Sports photo lessons learned
While I was having fun photographing the Austin Grand Prix shifter kart race this weekend I got to talk with a professional photographer. He was from Shifter Kart Illustrated magazine. Was very helpful. He went over 6 of my prints and gave me some pointers, where I did good, where I did bad, how to fix it. I found some of his advice interesting and wanted to share.
He was shooting with a Canon D60 camera with a Canon 100-400mm 1:4.5-5.6 L IS USM lens. He finds using prime lenses gives a slightly sharper image, but they are so inconvenient to use he always uses a zoom instead. But he only uses L series zooms, they make a difference. And he seldom needs a lens faster than f/5, mainly because the depth of field becomes so shallow that you cannot get an entire kart in focus at one time. I found that I was shooting at f/10 or f/11 most of the weekend (decent sun, ISO 100 or 200, shutter priority at 1/400). Very fast lenses appear unnecessary for outdoor daylight shooting. He always shoots in shutter priority mode, almost always in manual focus, almost always in JPG instead of RAW mode.
1) He almost always shoots in manual focus mode. Focus on a spot on the track, then track the kart until it gets to that spot then take the picture. Don't rely on the camera to accurately track the object and continuously re-focus for you.
2) He almost always shoots in JPG mode, not in RAW mode. He considers all the post-processing to be way too much work. Instead, learn to work the camera. Learn to make the camera take the shot correctly in the first place. We all had to do that during days of shooing film. He will shoot RAW if he knows a particular shot will be hard to expose correctly. I found that I got good results using a grey card to set a custom white balance, re-shooting the card every 30 minutes to adjust for changing light, and use large-fine JPG mode with "parameters 1" setting (vivid color, sharp images setting). I do this because the Digital Rebel choose the white balance setting very poorly on its own.
3) Kart tracks are flat (i.e. not banked), but you can tilt the camera and get very interesting pictures of karts as they enter a turn. Makes it look like a faster scene. Works best on corner-entry shots. The correct tilt to use is to have the "inside" part of the camera tilted up, and the outside tilted down. That, in turn, makes the inside of the kart appear lower than the outside, which is the way a turn should be banked.
4) He almost never shoots in continuous shot mode. He doesn't see the need. Follow the kart for the shot you want, then take it. No sense taking 10 shots in a row to get 1 shot.
5) His lens is image stabilized, but he never uses it that way. It even has a "panning" mode (unlike my IS lens) but still does not use it. He doesn't think it gives satisfactory results when the lens is panning. For him, IS is only for stationary shots of stationary subjects.
6) He said the job gets boring. He used to photograph the Vancouver Indy Car race (CART). One day he told himself "didn't I get that shot of Michael Andretti, at this corner, in this car, for this team owner, with this paint job, over and over again for the past four years?" He said it can be hard to stay fresh and not get bored, to get a truly new shot. He said other photograpers in the biz tell him the exact same thing.
He was shooting with a Canon D60 camera with a Canon 100-400mm 1:4.5-5.6 L IS USM lens. He finds using prime lenses gives a slightly sharper image, but they are so inconvenient to use he always uses a zoom instead. But he only uses L series zooms, they make a difference. And he seldom needs a lens faster than f/5, mainly because the depth of field becomes so shallow that you cannot get an entire kart in focus at one time. I found that I was shooting at f/10 or f/11 most of the weekend (decent sun, ISO 100 or 200, shutter priority at 1/400). Very fast lenses appear unnecessary for outdoor daylight shooting. He always shoots in shutter priority mode, almost always in manual focus, almost always in JPG instead of RAW mode.
1) He almost always shoots in manual focus mode. Focus on a spot on the track, then track the kart until it gets to that spot then take the picture. Don't rely on the camera to accurately track the object and continuously re-focus for you.
2) He almost always shoots in JPG mode, not in RAW mode. He considers all the post-processing to be way too much work. Instead, learn to work the camera. Learn to make the camera take the shot correctly in the first place. We all had to do that during days of shooing film. He will shoot RAW if he knows a particular shot will be hard to expose correctly. I found that I got good results using a grey card to set a custom white balance, re-shooting the card every 30 minutes to adjust for changing light, and use large-fine JPG mode with "parameters 1" setting (vivid color, sharp images setting). I do this because the Digital Rebel choose the white balance setting very poorly on its own.
3) Kart tracks are flat (i.e. not banked), but you can tilt the camera and get very interesting pictures of karts as they enter a turn. Makes it look like a faster scene. Works best on corner-entry shots. The correct tilt to use is to have the "inside" part of the camera tilted up, and the outside tilted down. That, in turn, makes the inside of the kart appear lower than the outside, which is the way a turn should be banked.
4) He almost never shoots in continuous shot mode. He doesn't see the need. Follow the kart for the shot you want, then take it. No sense taking 10 shots in a row to get 1 shot.
