|
My first "big" show. Big as in people show up to it on finals week.  
|
#
¿
May 16, 2009 15:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 30, 2024 00:01 |
|
|
Shooting with a 50 1.7 is obviously ideal for concert situations, just be aware that if you're body has a crop sensor you will have to factor that in. Mine has a x1.25 crop on full frame lenses, so that pumps it up to 75mm, which works fine in a venue where you can move about, just as much as a 50mm. However, at a larger venue, one where you may have to secure a photo pass to even get a DSLR past the front door, you can feel 75mm getting rather narrow, as your ability to move your physical self can become extremely limited by the time the headliner hits the stage. If you have a crop body you can always look at full frame primes in the 20-30 range but you lose some aperture coverage as well.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2009 20:06
|
|
|
I half agree with Kynetx. Respecting security can be tough as some places have extremely huge assholes working. And sometimes you're more afraid of the bartender than you are of the dudes with the huge arms keeping eye on the venue. But mostly I agree with taking a million photos. You will wear out your battery pretty well through a show but you also get great candids. I have about 10 shots of Fischerspooner's dancers off routine, where they really showed that they were enjoying the gently caress out themselves.  Watching a woman in flesh tone spandex do the robot while laughing is something I will never forget.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2009 19:28
|
|
|
Anyone else ever have a problem with hired security at a larger venue? By hired I mean 3rd party security hired by the venue to supplement house security. Even as a teenager I've despised them. I had a situation tonight where I thought I was going to get kicked out over a hired shirt not explaining something completely and trying to put it all on me. Then the dude had the balls to come by and flash his light on me a few times to "make sure". Anyways, here's a picture of Slug from Atmosphere looking like a hungry baby robin. 
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2009 08:11
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:I find that stating what you know you're allowed to do then asking them to check with the security manager works best. No doubt. But 95% of all shows have the same rules going on to the point where if there is something going on that a photog needs to stop doing (per the request of the performers) you should probably explain that instead of just telling him to put his camera away. Yeah it's your job, you're in the zone, but that's also how your security company has gotten a bad name over the years because you guys don't know how to handle people. You're not keeping watch at a frat party, talk to me like I'm sober. This was all over the shirt not telling me that Atmosphere requested that photogs get 3 songs. Period. How hard is that?
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2009 16:08
|
|
|
rockcity posted:Pretty much every concert for larger bands is 3 songs only. I can't tell you how many times I have heard the phrase "3 songs, no flash". It's just a given. The only times I've been able to shoot more than 3 songs are if I personally know the band and they've given security permission to let me stay in the barricade. Here's the thing, I was outside the pit. I switched to my tele and sat at a table to get some level shots and when I took a step forward from my seat he appeared. I've never heard of anyone having this problem before and I've personally seen photogs shoot from all over the venue with no problem. Now that I think about it, it's funny that a guy with a tele gets so much heat while nothing is done about the 40 dudes on the dance floor throwing flash at the performers with their Kodaks.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2009 18:16
|
|
|
Ha, I wish I got paid for writing/photography. The other guy in the pit last night, however, happens to be moderately established. I believe he's the live music photographer for the local Village Voice outfit and he's been in Spin and so forth. He was shooting with some massive lens with two small strobes on the edge of the stage (you couldn't tell they were going off unless you were looking right at them so I guess security didn't care) and here I am with my A200 and an old Minolta 50mm feeling rather amateurish. I guess if you wanted to be a real rear end in a top hat you could always get one of those prosumer PSs that Sigma or Lecia make and keep going. I know I could go without my kit lens in my sling bag and tuck one of those in there.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2009 20:33
|
|
|
IndieRockLance posted:Did you sign a photo release waiver? If you did, they can enforce that however they like. Usually "three songs" means total, not "three songs and then you can shoot outside of the barricades as much as you want." I know security shut me down like that when I shot Foo Fighters and I tried to get a few more shots when they moved down to a second, smaller stage. But in a festival setting, security has bigger concerns than whether or not you're taking pictures, so it really depends. Didn't sign a waiver, just showed my ID at the box office to get my pass and ticket and I was good to go. So whatever, I guess. I've done shows there with a camera in hand the whole night without security saying anything. Maybe it was because I shoot Sony and with my prime lens it looks like I just have some weird P&S? Either way, I'm over the situation. I'll just have to be more careful in the future.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2009 15:47
|
|
|
I think what happens is that people see the same angles over and over again and so a well done shot can lose it's appeal. Has anyone shot live with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8? I'm in a toss up between that or the Sigma 30 f1.4 as the next lens in my live kit. I already have a Minolta 50 f1.8 but it feels a little tight on a crop sensor body so the 30 would be wider and a bit faster. A medium zoom would definitely have its advantage in larger venues with professional lights but I still lost the aperture speed.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2009 21:03
|
|
|
HPL posted:I have. If you're doing stage front work in a smaller venue, it's a little long and I would recommend the 17-50 over that. For a larger venue, it's not so bad. Keep in mind that there's a huge difference between f/1.8 and f/2.8 in low light conditions. The shape of the stage makes a difference too. Shallow, wide stages are better served with wider lenses because you'll more likely be shooting right smack in front of the artist whereas with deeper stages, you'll want something longer because the non-singing musicians tend to hang back more on those types of stages plus the drummer is farther away as well. the 50mm felt too close at one of the largest venues in the area and the lighting is professional, even on the rare nights when they let local bands play. So shooting at 2.8 is a reality for me. At any of the smaller venues the 50 works fine, but I've only got 3 songs to get something good and the 50 just wasn't give me the angles I needed. Also, the Sony A700 has worse ISO performance than a D70s so I've got that to deal with as well. 1600 is usable but 3200 looks like a dirty polaroid. It's bad when one of your favorites of the show was taken from the bar with a 100-200 f/4 wide open. 
Scream Machine fucked around with this message at 04:58 on May 26, 2009 |
|
#
¿
May 26, 2009 04:55
|
|
|
Some shots from Friday. The usual venue. Local MC got me in as a band member so not only did I get free beer but got to go backstage and chill when the awful rock bands came on. Was slightly annoyed with the static lighting during this set but I got a few alright shots out of it with post.   Yeah, can't tell that these were taken with a DSLR at all because of my camera's poor ISO performance but honestly, he's happy with them so I feel validated enough. Trying to score a photo pass for the Yeah Yeah Yeahs, which would be great.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2009 19:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 30, 2024 00:01 |
|
|
IndieRockLance posted:A couple of suggestions: It's difficult with MCs, but try to catch moments when the mic isn't in his face. Or, if you can, get at an angle where you can shoot in profile so that the mic doesn't obstruct as much. You could also probably stand to shoot at a faster shutter speed, it looks like you have the ISO and aperture to compensate, so long as you don't mind the grain. Mic Mouth is indeed a problem but sometimes you can't get the angle and you have to work with body language and their eyes. Maybe not something you put on a press kit but it's still usable. Those were shot at 1600 and 1/60 I believe. I was shooting for free drinks and my plan was to shoot the other bands and sell my pics to them but you really can't underestimate how awful the hard rock scene in the Midwest is. Everyone wants to sound like Tantric or Nickleback but also like Dope. I couldn't take it and left. I have a hard time with arms being blown out at that venue so tonight I'll try something faster. That is, of course, if the package from the label arrives on time. I've never heard of an editor being mailed tickets and passes from the label before and it's not doing good for my nerves.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2009 18:48
|
|