|
S-s-s-s-s-s-season opener.      Saturday is UT vs OSU at the Horseshoe. Should be fun stuff.
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2011 23:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 1, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
DJExile posted:This rules right here. Auditore posted:Awesome shot man, I love this one. What post did you do? Thanks! Post was just a bit of Lightroom -- recovery, fill light, contrast, crop, noise reduction, and output sharpening. Here it is straight out of the camera (other than resized) 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 9, 2011 06:03
|
|
|
My Rockets came within 16 yards of beating Ohio State at home. They would have been the first team from Ohio to beat OSU at home in some 80 years or so. I'm drat proud of our team, but also pretty upset at the refs. The penalties were 14 to 2, with some veeeeery questionable calls that were absolutely clutch for OSU. Anyway, I rented a 2x TC for the 300mm f/2.8. I didn't anticipate that shooting at an effective 900mm would present a unique problem: the heatwaves coming off of the field at a distance distorted and softened otherwise in-focus images. Whoops. Still fun.       
|
|
#
¿
Sep 11, 2011 22:44
|
|
|
DJExile posted:My buddy at WSPD said "if I was coach I would take that whole team into Savage Arena and pelt them with flags for 20 minutes" It's unreal. Sloppy penalties literally cost us one of the biggest upsets of the team's decade.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2011 02:22
|
|
|
Haha, noticed this today. On the right is a photo on Sports Illustrated's website. On the left is mine.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2011 01:21
|
|
|
DJExile posted:For anyone watching TV, if you turn on ESPN, odds are you'll see our boy Dakana somewhere on the sidelines. Very much  if you're a Boise fan. My Rockets shot themselves in the foot again. Two turnovers in the redzone. A perfect pass that easily would have been a TD (he was -gone-), dropped. Just tough to watch. Oh well. I just hope we tear up the MAC.        Oh, and Reedy almost took me out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTKHfIvXIio
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2011 18:12
|
|
|
We're 4-0 in the MAC. Awwww yeah. The real two tests are coming up -- two back to back Tuesday night games vs Northern Illinois and then Western Michigan. Tuesday night football will be weird, but they will hopefully be good games. Last Saturday we took Miami to the cleaners, 49-28.    This is a LB after returning a fumble for a 55-yard touchdown.  
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2011 22:14
|
|
|
Auditore posted:Great photos there dakana. The last one = noise though Thanks! Do you mean "= noise" as in it's noisy? It's reaaaaaally tough to shoot in that stadium because the only lighting on the sides, so the endzones are black holes. Even in the middle of the field it's 1/500, 2.8, ISO 3200. Since I'm stuck with my 70-200 f/4 on my Canon camera, it's ISO 6400 in the end zone, and even that is pretty dark if they aren't facing the sidelines, so I often boost it in post up past that. So a lot of times I'm forced with shooting at an effective ISO 12,800 with a camera whose hardware only takes it up to 3200. My poor 1D3... I really need to upgrade to the 2.8. Glass before body, kids 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2011 20:06
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:Holy poo poo dakana I sure hope you were shooting tonight's Toledo game. I just saw the recap, loving wild. Yeah. That was a long, long game, and honestly, the coaching lost it. I'm importing everything right now -- pictures'll be up soon.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2011 05:45
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:Clearly you're not working for somebody with a strict enough deadline if you have time to check the forums in the midst of processing photos Working for a bi-weekly paper is awesome sometimes  Otherwise I'd have had a laptop at the game. Right now, though, the only impetus I have to get them done tonight is for an online gallery and Facebook. Anyway, man, what a heartbreaker. 60 points of offense wasn't enough to win this one. A year after giving up 65 points, UT gives up 63 points. With over 1500 all-purpose yards, this game was ridiculous. I'm exhausted -- running up and down the field myself had something to do with it, no doubt. This is what pissed me off. You're up 60-56 with one minute left in the game. They're at your 3. Why the hell wouldn't you call a timeout? If you've given up 56 points, your defense isn't suddenly going to completely stuff them at the 3. To make matters worse, instead of just scoring, NIU ended up getting two penalties to leave them at the 13 with less than a minute left, and they take a few plays to punch it in, leaving UT with less than 20 seconds to get to FG range to tie it or go 70 yards for a touchdown. I don't understand why they didn't save the clock. Ugh. Anyway. Since this game was broadcast on ESPN's 3D network, this dude was running around           And, finally, here is the game-winning 17th touchdown. 
