had a picture of the Burger King inside the shirt so you could take it over your head after you had scored and pretend it was a mask... This though, this is loving hilarious. Although it probably gets old after a while
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2012 13:52
|
|
|
More college baseball shots.  Coyotes, April 15th 2012-137.jpg by theokaluza, on Flickr  Coyotes, April 15th 2012-279.jpg by theokaluza, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 04:25
|
|
|
They're good shots, but why f/11?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 12:40
|
|
|
DJExile posted:This though, this is loving hilarious. Although it probably gets old after a while It was pretty hilarious as well. You can see it here: http://www.footballshirtculture.com/09/10-kits/getafe-cf-2009-2010-joma-kits.html n0n0 posted:More college baseball shots. You make me wanna have a go at baseball-shooting. A shame noone around here plays it. A few more football shots from me - Lillestrøm (yellow) vs Vålerenga (blue):  Lillestrøm SK - Vålerenga IF by azathosk, on Flickr  Lillestrøm SK - Vålerenga IF by azathosk, on Flickr  Lillestrøm SK - Vålerenga IF by azathosk, on Flickr  Lillestrøm SK - Vålerenga IF by azathosk, on Flickr  Lillestrøm SK - Vålerenga IF by azathosk, on Flickr I really REALLY should have gotten his feet in the last shot...
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2012 12:43
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:Like I mentioned, last week I covered our state high school basketball tournament. I ended up shooting nine games for five publications in three days, and spent the fourth day nursing my poor back. What noise reduction filters did you use on these basketball images? These look very clean, considering the ISO, nice job.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 04:23
|
|
|
None at all, I got lazy after processing so many photos with such a quick turnaround. Most of the tight stuff was shot on a 7D at ISO 1600, so not pushing the sensor too badly. The lighting at that arena is pretty good. The noise is more evident on the wide-angle photos, maybe only at a larger size, since those were on a 40D, also at ISO 1600.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 04:37
|
|
|
DJExile posted:They're good shots, but why f/11? Do you have other thoughts? I'm really new to this whole sports-photography thing, and I'm open to suggestions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 04:50
|
|
|
n0n0 posted:To get enough DOF that I don't have to worry about missing focus as often. Bokeh rules, dude. In seriousness, you want separation between your subject and the background. Your angles have given you a neutral background, but when you throw crowd, other players, and the environment into the mix, it's gonna look real lovely if that stuff is super in focus. Believe me, you'll have plenty of depth of field for the bit of action. Work on nailing the focus. Even at f/11, missing focus is still going to gently caress your shot. at 2.8, plenty of dof, background fades nicely  dakana fucked around with this message at 07:42 on Apr 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 07:39
|
|
|
Yeah, like Dakana said, separation is king in most cases. If you're anywhere past f/4.0 (short of the limitations of the lens itself) you're going to have too much DOF, unless your subject is right on top of you like in boxing or something. Untitled by PhotoBen27, on Flickr Here, if I would have had a bigger depth of field, the soccer goal and fence in the background would have been a big distraction. What lens are you using?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 12:55
|
|
|
Thirding the aperture bits above. The vast majority of the time you'll want to shoot sports action wide open or drat close to it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 14:16
|
|
|
I'm using a 70-200 f4L with a Canon 1.4x extender. I can see your point about the shorter DOF. I'll give it a go during the next game that I shoot, which will likely be next weekend. I guess I was kind of trying to cheat :P
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 16:55
|
|
|
n0n0 posted:I'm using a 70-200 f4L with a Canon 1.4x extender. The 70-200 on its own will probably suffice for almost anything in the infield. Bear in mind a teleconverter will stop your aperture down and probably slow your focus as well. You're getting good moments, to be sure. Just open up your aperture all the way, turn on autofire, and go nuts. You've got a great advantage in baseball in that you know where the action is going to go before it happens. Pre-focus on the first baseman and wait for the ball/runner to enter the frame, for example.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 17:21
|
|
|
DJExile posted:The 70-200 on its own will probably suffice for almost anything in the infield. Bear in mind a teleconverter will stop your aperture down and probably slow your focus as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 18:40
|
|
|
n0n0 posted:You think I'll be able to get sufficiently low DOF with the teleconverter at f5.6 from like 30 or 40 feet away? Hard to say. f/5.6 is pretty well stopped down, and it'll depend on what's behind your subjects, focal length, etc.  P5082027 by PhotoBen27, on Flickr This is with my old 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6, at 226mm, f/5.5. The girl in white is about 20-25 yards from me, and the crowd and cars are at least another 50-60 yards behind her. The other player is probably about 10-12 feet behind her.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 19:03
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Hard to say. f/5.6 is pretty well stopped down, and it'll depend on what's behind your subjects, focal length, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 20:19
|
|
|
One argument against thin DOF is that there is frequently something hilarious going on in the bleachers or along the sidelines, which can be a sort of easter egg. Spectators can also make a sports photo a real gem, especially if it's a scoring moment and the crowd is going nuts. Like with most things involving a camera, aperture choice depends on what you want to get out of the photo.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2012 20:50
|
|
|
