|
Yeah I read books. posted:We decided since we couldn't get photo passes to just go to a tattoo convention instead...next time I'll have to consider giving proper notice and all that for the right passes...thanks for the help! Yeah, typically unless the PR people or the band know who you are already, you're probably not going to get a photo pass within a week of the show. Also, if it's like the last two years they haven't had a barricade for Summer Slaughter tour. I went to one in both MI and FL. I made attempts at shooting both from the crowd with little luck.
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2009 01:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 07:44 |
|
|
Alabama Matt posted:Is anyone looking to shoot Warped Tour this summer? Yeah, I plan to hop on the tour for a few days actually at the end of the month.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2009 17:55
|
|
|
Cyberbob posted:Fair enough. I don't have an AF low light lens, so i was looking for ways of using a flash creatively, trying to avoid the "that annoying guy with the flash" stereotype. Then you're just the annoying guy with the flash on stage that the crowd hates. Realistically, it's doable, but it's probably something you want to do just for fun if you already have tons of other shots of the band, or maybe you're touring with them or something. You have to really be aware of where the flash is at all time when you're shooting. I've shot bands with flashing lights and it ends up being pretty tough because you constantly have to be moving around to position the camera, the band member, and the flash all at the right spots or your shot ends up way off. On another note, I got my approval to go on Warped Tour for the July 24th-26th shows so I'll be at the Orlando, Miami, and St. Pete shows if anyone is there.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2009 12:38
|
|
|
Zurich posted:Yeah I meant pretty much shooting from the middle of the pit at a metal gig. It tends to look really amateur for the most part, but the hardest thing is getting an exposure like that. The stage light at most venues doesn't really hit the back of people in the crowd so you'd just end up with a really underexposed crowd and a lit stage or a blown out stage and exposed crowd. That and have you ever tried it? It's loving hard as hell. I've shot a few non-barricaded shows that were pretty sizable, maybe 1500 people and fighting your way to get shots and guard your gear in a metal crowd it ridiculously tough and nerve-racking.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2009 12:47
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:Quick question for any boston based music photographers or really any large outdoor music photographers. I've posted some of my shots in this thread before but they are mainly local shows. I got a photo pass for the WNFX/Boston Phoenix Best Music Poll at Boston City Plaza because one of my favorite bands (The Gaslight Anthem) is playing. Now my question is this: what lens should I rent. I know that for shows like Warped Tour a wide and fast lens is good if you are in the photo pit. I have a Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 but I think that is too wide and too slow. I was thinking of renting a 16-35L MKII (it's like 100 bucks for a week). Any other suggestions? A couple things. 1. Don't expect to be able to use that flash your bringing. Most shows, well most that require a photo pass have a strict no flash policy. And they mean it. The four words you will hear the most if you become a concert photographer is "Three songs, no flash." That being said, bring it with you just in case. 2. For most outdoor shows, lens speed isn't a big issue. I typically shoot most outdoor stuff around f4, so don't focus on needing a super wide aperture. It's outdoors, there is light. If the show does go late, typically the lighting at those type of venues is pretty solid too, so even then you probably won't need f2.8. That's not to say you shouldn't go that route. 3. If you have a 10-20 and a 24-70, why would you rent a lens that is pretty much covered by what you already have? If you're set on renting an extra lens, I'd rent a 70-200. Never underestimate a good drummer photo. They are harder to get and not a lot of people take the time to shoot the drummers. Realistically speaking, your 24-70 is probably what I'd say to use the most. It covers a good gamut of focal length for concert shots. I tend to use my primes for concerts more than anything, but that's mostly at indoor shows where I like the fast glass. My two most used lenses for any show are my sigma 20mm f1.8 and my canon 50mm f1.8 The 20mm is wide enough to get some close to head to toe shots and gives a cool perspective if I want to get right up next to them as well. It's easily cropped in for a slightly tighter shot too. And the 50mm is great for shots of the singer or some side angle shots of the other members. Enjoy the show. Outdoor shows can be fun, but they can also lead to some really lackluster photos if you don't put some effort into it. A nice expsosure and cool lighting can save an indoor shot, but that same shot in natural light could be extremely sleep inducing. My biggest tip is to use your angles and focus on expression.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2009 18:20