dakana fucked around with this message at 05:32 on Nov 7, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2011 07:26
|
|
|
Dreadhead, those are some really beautiful shots. Very nice use of the scenery. BobTheCow posted:I also tried using a floor remote for the first time... Hahaha jesus. This is awesome. (I'm glad you didn't get hurt) So, uh, last week the UT - NIU game set the record for touchdowns in the Glass Bowl at 17. This week we topped it. 18 touchdowns. 804 yards of offense for Toledo. 66-63. What the flying gently caress     
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2011 09:38
|
|
|
azathosk posted:Got to shoot wrestling yesterday. That was something ... different. Alot harder than football and icehockey. And I really need to learn to use a flash. Really, it's tough using flash for sports. You run the risk of interfering with the game by flashing a player, for one, but the largest challenge is balancing the ambient light. Since usually the only time you're going to actually need a flash it's going to be super dark, you can't just pull back the exposure and let your flash illuminate since a single on-axis point source is going to look terrible with tons of hard shadows everywhere. It can sometimes be used effectively when balanced with the ambient to provide just a bit of lower fill light. Usually the only time flash works in super dark environments is when you can get two or more light sources up high or bouncing off the ceiling -- dedicated strobes are best, but in a smaller arena people have effectively used hotshoe flashes or smaller monolights.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2011 00:40
|
|
|
I went to a football game, too!     
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2011 05:59
|
|
|
DJExile posted:You lucky SOB, how was the NFL sideline? Fun as hell. Everyone was really nice, too. I wasn't quite sure what to expect, but all the other photographers were good, friendly people. I always try to be very respectful on sidelines and make sure I'm not blocking anyone, and most of the folks there were happy to do the same, or let me get in in front of them so I could kneel and they could shoot over me if I got there after they did, etc. Some dudes from NFL films were there with a high-speed Arriflex camera -- that was sweet too. Plus, the food. Holy loving poo poo. A breakfast spread at 11:30, motherfucking Skyline chili spaghetti and coneys at half-time, and then tons of pizza postgame. It was incredible.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2011 06:16
|
|
|
psylent posted:I usually shoot weddings so I'm armed with a Canon 5D MkII and a 7D, 50/85/135mm primes and a 24-70. I think I was shooting in AF One Shot mode. Definitely shoot in servo AF mode. That gear will be fine for it. Shoot in servo and, with the 5D at least, use the center point and you should be fine.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2012 00:48
|
|
|
psylent posted:Assuming I probably shouldn't be using back button focusing whilst doing this either? Actually, most sports photographers will say you SHOULD use back-button focus for sports. I switched and now use it exclusively. It's great because if you're shooting or preparing to shoot while waiting for someone to make a move, it's so much better to be able to just take your thumb off if someone crosses your path so that you don't switch focus to the 'traffic' so to speak, and it lets you keep your finger on the shutter button.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2012 01:11
|
|
|
Toledo managed to beat Ohio U, one of the top MAC teams. I've been running a floor remote in men's games, mostly hoping to catch a dunk, but also because it can produce some cool stuff. If I had some cash to blow I'd totally be trying to get a backboard remote set up -- but that takes a super clamp, magic arm, camera bracket, and safety cables, none of which I own right now or really can justify buying at the moment. Not to mention you need referee approval and a good amount of setup time. Until then, I'll continue with the method of taping two sharpies to the bottom edge of the camera.       and I thought this one from the floor remote was funny 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2012 00:23
|
|
|
xzzy posted:I love the pitch black background. The shot through the legs worked out amazing too. Yeah, I'm really fortunate with Savage Arena. The background fades to black from a lot of angles -- it helps avoid a background of empty seats when attendance is down. During the WNIT championship, though, it was fun to get different angles because the place was packed. For now, though, black is best. And man, that would be an awesome hockey angle. I suppose it'd probably be pretty hazardous with pucks, though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2012 01:03
