baseball triptych

Elaine

I checked into DGrin yesterday and a little note on top told me I haven't posted in a few weeks, so...I thought I'd share a pitching trio of my son.



He's 8, and one of the youngest and tallest on his team, and has been getting better at pitching. Last game (not these pictures) he pitched two innings, six strike-outs, and hit a grand slam! Woohoo!

He's also a swimmer and won this second place trophy last weekend, after the times for the same six events were added up for each age group.


These were all shot with the Canon 40D and 70-200 f/4 L IS.

jonh68

Good series and control of exposure against what looks like back-lighting.

Elaine

jonh68 wrote: »

Good series and control of exposure against what looks like back-lighting.

Thank you! Yes, I really liked the light that evening.

Niepce

Nice exposure for the portrait as well. Did you use any off-camera strobe?

Elaine

Niepce wrote: »

Nice exposure for the portrait as well. Did you use any off-camera strobe?

Thank you! All natural light for the portrait. This pool venue had a huge, tall wall of windows and glass garage-style doors which made for some great light, if you were facing the right direction.

W.W. Webster

Elaine wrote: »

I thought I'd share a pitching trio of my son.

The shots are great and make a great series, but what struck me immediately was that the cropping appears to make the lad get smaller and smaller from frame to frame, left to right.

If the maximum height of the subject is governed by the third frame where his arms are spread making him at his widest, then I'd scale all the images accordingly. This might mean that the individual frames are not as high (meaning, more squat, nearer to square images).

Just an opinion!

Elaine

W.W. Webster wrote: »

The shots are great and make a great series, but what struck me immediately was that the cropping appears to make the lad get smaller and smaller from frame to frame, left to right.

If the maximum height of the subject is governed by the third frame where his arms are spread making him at his widest, then I'd scale all the images accordingly. This might mean that the individual frames are not as high (meaning, more squat, nearer to square images).

Just an opinion!

Thanks for your opinion! Interesting thoughts... I kinda liked the stair-stepped look, and now that I'm looking again, what's bugging me is the grass line not lining up. I'm curious to try what you suggested, although I'm picturing him looking like a giant on the right if he's the same height there as he is standing straight up on the left.

W.W. Webster

Elaine wrote: »

what's bugging me is the grass line not lining up.

Elaine wrote: »

I'm picturing him looking like a giant on the right if he's the same height there as he is standing straight up on the left.

I'm not suggesting he should fill the same height in all frames, because he's standing up straight in only one. It just that it seems he's smaller in the second and third than he is in the first, as though those images have been captured at a slightly greater distance.

Just the way I see it!

Elaine

W.W. Webster wrote: »

I'm not suggesting he should fill the same height in all frames, because he's standing up straight in only one. It just that it seems he's smaller in the second and third than he is in the first, as though those images have been captured at a slightly greater distance.

Just the way I see it!

They are all from the same sequence and same focal length (191mm), so maybe it's just an optical illusion?

Here's one with the grass lined up better...