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:Thanks for the advice! It's a Sigma 24-70 that is rather soft so I might rent the Canon 24-70 instead of the 16-35 so I can get a bit more range in my shots. I'm just wondering if wider is going to be better because of how high the stage is going to be, location of photo pit, etc. It's soft even at f4? I have the 24-60 and it's plenty sharp at f4, it's only a little soft at 2.8, but still not awful. Also wide lenses tend to be worse for tall stages, it makes the stage seem even taller and bigger. Oh and the best tip for changing lenses is do it during song changes. As soon as a song ends, that's when I swap lenses.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2009 19:05
|
|
|
That's how I do it. I usually start with my 20mm, change to my 50mm for the second song, then the third I usually try for drummer shots and maybe toss on my 8mm fisheye for some interesting shots. It all depends on the band though, sometimes you just have a hunch what lens is going to work best at what times. Helps if you've seen them before too. Some of my best live shots are of bands that I've gotten to know over the years and that I've shot a dozen times over and they'll look my way and give me a nod when they're going to jump or something so I know how to time it. Like this shot.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2009 19:13
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:Is the sigma easy to focus for you? I had never heard of it until you mentioned it just now, and a quick google turns up slow autofocus in low light. It also seems really big. It's quick enough. Most of the time you're not making huge jumps in focal length when you're that wide anyway. Sure if you're focused on something 10 feet away and then bamn, you're 2 feet away, sure it's gonna be slow, but you're usually not making that big of a change. It is definitely a big lens for a prime, but it's not overly heavy either. To be fair the large filter size is a little misleading as the actual hood/filter ring is wider than the rest of the lens, probably to allow clearance for the hood. Also another thing to note is that that lens has shot up a ton in price. I got it maybe 3 years ago brand new for I think $330 from a website at their regular price. It's near $500 now from that same site. pr0digal posted:I never really thought of that...I'll dig around the web for some that operate in my area and see if I can't do some freelance work! Start your own once you get some content. You'd be surprised at how little of any form of media you need to get approved for most shows. A lot of it just depends on the publicist. Some of them will approve drat near anyone with a domain name. rockcity fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Jul 22, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2009 19:44
|
|
|
Not trying to sound too harsh here, but those need a lot of work. The main issue with them is that you shot him in essentially dark places with no source of additional light other than what was ambient, which you can see is clearly not sufficient. If you're going to do portrait type shots in dark areas, you either need to use a flash, strobes, or situate them to where they are directly in an existing bright light source, like right under it pretty much. Really though, my biggest tip if you're not using flash or strobes is to not shoot at night. It's just going to be blurry and grainy. I don't think I tripod is going to solve all the issues with these photos, they just need more light in them, plain and simple. You can still get darker looks when shooting during the day and not have to worry about grain or blurriness near as much. Try shooting in shadows or partially enclosed areas.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2009 13:05
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:This one was actually last minute, I was taking him home from a party and was like "gently caress it, hey man let's do that photoshoot now". There are a few more from his apartment, but in general I feel that the low-light out-door shots are more interesting. Again, I don't mean to sound crude, but have you ever learned how to edit a photo before? Your colors are all really bad. Take a look at the skin tones. Also indoor lighting is nowhere near proper. I'll echo again what we're going to tell you. Shoot outside, shoot during the day. Trust us. It may look more interesting in low light, but it's making it look really amateur and unplanned. And please don't let him wear what he's wearing. it accentuates his ummm girth. For the most part, so do your angles and positions. Don't shoot a chubby guy from waist height. It is never, never going to look good. rockcity fucked around with this message at 19:28 on Jul 23, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2009 19:26