|
|
|
BobTheCow posted:This is the saddest tennis ball.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 1, 2012 20:29
|
|
|
This is a little old, but I found it online after seeing it in SI. I thought it was fantastic. It's not an action photo, but it's an astoundingly good piece of journalism. Members of the media are reflected in Ryan Braun's sunglasses. dakana fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Mar 14, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2012 19:43
|
|
|
Well, Toledo's women's basketball team is back in the WNIT. They advanced to the Sweet 16 last night. I won't be able to shoot their next game against VCU on Thursday, but hopefully they win that one so I can shoot the next. This brings UT up to 9 consecutive postseason wins after winning the WNIT last year. This game was a blowout from the beginning. UT held Cincinnati to just 11 points in the first half, while scoring 37. They ended at 72-51.         And looking at these now I realize I forgot to run noise reduction on the lot of them. Oh well. Also, something cool: the university photographer showed me his new toy. He bought a wireless SD card, and is able to lock a photo on his camera, then it pops up on his iPhone app. From there, he can quickly crop and edit and upload to Facebook or send in email to the website guys. He can do all this in the time it takes for a foul shot or timeout. It was pretty wild. And he's able to say "I'm not chimping -- I'm editing!"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2012 20:09
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Pukestain Pal posted:It's not just the photographers in the way though. The NFL Films guys can cross "the line". There are also a billion other people...players (usually the kickers) linesmen, the guys that carry spare balls, etc, etc. If you aren't close, you aren't going to get good sight lines. This is why you make friends with the security guards and event staff. Usually, if you get on their radar as a nice / respectful guy, they'll watch out for you when others break the rules to get closer and are in your way, and give you a break if you need to lean out in that sort of situation. Or, you do what some of the older photographers do and give people a sharp tap on the leg with the end of your monopod. Also, I probably shared when this happened, but a friend of mine took a pretty good hit during women's basketball. The girl came careening off the court right under the basket and ran into him, jamming his camera's metal hotshoe up into his chin. The girl was fine, but he was bleeding pretty decently. The athletic trainers on the bench nearest him got him a towel and bandage, which a member of the cross-country team who happened to be sitting behind him helped him apply. He ended up going on a few dates with her :giggity:   http://i.imgur.com/PDtA0.jpg (closer picture of the injury; a little gross) And then here's a gif of really the only time (quite surprisingly) I ever had any contact. I'm the dude in the gray sweatshirt. 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2012 03:49
|
|
|
Are you pushing them at all in post? If not, I didn't realize how noisy the 1D2 was. I didn't think you'd get that much grain until at least 1600.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2013 02:02
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:So I just talked to the athletic director at my school about shooting our basketball teams. Any tips on shooting bball? I was thinking 70-200 f/2.8 + 17-35 f2.8 on an APS-H body would be a good range for courtside? Supposedly they just got some new lights installed so I should have decent lighting. No flash allowed. Is it basically just get low and try to get faces? I've only shot soccer and hockey and that was from the stands. Two faces and a ball. That's pretty much it. Bread and butter will be layups, contested rebounds, and driving. 200 on APS-H will probably be a bit short for shooting defense on the other side of the court, but you might try it anyway, if only to get a feel of the game from a photographic standpoint a bit more.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2013 17:39