xzzy posted:One argument against thin DOF is that there is frequently something hilarious going on in the bleachers or along the sidelines, which can be a sort of easter egg. Spectators can also make a sports photo a real gem, especially if it's a scoring moment and the crowd is going nuts. This is also going to depend a lot on how far the crowd is from your subject, and how far from your subject you are. Examples: I think any more dof would hurt these photos, since the crowd is far away anyway    I think normal play action is generally going to be best served by a thin dof and focusing on the play at hand. Also, during the actual play, the crowd probably won't have had time to react to something you're capturing. It's usually after a play that the crowd gets happy / pissed. If there are crowd reactions, maybe stop down and try to work those in to a composition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 00:21
|
|
|
Yeah, I guess I was thinking more along the lines of goal/touchdown celebration type stuff. And I do love scouring the backgrounds of sports photos see what stupid stuff is going on back there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 02:36
|
|
|
xzzy posted:And I do love scouring the backgrounds of sports photos see what stupid stuff is going on back there. I always love seeing a sports photo of peak action with some rear end in a top hat photographer in the background already chimping. Some guys just can't shoot through a play.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 03:42
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:I always love seeing a sports photo of peak action with some rear end in a top hat photographer in the background already chimping. Some guys just can't shoot through a play. http://www.scottjones.net/?p=2038 quote:We all got photos of the crash, or I assume we did. And most of the other shooters started chimping as soon as the gravel stopped flying. But chimping in a situation like this can be a very bad idea because the emotions caused by a crash are often much more compelling when exposed in the rider’s behavior than the crash itself.  It takes conscious effort for me to keep the subject framed until long after the action has passed. The urge to "see what I got" is irresistible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 20:20
|
|
|
xzzy posted:It takes conscious effort for me to keep the subject framed until long after the action has passed. The urge to "see what I got" is irresistible. That is so hard sometimes. Getting THE shot - chimping - just to notice that you missed it when the soccerplayer punched the other soccerplayer right in the mouth. Just infront of you. (Haven't happened yet, luckily.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 20:52
|
|
|
I got very nearly caught checking my screen while a hockey game was going on. A deflected shot missing my head by about 6" quickly cured that  I just swivel my screen around and closed now so I'm not even tempted to look. That is still a hell of a temptation though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2012 20:57
|
|
|
n0n0 posted:I'm using a 70-200 f4L with a Canon 1.4x extender. You may have discovered this already, but you really need a lot of light for an extender to work well (or at all) for sports photography. Auto-focus will be all over the place as it is with an extender, and overcast skies or early evening will worsen it - which means a lot of lost shots in sports. I have a Tamron 2x extender literally collecting dust on a shelf - I've done enough shoots to know its limitations outweigh its benefits enough to not even bother packing it anymore.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 14:08
|
|
|
Yeah, 1.4x teleconverters absolutely require good light (especially if the lens itself is already an f/4 to begin with). About the only time I use it now is on my 35-100mm f/2.0. I have a 50-200mm f/2.8-3.5 that it does OK with, but I've never been crazy about it. Granted, compared to spending $crazy on a 300mm, I'll still take it. This was on a cloudy day about a year ago and I can't entirely complain:  63 by PhotoBen27, on Flickr Like 40oz said though, it slows the poo poo out of your focus. I didn't even bother using it on running players.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2012 14:16
|
|
|
Things are still up in the air but I may get the chance to shoot the ND vs. Syracuse game lacrosse game on Saturday night  It's on ESPNU at 5PM. Look for the 6'6" guy with Olympus gear.
|
|
#
?
Apr 24, 2012 20:51
|
|
|
So, based on the suggestions of this thread, I spent this softball game wide-open (at f5.6, unfortunately). I feel like my results are mixed. A couple of my shots would have been stronger at f11, but I can see the appeal of shooting wide open. If only I had a 70-200 f2.8... Coyotes Softball, April 20th 2012-040.jpg by theokaluza, on Flickr  Coyotes Softball, April 20th 2012-071.jpg by theokaluza, on Flickr  Coyotes Softball, April 20th 2012-1024.jpg by theokaluza, on Flickr  Coyotes Softball, April 20th 2012-1073.jpg by theokaluza, on Flickr Edit: I would more tightly crop some of these, but I like to leave that decision to my section editor, so I give him these larger versions. Cause the school paper has size constraints and, etc.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2012 21:31
|
|
|
Honestly these are all a ton better compared to f/11. Which ones would you have wanted at f/11 instead? Out of sheer curiosity.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2012 21:35
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Honestly these are all a ton better compared to f/11. Which ones would you have wanted at f/11 instead? Out of sheer curiosity.  I'd keep working at it this season -- but the season is over, except for away-games, which are like hundreds of miles away, so I can't go. Thanks for the comment though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2012 21:53
|
|
|