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:Sounds fair, can you give me a little more info on "fix your white balance" though? What should I be looking for to make sure I have the "right" white balance selected? White balance is based on what your light source is so it's going to change based on where you are shooting. Shooting in his living room? There should be an incandescent setting. Shooting in the kitchen? You probably want the fluorescent setting. What your white balance does is that it tell your camera what exactly in the photo should be white. It's matching the color temperature of the light to be white in tone. So that white things actually appear white and not blue, red, yellow, etc. Take a look at what's on the display, if it looks bad, change it. I'm not sure about good editing tutorials. I learned most of my basic color editing when I worked for my college newspaper. What I'd suggest doing to start (if you're using photoshop) is to open up your levels adjustment and start toying around with the three sliders at the bottom. The one on the left controls your shadows, the middle is the midtones and the right is your highlights. These are the three levels of an image. This will affect the exposure of your image. You can also select the color channels individually in that top drop down box and do the same thing with those as well. This will teach you how to correct color problems. Skin is looking a little pink? Try toning down your reds. White walls have a blue tint? Drop down the blues and warm it up by upping the reds. Learning to edit is mostly just practice. Flood lights are certainly a way to go. I've used one before and it can definitely add to the image. Be prepared though that they're pretty bright and will overpower most of the other ambient light. You can counter act that a bit my moving the light source around, namely further away. As far angles, I'd avoid shooting from anything below the waist for the most part. It's really accentuating his gut. The only times it can work is if his stomach is hidden, like it's not too bad looking in those first couple images, but take a look at the shot in the kitchen or the one outside the house. They both really accentuate that he's a bigger guy. That can be hidden with a different angle. The main reason I suggest a different outfit is because an open sport coat like that makes fat guys look fatter. it's just an opening for his gut. Because you're shooting in dark situations, the eye is drawn where? The light parts. What's light in the photo? His shirt. So essentially you're guiding the eyes immediately to the fact that he's chubby. Even something simple as a plain black t-shirt instead of that white one would make that image worlds better. Try to look at your photos and visualize what stands out the most to you. This can often be a clear indicator of problems right away and can be fixed during the shoot. I also think a baseball hat and a sportcoat is way too try hard for a guy trying to be a solo artist, but that's just me. If you look at most solo artist shots, they normally have more of a "I'm just a normal guy" vibe going on and try to capture a normal moment. It lets people connect in a, I could hang out with that guy, sort of way.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2009 21:29
|
|
|
AtomicManiac posted:
Photoshop does a poor job at levels when there are bright spots in the photo, like your sky. It does an excellent job when there is sort of a nice even exposure. Can I ask you what ISO you shot these at. Some of them are still horribly grainy for being outside.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2009 12:38
|
|
|
Three days of Warped Tour leads to some pretty cool shots. So far this is my favorite.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2009 06:53
|
|
|
Knux posted:Heck yeah man. The over saturated sky works well in this shot for sure. Did you use a polarizer or just crank it in post? Just cranked it in post. I actually masked him off a bit too and dropped his saturation just a touch, to really give the colors that extra bit of contrast.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2009 20:36
|
|
|
Nondo posted:Who's the singer? Have anymore from Warped Tour on your page yet? That fine gentleman is my good buddy Craig Owens. He sings for the band Chiodos. I talked his security guard into letting me stand on top of the barricade right behind him when he does his crowd walk during the last song, so that's how I got that shot. I don't have many edited yet, since I didn't get home from the tour until late last night, but I had to turn in some shots to Alternative Press by today and they just put my gallery up. You can check out my shots from the St. Petersburg show here. Alternative Press - Warped 2K9
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2009 03:12
|
|
|
Nondo posted:Nice! Thanks for the link. I'm looking forward to seeing Gallows at Warped here in August but I don't know what camera I'll be bringing. Deeeefinitely go watch Gallows. I'm not even into their music, but god drat were they entertaining.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2009 22:13
|
|
|
Cyberbob posted:I'm sure this has been asked a million times, but a band has approached me to take some photos for an upcoming concert they're having.. Now this is bigger than just regular bar gigs, this is in an arena with a 6k person capacity in New Zealand. Depends on what they want to use them for really. For live shots I charge based on usage rights. Is it for promotional use, album use, web use, sponsor use? These all play a part in how much you should charge.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2009 02:56
|
|
|