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:He must be shooting faces from the far end of the rink, or action from the box seats above the glass. My paper has a single shared 300 prime, and it's a bit long for American football unless you're an artist with the reflexes of a mongoose -- most of us do fine with a 70-200. 400 2.8s are pretty standard for American football. I did most with a 300 on a crop, so 450 equivalent. 70-200s are really only useful when the action's coming close -- i.e. a catch in the endzone or a sideline play when you're close. Other than that you're really hard-pressed to get good close action with only a 70-200.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:Friday Night Lights: Jesus, dude. I mean, the compositions and action is pretty decent but as some point the gear starts really holding you back. What are you shooting these on?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:If I was doing real freelance work and getting paid a decent amount for it, sure, I'd get better equipment. But for $35 a game and my photos are lining the birdcage tomorrow afternoon? Word. I can respect that. Some Spartan stuff. Takeaways from this weekend: 1. Holy poo poo it was cold. I had a cotton undershirt, a longsleeve underarmor shirt, a cotton overshirt, a Nike ACG jacket, and then my big fluffy faux-fur/suede overcoat. I was loving freezing. The rain, sleet, and HAIL didn't help. I couldn't imagine what the racers were feeling like. Needless to say, there were tons of medic calls for hypothermia -- handfuls of people ambulanced to the hospital for it, too.  NKPH2699 by nick.kneer, on Flickr2. Apparently, dogs can be Spartans, too.  NKPH0704 2 by nick.kneer, on Flickr3. When the sun goes down, bets are off and the flashes come out for the last trickle of races.  NKPH9154 by nick.kneer, on Flickr
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
Wooten posted:Days like that are why I don't miss shooting races. I love the look the dog is giving it's owner, and the last one is great. It was pretty loving miserable for a good bit of the day. Definitely needed some heavy-duty gloves and maybe a drat balaclava. And yeah, the dog really didn't seem too pleased for the obstacles. It also lost a bootie at some point I didn't get the story behind her; I'm wondering if perhaps she's a service dog for seizures of something.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 17:48
|
|
|
I remember it being a huge deal when Sports Illustrated used a photo for their cover that was shot horizontally with a D3 at ISO6400, then cropped into vertical. Sort of a "holy poo poo, cameras are nuts" moment.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
sell ur zooms, shoot at 1.8 all day every day NKPH8222 by nick.kneer, on Flickrthe hosed up bokeys is from the heat coming off of the fire.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
hi liter posted:Keep shooting and sharing! I'm also pretty new to doing sports stuff, mostly shooting rec sports and pick up stuff for now. I've been told that pictures I share are You know, that 17-50's probably your best bet. Here's a photo from a remote on the ground in front of me at 17mm on a 1.5x sensor (so ~25mm on full frame or ~15mm on Canon crop)  2012-02-08_NKneer_UTMBball-v-Ohio_011 by nick.kneer, on Flickrand the same moment at 70mm on a 1.3x sensor (~90mm on full frame or ~65mm on Canon crop)  2012-02-08_NKneer_UTMBball-v-Ohio_057 by nick.kneer, on FlickrBoth are uncropped. I chose horizontals because that's how you'll be shooting video. The downside to the 17-50 is that it'll be too short for anything on the other side of the court (you'd need at least 200mm for that), and it won't be great for things happening on the perimeter, as it'll be short. However, I think your framing is going to be really difficult with 70mm on a crop sensor in horizontal orientation when people get to the basket, which is where your meat and potatoes is going to be.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
When I shot basketball I was comfortable on a 1.3x crop with a 70-200 on the baseline. If you're right up under the basket or something, 24-70 would be good, but if you're more than a few spots away from the bottom of the basket anything less than 70mm gets too wide. If you've got just primes I'd say 50 and 85 would be fine, but don't expect to get any defense or coach stuff. 200mm on 1.5x crop was juuust enough for defense, though a little longer would've been nice. Also scrums for the ball happen around the perimeter and half court often, especially when the defense presses. For the crowd, definitely get up close and in faces with a wide lens. That's fun. Some of my favorite crowd stuff is like 16mm on my 1.3x body.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
hi liter posted:Well I don't have a lot of that stuff. I have a Canon T3i and an Fuji X100S. For the T3i I have the kit lens and the 55-250. My friend is letting my borrow her 50 1.8 as well. I want to avoid changing lenses as much as possible so I think I'll roll with the 50 on the Canon and with my Fuji for stuff up close and in the crowd. I think I'm gonna try and make due with the 35mm and 80mm equivalents. Well poo poo, that simplifies things. Try the 50 1.8. I worry, though, that its focus won't keep up with the basketball players. If you're not getting shots in focus with the 50 1.8, up the ISO and try the 55-250.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
