Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Post Your Photos > Sports & Action Photos

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 27, 2006, 11:19 PM   #1
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Well it's been a while since I last posted so here are a bunch from yesterday's district volleyball championship...

as always C&C welcome.









In case you can't guess, she's a pretty hard spiker...





In the history of sports, has complaining to the officialever gotten an athlete anywhere?



And finally the celebration after the final kill shot. District champions!








JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 28, 2006, 7:31 AM   #2
Member
 
Ripsnort's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 97
Default

Great photos and great memories for the girls captured there, JohnG.



So, occasionally I get the backgrounds that come out semi-focused likea couple of your photosindoors, any way to get a greater depth of field to eliminate this (Other than moving the stands, fans back about 200 feet!) ?
Ripsnort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 7:45 AM   #3
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Ripsnort,

Not sure I understand. Do you really mean "greater depth of field" (meaning more of the background will be in focus) or did you mean "shallower depth of field" meaning the background is more blurred?

I'm going to assume you mean shallower. Unfortunately that's a little tougher. These shots were at f2.0 on an 85mm lens. There are several things that theoretically could be done:

1. use a longer lens - impractical from where I was shooting plus I don't currently own a longer prime :-)

2. get closer to the subect - the refs frown on me being on the court

3. move the fans back - about 30 yards or so

If I had a 135 2.0 I could shoot from the stands and that would improve the subject isolation a bit. But I don't own it unfortunately. Maybe next year.

If someone has some other ideas I'd gladly listen - you know I love subject isolation.


JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 9:19 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
soliz39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 204
Default

Johng I take it you're using a cutom WB on these shots? Any shot I take in a gym just coem out looking flat from a color standpoint. Do you get this type of color off post processing?
soliz39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 11:18 AM   #5
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

Great series John, I would love to have that lens but the 120-300 comes first :-)

What sort of light are you working with there, what settings were you able to get?
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 11:37 AM   #6
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Thanks folks.

This may shock you but I simply usedauto WB. My 20d does an extremely good job at auto WB. I did minor corrections to a few of the 160 or so shots but not many. I was blessed by being in a very well lit gym. I shot at 1600, f2 and 1/500 - but the key was the exposure was dead on. The camera probably would have metered at faster shutter speeds if I was in AV. I'd say I did some minor levels work on about 20% of the shots. So, it was an amazingly lit gym - certainly not the norm. One of the benefits of covering Division 1 teams - especially in the playoffs where typically the best gyms are used. So, I realize I was lucky.

So, as for flat colors - that is completely a matter of proper exposure. If I have to use my 70-200 2.8 colors are a bit flatter. When I do have flat colors I do a saturation boost (set up an action in PS and apply it as part of my workflow when I need it). For these, I didn't need to use it. I more often need to use it for my night football shots where I don't have the luxury of a 1.8 lens.

Thanks for the positive comments.

Mark - I understand what you mean about lens priorities. The problem is, the more sports I shoot, the more I realize I need new lenses - especially in the world of primes. A 135 2.0 would be VERY nice :G
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 11:48 AM   #7
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,397
Default

Yep very true. I might go for the 85 1.8 at the same time as the 120-300 if I have a some good months at work before the end of the year. I am hoping to do more portrait work so the 85 would double up for that. I also have the 300-800 Sigma a bit further down my wish list but this will happen if I start to sell more and do some weddings etc for extra cash (but if I do that I will want another body and 2nd flash so we will have to see). Also with that bad boy for any field sports I would needa 2nd body with a smaller lens on so I could still get shots when the subjects are closer.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 12:17 PM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 67
Default

John, I am relavively new to indoor sports photography but I've watched you posts here for quite some time and learned a lot from you.

Pleasetake a look at this photo and give me your opinion/advise on the noise level. (I know it would be easier to comment on a full size image.) It was shot at ISO 1600 and the blue uniform and background showed quite a bit of noise. I worked hard at reducing it, but I reach a point where sharpness suffers.

You seem to have mastered the art of noise processing, from what I can see in your images. Do you have a set formula you've developed for filtering noise and retaining sharpness? Do you ever sacrifice some sharpness to reduce the noise, or am I being too picky about it?


Attached Images
 
gredan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 8:59 PM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 49
Default

Thank you for posting these. I always enjoy your photos. I especially liked the photo of the girl complaining to the official.

Karen
techaide2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 9:43 PM   #10
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Thanks for the kind words Karen.

Gredan,

IMO, the key to handling noise is to nail the exposure in camera. Typically for indoor sports like volleyball that means about 2/3 stop difference from what my camera would meter at. So, my camera at f2 ISO 1600 may want to use a shutter speed of 1/640 - I'll drop it to 1/400 to get a centered histogram or preferably slightly to the right of center.

I see from your posted photo that you shot at 1/500 3.2, ISO 1600 - I'd be amazed if any highschool gym was that bright. I'm also guessing (correct me if I'm wrong) that you did some levels work or something to bump the exposure in PP which is what's causing all that noise in the background. If your exposure was on in-camera, the D50 should give you a much cleaner noise signature than what I see in this photo.

Now, the sad fact is: even on the best cameras, at 1600 and 3200 you're still going to have noise and thus still going to need to remove it and lose some detail. When I look at my daytime soccer images for instance and compare them to my nighttime shots It's sad how much less detail there is. BUT, if I get the exposure right then there's less of it.

The second key IMO is framing tight. The noise destroys detail so the more you have to crop in PP the worse your image is going to look. As an example for volleyball, I'll only shoot half a court with my 85mm lens. I like to stand behind the net jugde and shoot from there. The 85 is really too short to shoot from the back of the court and try to get net play.

So, frame tight and expose to the right and you'll have more image detail. Then it's just a matter of playing with your noise reduction software to get the right mix. I still don't batch process my noise reduction - it would save me a lot of time but I honestly prefer to do it on an individual basis.

But as I mentioned earlier, it also helps to have a well lit gym
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:50 AM.