HPL posted:I went to a show last night and spent most of it messing around with exposure lock and what not. When it worked, it worked very well and the camera got some awesome exposures of the musicians against backlights instead of underexposing the musicians or overexposing when they were spotlit against dark backgrounds. Anyways, I could go over the lessons learned, but Canon thoughtfully wrote up an article on the matter: Yeah, even with the AE lock, I just don't like trusting the camera to make my decisions for me at a show. There's just too much variation in the light sources between direction, power and position for me to let the camera figure it out. I'd rather just shoot manual and trust my gut on it. For the most part I end up with far better results, especially if the light is mildly consistent in power. I also hate having it meter in the middle for the same reason I detest shutter button focusing, my subject, or at least where I want it to focus is not always in the middle. I'd rather manually set the exposure and set my focus button to one of the buttons on the rear so I can tell it exactly what I want a lot easier.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2009 18:13
|
|
|
HPL posted:I usually run manual mode when I'm using a flash. Otherwise I find that the lights change too rapidly to fiddle around with settings. If it's total blinky-flashy situation as often happens at metal shows, I'll go manual mode because there's just no helping otherwise. I did find myself falling back to manual occasionally because the meter was giving me strange readings like 1/1000 at f/2.8 which as anyone here knows is pretty much impossible at a small venue concert. Yeah, I shoot a lot of shows where the light jumps too much and I get a lot of misreads where the shutter is up as fast as you said, just due to the angle of some light. I find I'm better off sticking with a somewhat consistent shutter speed most of the time. It usually requires a lot of chimping if you want to stay on top of it, but I still prefer it to aperture priority.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2009 19:45
|
|
|
AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I was at a show last week in a smallish club and I had a hell of a time because they used a fog machine. The fog would refract the light all weird and I couldn't figure out how to meter for it. A lot of it was either blown out, or no definition of the performer amidst the fog. Yep, fog machines are pretty much a thorn in the photographers side. It's not so bad if it's a low lying fog machine, but if it's not (most aren't) it sucks, especially if the fog is between you and the performer. I don't mind it so much if it's for like one song, but if it's for the first three it gets really annoying. Avenged Sevenfold is notorious for this poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2009 20:43
|
|
|
jackpot posted:I played around with this when I first got my 40D but quickly lost interest and switched it back. Can someone give me the 30 second explanation on why and in what situations I'd want to set my focus button to something other than the shutter? I know there are benefits, I just can't remember what they are. Well I can tell you the reasons I use it. The main one is that it stays focused where I want it to. If you set your focus to another button you can point your camera to what you want in focus and then move the frame anywhere you want and that object stays in focus, which makes positioning things not near the center of the frame a lot easier than trying to half press a button before moving. It also prevents it from re-focusing when I don't want it to which becomes a huge problem when people are moving or there are a lot of contrasting objects around, like in concerts or even more importantly sports. Try to shoot a sporting event with it on shutter focus, then try it on an external button. You will notice how many more of your shots are actually in focus. I always had shutter as the focus on my first SLR, but then when I started working at the newspaper I worked for in college they had us always use the focus as a button on the rear. I hated it at first, but now I could never go back. Seriously, try using it for a few weeks and see if you really don't like it better.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2009 21:38
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:As I posted earlier I have been given a chance to shoot the WNFX/Boston Phoenix Best Music Poll tomorrow afternoon/evening. My XTi decided to break, but thankfully my neighbor was kind enough to lend me her 20D. The lens that I ended up renting (the 16-35L f/2.8 II) came in today and holy poo poo that thing is loving sweet. Even on a crop body it is still pretty drat wide. Most shows you just go to will call and show them your ID. If that's not that case, they should be able to direct you to where you need to be, sometimes there is a separate media gate or desk you have to go to.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2009 01:43
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:It's a free show so there isn't a box office, but I am planning on getting there wicked early (with the printed out e-mail) to find my photo pass. I am wicked loving nervous. I've never really shot a major show before but I've got a fair amount of local show experience under my belt so I should be okay. Boy, you were kidding about being in Boston. Most newspapers don't really run many concert photos and if they do they send someone to shoot it. Magazines you might have more luck with, but for the most part, it's pretty tough to sell normal concert photos. Most of the time it's for ad usage, or they have a contributing photographer list that they email to request shots. This is the deal I have with Alternative Press at least.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2009 02:38
