Maybe Stadium Lights too??

David Evertsen

Okay I had a horrible experience this evening and really need some guidance. I have a new 50D and a 70-200 2.8L that I have had for a long time. I was shooting 3200 2.8 and could really not get the shutter speed above 320. I was shooting night football and the meter inside was bouncing all night. Some shots are over exposed others are okay but some have dark sides and at the corners. I was shooting portrait for sports and just couldn't figure out if my camera is a mess or it was the dreaded stadium lights. I had no problem last 2 games at night shooting 3200 2.8 at 500 and everything was great. Was it really the lighting and the cycling of the light like the other thread talked about?? I also had set it for Eval metering instead of partial. Any ideas?? Cause man my pictures where off so bad.. That and they ran the ball to the other side of the field.. I was on the wrong side of the plane again..





Can you see the brown in the corners?? It would be mostly on the side and on either side nothing the same. I was actually worried that the camera was messed up.




David Evertsen
www.phabulousphotos.com

Jeffro

I would think setting things manually would help eliminate the meter jumping all over. Perhaps try taking a reading off the turf to get your settings. That way you have the shutter speed you need. Since one team is usually in color and the other in white the turf could act as your gray card......sounds good as I type it...:D

rockcanyonphotos

Photos always help and a few more details.

Was this a new field or the same field you always shoot?

Was this your first time using Evaluative metering??

(I settled on partial a few years ago and have never left)

Sounds like you were shooting in Aperture Priority (Av) mode?

If that is the case, you can expect your SS to vary as you focus on different areas of the field. HS stadium lighting is spotty at best with anywhere from 2-3 different broad "zones" where the lighting conditions will vary significantly. Then you add in that the lighting will also vary from sideline to sideline and it just makes using Av mode on your camera a total mess at night.

I have found that lighting conditions will vary dramatically from one HS stadium to the next and sometimes even at the same stadium.

Previous poster is correct... always shoot manual after dark. I try to find an average SS (from about 30 - 30 yard-line) and just lock it in, then another setting for the redzone/endzone.

I have also found the type of lighting they use in stadiums is often different from one stadium to the next. Most of the time AWB works just fine, however, at some "special" fields you would think I was shooting in a gym with all the traditional cycling problems.

My solution to the WB issue is two fold. 1) I shoot with a flash and 2) I shoot in RAW so I can correct most WB issues in PP.

David Evertsen

rockcanyonphotos wrote:

Photos always help and a few more details.

Was this a new field or the same field you always shoot?

Was this your first time using Evaluative metering??

(I settled on partial a few years ago and have never left)

Sounds like you were shooting in Aperture Priority (Av) mode?

If that is the case, you can expect your SS to vary as you focus on different areas of the field. HS stadium lighting is spotty at best with anywhere from 2-3 different broad "zones" where the lighting conditions will vary significantly. Then you add in that the lighting will also vary from sideline to sideline and it just makes using Av mode on your camera a total mess at night.

I have found that lighting conditions will vary dramatically from one HS stadium to the next and sometimes even at the same stadium.

Previous poster is correct... always shoot manual after dark. I try to find an average SS (from about 30 - 30 yard-line) and just lock it in, then another setting for the redzone/endzone.

I have also found the type of lighting they use in stadiums is often different from one stadium to the next. Most of the time AWB works just fine, however, at some "special" fields you would think I was shooting in a gym with all the traditional cycling problems.

My solution to the WB issue is two fold. 1) I shoot with a flash and 2) I shoot in RAW so I can correct most WB issues in PP.

Okay I was shooting manual.. Always do and the camera has been mine for 2 weeks, set it for partial
when I got home. Figured on site it was the lighting cycling.. I really was sick had never shot this field before and realized there was some issue. Will post a few pictures when they are done uploading... I am working on getting Lightroom2 for Raw and will go from there. It was really bizarre.. Anyone in Orlando Florida had problems with Colonial High School???


Thanks,
David
David Evertsen

johng

The first thing that jumps out at me is these shots are framed way too loosely. So the field of view is covering a lot of ground - and you're going to have different light characteristics over such a large area. Assuming your'e already at 200mm, the action in these photos is just too far away. Do you have any shots where the subject was filling let's say 2/3 of the vertical portion of portrait oriented frame or 90% of vertical portion of landscape orientated frame (BEFORE cropping)? Do you see the same issues in those photos?

rockcanyonphotos

I tend to agree with Johng wrt the loose framing. At least to my eyes the center area of your photos seems to be ok on the WB... it is just the fringes that are going wacko.

I shot a similarly lousy field last friday using a 200mm for the first half and the lighting was all over the place for shots at similar distance to yours. Once I switched to my 300mm and locked in tighter on my subjects everything got a lot better. I also noticed the lighting was a much bigger problem for me when I switched to landscape vs portrait mode. Not an issue for you, just a side note.

And although RAW can correct a lot of WB issues... with the kind of variations you have going across the images, I don't know if they could have been pulled back even with RAW. I had a few like this the other night where the only way I could salvage the image was to go B&W.

David Evertsen

johng wrote:

The first thing that jumps out at me is these shots are framed way too loosely. So the field of view is covering a lot of ground - and you're going to have different light characteristics over such a large area. Assuming your'e already at 200mm, the action in these photos is just too far away. Do you have any shots where the subject was filling let's say 2/3 of the vertical portion of portrait oriented frame or 90% of vertical portion of landscape orientated frame (BEFORE cropping)? Do you see the same issues in those photos?

Most are framed tightly wanted a good example of the lights..

See if this helps..



I was loose on the kicker just to get the shot and obviously wrong side of the field in others.
In this picture the darkness is on the left bottom. I had never come across a field this bad..
I have had it in hockey with different color lights in the rink but never this. Endzones that
are dark and such but this was bizarre..

Thanks,
David

jrowphoto

Thr brownish/magenta tint is due to the light cycles. I get shots that are bright and "greenish" cast, and the magenta reddish-brown cast is not as bright. When the sodium vapor lights cycle, the color and actual power of the lights cycle, so you get shifting color casts AND shifting exposure. Not much you can do with the color shift, other than flash. Could also be due partially to the coverage of the lighting on the field. Some parts of most fields aren't as well lit.

Also, I have pictures that get the cycle at the right (or wrong) time where one half of the frame is greenish, and the other is red/brown, like what you mention about some of your shots. Could be the part of the cycle where it's in transition, or it could be different lights on different parts of the cycle at the same time.

David Evertsen

jrowphoto wrote:

Thr brownish/magenta tint is due to the light cycles. I get shots that are bright and "greenish" cast, and the magenta reddish-brown cast is not as bright. When the sodium vapor lights cycle, the color and actual power of the lights cycle, so you get shifting color casts AND shifting exposure. Not much you can do with the color shift, other than flash. Could also be due partially to the coverage of the lighting on the field. Some parts of most fields aren't as well lit.

Also, I have pictures that get the cycle at the right (or wrong) time where one half of the frame is greenish, and the other is red/brown, like what you mention about some of your shots. Could be the part of the cycle where it's in transition, or it could be different lights on different parts of the cycle at the same time.

I was thinking that on the sidelines but it is always great to have some confirmation from those that are much better and more experienced than I am. I even spoke to a few coaches at the school and they said the lighting and field where bad for football as well. The field and stands didn't look right when I got there it looked not brown but odd and funny, the camera caught what I saw now that I know. I will chalk it up to a learning experience..


Thanks everyone,
David Evertsen
www.phabulousphotos.com