n0n0 posted:To my eye, the last photo would be cool at f11. And one other photo from the album that I didn't post -- where the pitcher is in focus, and the first baseman is out of focus. But really, I wish that the first baseman was in focus and the pitcher was out of focus I suppose I can see what you're saying there, but in 99% of cases, you want to keep to one isolated event (player hitting ball, slide into a base, etc). Otherwise things become a bit too busy. If you want to get more practice, almost every city in the US has a few travel softball and baseball leagues ([City] All-Stars, etc) that you could probably shoot. There's also tons of beer league slow-pitch softball leagues in the summer that usually are fine with you shooting them. Finding out now that Saturday's forecast for the game is a high of 44, with showers and wind gusts up to 30 MPH. Gonna see just how good this weather sealing really is 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 15:37
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Finding out now that Saturday's forecast for the game is a high of 44, with showers and wind gusts up to 30 MPH. Gonna see just how good this weather sealing really is Every photographer should have a pack of these rain sleeves in their bags at all times. They're too cheap and too effective not to. I only have to use them once in a while, but they're invaluable when I do. Plus they're more durable than they look, I've reused them a handful of times with no tears or stretching. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/469774-REG/OP_TECH_USA_9001132_18_Rainsleeve_Set_of.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 15:44
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:Every photographer should have a pack of these rain sleeves in their bags at all times. They're too cheap and too effective not to. I only have to use them once in a while, but they're invaluable when I do. Plus they're more durable than they look, I've reused them a handful of times with no tears or stretching. Oh yeah I have one stashed in every bag, especially needed them when I didn't have a sealed body. They're fantastic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 15:56
|
|
|
I got my 70-200mm a few weeks ago. I've been really looking forward to taking it to shoot some sports, but the local rugby season is winding down with only cup finals for the higher tiers on, and I'm not going to ask for permission to shoot those until I have at least some experience. Instead, tonight was the final for the British and Irish cup. One of the biggest rugby teams in the world second string were in this final against a Welsh lower division team. (The second strings from top division teams in Ireland play off against some second strings from Britain, but mostly teams from the second or third division in Britain.) I didn't ask to shoot from the sidelines, but the stewards there have no problem with people bringing in big lenses to shoot from the stands. And there was a free-for-all on the seating, so I just arrived early and picked a semi-decent spot. Big prologue out of the way, I had a blast. Sitting where I was it was incredibly tough to get shots without anything in the way (be it structural pole, fans standing in front of me, or the the officials and management on the sideline.) Still, it was a brilliant experience. I'm definitely going to try and get onto the sidelines for some local Gaelic Football and Hurling matches over the summer. There were parts where my heart was thumping from trying to get a shot rather than from the action itself.    And even better, my team won the cup. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 21:02
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:Every photographer should have a pack of these rain sleeves in their bags at all times. They're too cheap and too effective not to. Thanks for the link. I've seen these behind the sales counter, but didn't know they were so cheap. And, yeah, they're more professional than the "sliced up garbage bag held on with giant rubber bands" or praying those ominous black clouds will pass by before kick-off.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2012 22:12
|
|
|
I've been taking hockey pictures of my roommate and another buddy playing all season. There are some decent ones in there, but the two best I have of the season are a couple of great stitched together pictures of them on the ice: stiched, on Flickr  corey1complete, on Flickr I'll have to go through the rest to see if I have any others I want to show off. I end up taking nearly 500 pictures every game and pull out about 10% as interesting in any way. Most of those are really only amusing to us so there's a lot to go through.
|
|
#
?
Apr 28, 2012 01:08
|
|
|
I finally got to shoot some football during the daylight. It's amazing how much easier it is to do post-processing with ISO 100-shots than ISO 3200... Lyn - Vålerenga Fotball by azathosk, on Flickr  Lyn - Vålerenga Fotball by azathosk, on Flickr  Lyn - Vålerenga Fotball by azathosk, on Flickr  Lyn - Vålerenga Fotball by azathosk, on Flickr  Lyn - Vålerenga Fotball by azathosk, on Flickr It's a bit of backstory on this match. The guys in red/white (Lyn) are Vålerengas (black kits) fiercest rivals. A few seasons ago they went bankrupt and had to start all over in in the 6th tier - now they're at the 4th tier and qualified for the cup. Vålerenga on the other hand is in the top tier. This was the first match between the clubs since 2009. So both teams supporters did what they could to make it memorable: Bastionen (Lyn-supporters) with flares:     Klanen (Vålerenga-supporters) with flares:  This post suddenly became alot longer than I expected, hope that's OK by you guys.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2012 09:33
|
|
|
More football! VIF - FFK: Vålerenga IF - Fredrikstad FK by azathosk, on Flickr  Vålerenga IF - Fredrikstad FK by azathosk, on Flickr  Vålerenga IF - Fredrikstad FK by azathosk, on Flickr  Vålerenga IF - Fredrikstad FK by azathosk, on Flickr  Vålerenga IF - Fredrikstad FK by azathosk, on Flickr  Vålerenga IF - Fredrikstad FK by azathosk, on Flickr
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 15:56
|
|
|
azathosk posted:More football! VIF - FFK: I have no idea who this guy is but drat does he own. Tell me this is like a team owner or manager or something.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 16:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 15:37 |
|
|
I'm afraid he's just a fan...  He should be the team owner. I should change the description on the picture to "LIKE A BOSS" or something.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 18:52
|
|