5) His lens is image stabilized, but he never uses it that way. It even has a "panning" mode (unlike my IS lens) but still does not use it. He doesn't think it gives satisfactory results when the lens is panning. For him, IS is only for stationary shots of stationary subjects.
6) He said the job gets boring. He used to photograph the Vancouver Indy Car race (CART). One day he told himself "didn't I get that shot of Michael Andretti, at this corner, in this car, for this team owner, with this paint job, over and over again for the past four years?" He said it can be hard to stay fresh and not get bored, to get a truly new shot. He said other photograpers in the biz tell him the exact same thing.
Bill Jurasz - Mercury Photography - Cedar Park, TX
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
0
Comments
Also, while your shooting your gray card, you could miss a shot. I agree, the drebel isn't the best at WB, thats exactly why its so nice to do it in a RAW converter. WB is so easy to batch post process, especially if all your shots are from the same site/day/light... just take 1 minute on one image, and batch the rest. And RAW still has better quality based on all the reading I've done. All the guys at SI shoot RAW+jpg. Jpg for previewing, RAW for the money shot. Granted, they don't do their own processing, but still, when it counts, RAW is the way to go.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
I didn't ask him that, but I think it has to do with convenience of digital, the lack of buying and developing film, instant viewing of the shot, not having to change rolls every 36 pictures, etc. And its quite possible that his employer requires digital, or digital submissions. Personally, I see post processing as the least attractive part of digital photography. If I want to, I could scan negatives and post process with film. But I can't have any of the other benefits.
But, I did like his advice: learn to make the camera take the shot correctly in the first place. Don't use Photoshop as a crutch.
As far as missing a shot as I take a pic of the gray card, one thing I learned while out there is you miss a lot of shots anyway. You concentrate on this corner while something goes on behind your back at another corner, or you are looking through the viewfinder as something happens 20 feet to the right, just out of your sight.
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
I suppose a shot gets compressed somewhere along the way. I would think it would be preferable to keep it as uncompressed as possible, for as long as possible, which would mean shooting in RAW rather than jpeg. And if his issue with PS is that's it's time consuming... well, that's purely a personal issue, no?
Thanks for sharing an interesting insight into how this man goes about his business.
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
MANY pros do shoot jpgs and seem to be quite happy with the results ( maybe they do know something) - they tend to be shooting for newspapers or printed magazines or portraits, as opposed to fine art photographers who are trying to achieve the very best image quality in a large print and tend to shoot RAW.
Jpgs from a 10D or a D60 or D100 will make VERY nice 8x10 images - I have many pictures shot as jpgs with a 10D that printed a very nice 13x19 inch grainless print, so there is nothing wrong with this approach. Also a busy pro shooting racing carts may be more interested in being able to save 400 jpgs on his card rather than 100 RAW files - less stuff to change while at the track. I frequently shoot jpgs for snapshots and family get to gethers or if a card is getting near the end and I don't want to change it in the field.
That said, most of my pics are now shot in RAW for the improvement in image quality it achieves, but at a steep price in terms of storage space, both now and later, and longer post processing times. If you just shoot a couple of frames post processing is not a big deal, but if you have a 1000 frames to process and store, it does become quite significant. I have a day job. Post processing can be fun and a chance to explore and learn if you have the free time, but for a pro who gets paid for shooting rather than printing it may seem like a very bad deal. Most pros shooting for newpapers and magazines did not do their own darkroom work with film.
I think we need to think about this topic differently - and decide real time and interactively as we shoot, whether we want our image to be a jpg or a RAW file and freely swing back and forth as needed during the day. My two cents. Rant over
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
I shot in RAW for the first time this weekend. Never used the software before, was a little intimidated. But it was the baptism of a friend's first child, I want to make a nice print and I wanted the very best I could get. I also wanted to be able to go back and correct mistakes if possible!
RAW files sure do take up a lot of space - I went through three 1gb cards far too quickly.
I'm now beginning to go through the images. As you say, it's not quick. Truth to tell, I spend an equal amount of time in PS adjusting jpeg shots, so for me at least, the amount of time is about the same. And it's a disincentive. If I'm not careful, I'll go out and shoot, more rather than process what I've already shot.
I need to get quicker on the software, be it PS or DPP.
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
Thanks
gubbs.smugmug.com
I used a grey card because that is what I could find at the camera store.
Note that white typing paper, etc. will not work. They are not truly white, they are bluish usually, and will throw your balance off.
-- Bill
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
gubbs.smugmug.com
Yes 'm.
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
As Pathfinder says, this has gotten to be a humorous topic. Jim and I have had some detailed offline exchanges, and naturally we don't really agree. So in an effort to lift it above the level of religion, I did a little scientific research. I googled for "raw vs jpeg" and posted the first entry I got (which I happen to comletely agree with.)
http://www.nikondigital.org/dps/dps-v-2-7.htm
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]