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:It really depends. Well controlled fog can look amazing if they have some lights on it, it makes for very "full" pictures of performers. Certainly, but most of what I shot is a fog machine behind a fan, so you don't get dense controlled fog, you get a hazy and ugly mess.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2009 13:29
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:The show I just shot (Best Music Poll 2009) had some of the most godawful restrictions I have ever heard of...mostly thanks to the city of Boston. As far as the city was concerned if you weren't a newspaper photographer or worked with the radio station putting the concert on you had no right to be there at all. Nahhh, that's just radio shows. Most radio shows suck for photos, for some reason they're completely restrictive. I have no reason why. I've had more problems with them than any other show. Though I credit that mostly to the assclown that was in charge of PR at the local rock station at the time. He had no idea what he was doing. As for the going through a band thing. That tends to vary venue by venue. Sometimes if you get the headliner you're pretty much set for the rest of the bands. Sometimes all you need is an opening band and you're all set. Sometimes they won't let you shoot all the bands unless you got approved by all the bands, though that's usually pretty rare when it's not a radio show. The best thing you can do at large shows is to get to know the media relations people at the venues. They can't get you approved for shows or anything, but it will make things so much easier when they know who you are.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2009 13:26
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:*edit number 2* I was thinking about e-mail Alternative Press regarding the photos I took to see if they would be interested in some of them for their archive/website, though I am not completely sure how to do this. Rockcity, I know you said (I think) you have some experience with AP, care to help a starting music photographer out? I'd honestly try some smaller publications. The thing about AP is that they're pretty set on their topics for the months and limit the amount of content they run so that they can actually get some good articles and interviews in there. They've been branching out for web stuff as of late, but it's usually behind the scenes stuff and in the studio kind of things. What I'd recommend doing is when they do their annual photographer content, enter. That's how I got in with them. I placed in the contest like 4 years ago and they put me on their contributing photographers list after that. The way that works is that they send out an email to all their photographers asking for shots of about 5 or 6 specific bands, so the odds of getting things to run are low. I think I've had 4 shots run in 4 years. On a side note DEFINITELY shoot Unearth. They are sick live and make for awesome photos. Spend a lot of time shooting their guitarist Ken, the smaller one with short hair. he makes for great photos, like this.  (own host)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2009 20:50
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:I go to school in Fitchburg so I am planning on keeping an eye on the shows at the Palladium. I was trying to get a pass for Worcester Fest but I heard nothing back from any of the bands I contacted. How exactly are you contacting them? You're probably not going to the right people. I rarely don't hear back when I request a photo pass.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2009 15:37
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:For Four Year Strong and Set Your Goals I e-mailed who I thought was their manager or press contact and I heard nothing back. For the local band I e-mailed them directly and had an immediate response...saying they didn't have a guest list. Stick with emailing. Typically who you want to email is the band's publicist at the record label. That's usually the best person to talk to about getting photo passes. Sometimes they give the PR work to a third party company also, there's a few pretty big ones and a lot of small ones. MSO PR for example is one of the bigger ones. They handle Warped Tour, Ozzfest, lots of other big ticket shows and tours. Most of the PR reps for labels and firms are actually really nice and pretty lenient when it comes to approving people, but every now and then you find someone who is just a total dick. The return to the pit guy was a douche when I met him a couple years ago in Worcester. Actually a lot of the bigger concert photographers you'll meet are generally really arrogant and really overrated in my opinion. Jeremy Saffer is probably the best example I can give of that. His he two styles of promo shooting (on location, parking lot style shot and a backdrop studio shot) that is it. His live stuff is also really boring, especially outdoors, his outdoor festival shots are horrible. And to top it off he has a book coming out. There are a dozen photographers who are barely out of high school who can already shoot circles around the guy both live and posed.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2009 18:21