First time shooting HAH SCHOO BASKETBALL. I've shot tons of college games and 1 NBA game, but high school was its own beast. 2015-01-20_B-V-Basketball_Kings-at-Mason_051 by nick.kneer, on Flickr 2015-01-20_B-V-Basketball_Kings-at-Mason_133 by nick.kneer, on Flickr 2015-01-20_B-V-Basketball_Kings-at-Mason_096 by nick.kneer, on Flickr 2015-01-20_B-V-Basketball_Kings-at-Mason_102 by nick.kneer, on FlickrThe 85 1.8 did really well, but I kept feeling super anxious because unless it was a layup or a drive to the basket, I wasn't shooting because it was too short. So nothing on the perimeter, no steals on defense, no shooting in tight between people, etc. I ended up shooting probably 70% with the 70-200 f/4 and 30% with the 85. The 85 definitely looks a hell of a lot nicer thanks to BOKEYS and a whole lot lower ISO, but I really didn't get anything great with it because I didn't shoot it enough. If my job situation lets me shoot more of these as a freelancer I may just sell the old 70-200 f/4 and get a 2.8 like a real boy.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 03:06
|
|
|
DJExile posted:Maybe it's the lighting, or maybe it's that wall back behind being a different color, but I am having the damndest time figuring the white balance out. The ceiling has like 3 different colors what is up with these liiiiights Yeah, with these crappy flourescent lights they're all cycling at different rates, so they're putting out different color temperatures on any given slice of 1/640th or 1/800th or whatever. That, and you get the normal cast from light bouncing off the wood floor. All that together means you're completely boned when it comes to color.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2015 14:07
|
|
|
kdrudy posted:I generally shoot on Shutter Priority whenever I do sports, that's what I had going here. They might be a bit underexposed due to my post work, the old location they skated at had worse lighting so I'm used to these pictures being a bit darker, I bet I darkened them a bit when working on them afterwards. Real talk: aperture priority is generally going to be A Better Idea. Usually you're going to want your shutter speed as high as possible and your ISO as low as possible. A shot at 1/1000th, 2.8 and ISO 3200 is going to look objectively nicer than a shot at 1/1000th, f/4, and ISO 6400 because with the increase in ISO comes an increase in noise, a decrease in color depth, and a decrease in dynamic range. Reducing the noise makes your shot softer, and you can't really get back the dynamic range and color depth. A lower aperture also means your main subject is going to be a bit more separated from the background thanks to a shallower depth of field. The argument against a lower aperture is that lenses are, all things equal, sharper when they're stopped down a little, and because a deeper depth of field gives your autofocus a little wiggle room and helps keep multiple subjects in focus. That being said, I'm confident that the sharpness boost from stopping down a stop is far overshadowed by the benefits of a faster shutter speed (f/2.8 and f/4 is the difference between 1/500th and 1/1000th, which is huge for motion blur in sports) or of a decrease in ISO (the difference between ISO3200 and ISO6400, which is a big deal for noise). Also, typically your autofocus is either going to nail it or miss it; a shot that's on the cusp of being in focus isn't really going to be helped by the amount of depth of field that a stop or so is going to provide. The acceptable sharpness range is still thin at the distances and focal lengths you're using.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
Miko posted:Just finished shooting some volleyball inside a gym with those crazy overhead lamps. Especially when it's like in one frame, you've got like three different colors coming from three different lamps. Green, pink, white, yellow, gently caress you!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 1, 2024 15:40 |
|
|
More HAH SCHOOL SPORTS. Of course my favorite images would be of the team that got crushed. NKPH6607 by nick.kneer, on Flickr NKPH7040 by nick.kneer, on Flickr NKPH7059 by nick.kneer, on Flickr NKPH7327 by nick.kneer, on FlickrHad the wide angle on right as the game was ending for crowd stuff when there was a fast break so I figured I'd shoot. Didn't turn out too badly.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2015 19:29
|
|