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:Thankfully I have an in with the band that is playing with Unearth so I should be able to get stage access without much issue...aside from probably getting bitched at by the return to the pit guy. In stark contrast his wife seemed pretty nice and I had actually run into her before at warped tour a couple years ago. I was in the crowd and not shooting but I noticed a photographer with two 5Ds but one had a Nikon strap. I think the reason people don't like flash and blur photos is that a lot of them tend to look similar and a lot of photographers ride that completely as their style. I use it here and there, but for the most part I don't touch my flash at shows. To be fair to most concert photogs, most of them are awesome people and you definitely want to get to know them. Some of my best friends from back in Michigan are people I met shooting concerts. There were about 5 of us that were pretty close and hung out a lot outside of shows and did road trips hours away to go shoot something. It's fun riding in a car with 4 people and a trunk full of like 20 grand in camera gear, haha.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2009 19:10
|
|
|
HPL posted:Small shows with lovely lighting are the majority of what I shoot. Eventually you learn to live with fast primes and high ISOs. I almost never shoot below 1600. I have to agree here too. Just looking at your shots from the weekend, you need to work on composition. I'd say that for the most part you shoot too wide, or at least too wide for certain shots. Most of those shots you posted have way too many non-important things in the foreground. Monitors, mic stands, all of that. It takes up too much of your photo and doesn't draw your eye in to the musician. This was your first big show though, so it's certainly something to work on. Don't worry, I look at my early work and I laugh at how bad it was. It was all really generic and poorly exposed. My two most used lenses for shows are my sigma 20mm f1.8 and my canon 50mm f1.8. They're both good in low light and allow me to avoid using flash. I suggest getting some primes, they're really the way to go. If you take a look at most of the better photographers (or at least the ones I like) they almost all shoot with primes, especially at indoor shows. AIIAZNSK8ER posted:I came across this guys stuff last week. It is pretty flat and boring. Yeah, when I first saw his posed stuff I thought he was cool, but I really hadn't seen anyone who'd wowed me that much. This was also like 4 years ago and he wasn't nearly as arrogant. I met him again when I was in Worcester shooting the New England Metal Fest two years ago and again a few nights later at another show and he was full of it both times. Since then I've met or at least seen the work of so many better promo photographers, one of them lives just a few miles from me and is like 19. He's just really boring with how he uses his lighting and general concepts all together. Edit: On a side note I think Alternative Press is going to run some of my photos in the Warped Tour recap issue. rockcity fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Aug 4, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2009 21:35
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:I don't put a whole ton of emphasis on marketing my shots either, as far as I'm concerned I'm just another photographer at the show (in general). At BMP, everybody and their mother had a loving DSLR. The thing is here that in order to be allowed to shoot Unearth (and hopefully only them) I have to agree to this...interesting stipulation. That's weird, I've shot unearth a good 10 times by now and have never had to give them that kind of permission. I wonder who you're talking to. I used to know their PR rep really well, but he just left that company a few months back or I'd shoot you his email.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2009 22:07
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Seriously. That's the first thing I bought once my gear came in. If you get foamies buy the 3M stuff, but better yet get some made at a local shop, the venue employees can probably tell you where. I can't recommend ear plugs enough. I was dumb when I first started and didn't wear them and my hearing has absolutely degraded. I won't go to a show without them now. I HIGHLY recommend these. They're not all that expensive, they're re-useable, comfortable, and have no sound quality loss. Ear Love pr0digal posted:What the gently caress do people have against freelance photographers? It seems that every time I even try to get a pass for a show I get snubbed because I don't have "anything to offer the band". I can see why some of you guys prefer local shows over the major arena shows. Welcome to concert photography dude. Hell, welcome to the real world. You don't get anywhere by doing it for free. You know how we give advice about how you shouldn't short change yourself as a photographer? Well there are people on there end telling them no to do the same thing. They're a band, but they're also a business. They're not doing things for free just like you aren't. They want something in return, this makes sense to me. You're not giving them publicity, so they want use of your photos. While I can't say that they're not aiming high with full use for promotional purposes, I will say that I completely understand where they're coming from. Also there really aren't many "freelance" concert photographers out there. The people who do freelance their work still shoot for some form of outlet, could be something as little as a photo blog, but it's something and people see it. There really aren't people out there who shoot shows to either sell photos or just for fun. rockcity fucked around with this message at 13:50 on Aug 17, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2009 13:45
|
|
|
pr0digal posted:Now that I've calmed down a bit, I see where you are coming from. Just keep posting stuff. The more material you have up, the better. You'd be surprised at how little you really need to get approved sometimes. It's so much easier to get approved when you're only dealing with a PR rep. Most of them are fairly nice and will get to know you. Once you get in with them getting approved is a easy. Every now and then you'll deal with some tightly run companies though that will only approve major daily papers. The lovely thing about that is, at least from my experience, is that a lot of the time the people from the paper don't even show up. A few years ago I was approved to shoot Tool for my college's newspaper. The only other people to get approved were 3 other daily newspapers in the area, the two major metro-detroit papers and one smaller one. I was the only one to actually show up. It made me sad because I had several other photographer friends who got denied. Didn't matter much since Tool is an awful band to take photos of when it's their tour.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2009 17:15
|
|
|
Sadi posted:Im going to be shooting a friends small concert tomorrow night. I dont know how dark its going to be but I think im going to bring my 30d with a 50 1.8 and my AE1 with two rolls of tri-x, 50 1.8 and 24 2.8. Any advice? Should I bring a flash? Should I even bother with AF on the 30D or will it be ok in the low light? AF ought to be fine. I haven't had any problems with it. It's got to be preeeeetty dark at a show for AF to not work. Bring your flash, it certainly can't hurt to have it. I'm not big into using flash at concerts, but I've been to a few that were near unshootable without it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2009 15:06
|
|
|
Not bad, but they look like bastardized versions of Joey L's photo shoot with protest the hero.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2009 16:47
|
|
|
Zoowick posted:You got it. Huge fan of his. Yeah, so am I. Now that I think about it, that would certainly explain why you were emulating the twilight photos for seniors. That Protest the Hero shoot was what got me into his work. I actually didn't know he did the twilight photos until a couple months ago when I saw a video from the shoot. A lot of my post production is based off of his methods. He is definitely on my "to meet" list if I ever get a chance.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2009 17:35
|
|
|
buddhakitten posted:Ya seeeeee the Jazz is like a Jello pudding pop.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 20, 2009 21:04
|
|
|
Knux posted:I'm a little bit late, but god do I hate that guy. Shai Hulud was pushing his book recently at a show and his work is just flat and boring. Damnit, not them too. I like those guys. My buddy drummed for them for a while. And for another guy whose promos sucks way more than people will ever admit, Todd Owyoung. Seriously, if I were slayer I'd have beaten him with my metal chains if he made us look this boring.  Hey, I have 7 lights, let's use them all at full power and just surround them so there's no depth to anything and no shadows anywhere. Yeah, that'll look awesome.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2009 18:16
|
|
|
Knux posted:It's always really good and inspiring to see awesome photographers get the larger names and see what they can do with them. Joey L usually always pulls through with an awesome shot or idea, then matches it with killer lighting. But when one of those guys gets to shoot a name as monumental as Slayer and they pull some local lovely metal band style shoot, it just makes me think that it depends more on knowing the right people. It really does, which sucks. Right now there are only a few names I really keep an eye on in terms of band promo photos. Joey L, Adam Elmakias, and my friend Nicole Rork. As for Todd, I just think he has no idea how to use lighting. Everything is waaaay too evenly lit. He just surrounds them with flashes and blasts in a ton of light. It's boring as all hell. He mostly does it outdoor too which means he's matching the sunlight and it loses all depth between the subject and the background. rockcity fucked around with this message at 15:13 on Aug 26, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2009 15:11
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 07:44 |
|
|
HPL posted:If you read the accompanying article, he had about three minutes to do the shots, so you're not exactly going to be getting the most personal of shots in that time. And like I said, Slayer has a fine history of "standing there" promo shots. I agree with them just standing there, but still, he could have done a lot more set up work beforehand to dial in his lighting. Heck, you could even do some minor work on post to darken that up and add some drama to the photo. A lot of his photos could be made so much better by simply adjusting the power on some of his lights, or using less of them. And I definitely agree with the thought of using a tighter lens and backing up. Wide angle all the time is boring and it gets distorted.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2009 15:35
|
|