Options
C&C for hockey, please?
Hello,
I am fairly new to the Dgrin forum , and have been following some threads with interest. Lots of great information and sharing. Realizing that I am a total amateur who is trying to learn as much as she can on her own, would anyone be willing to give me some tips about getting the most out of my equipment for minor hockey in dimly lit small town rinks? My goal is to provide nice photos (free at this point) for the parents and players and photos for the program. This is a team my husband works with as a trainer, so it’s a great opportunity for me to learn about how to handle poor light, capture action and wring the most of out what I have.
What do I have? A Canon 40D, 85mmf1.8, 50mm 1.8, and an ancient 70-210 f/4 which requires a 3200 for a decent photo. Unfortunately, the 3200 ISO leaves me with a huge amount of colour noise (chrominance?)The photos look like they have been pieced together with tiny bits of torn up coloured paper. There’s a 70-300 non IS kit lens , but I haven’t bothered to try it at the rink. Using a flash is out of the equation as the hockey shooting is done through marked up plexi- glass. For post processing (lots of work there) I used CS4.
Through trial and error, I use the 85mm about 95% of the time. Here are two examples. The first is cropped quite a bit. (I was on the side, players were in the middle.) In the second, I was standing about twelve feet from the player.
Thank you!
Myra
IMG_19170 by M.J. Hencher, on Flickr
Canon 40D
85mm f/1.8 1/500 ISO 1000 manual WB spot metering
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
IMG_4431 by M.J. Hencher, on Flickr
Canon 40D
85mm f/1.8 1/400 ISO 800 auto WB multi-segmented metering
I am fairly new to the Dgrin forum , and have been following some threads with interest. Lots of great information and sharing. Realizing that I am a total amateur who is trying to learn as much as she can on her own, would anyone be willing to give me some tips about getting the most out of my equipment for minor hockey in dimly lit small town rinks? My goal is to provide nice photos (free at this point) for the parents and players and photos for the program. This is a team my husband works with as a trainer, so it’s a great opportunity for me to learn about how to handle poor light, capture action and wring the most of out what I have.
What do I have? A Canon 40D, 85mmf1.8, 50mm 1.8, and an ancient 70-210 f/4 which requires a 3200 for a decent photo. Unfortunately, the 3200 ISO leaves me with a huge amount of colour noise (chrominance?)The photos look like they have been pieced together with tiny bits of torn up coloured paper. There’s a 70-300 non IS kit lens , but I haven’t bothered to try it at the rink. Using a flash is out of the equation as the hockey shooting is done through marked up plexi- glass. For post processing (lots of work there) I used CS4.
Through trial and error, I use the 85mm about 95% of the time. Here are two examples. The first is cropped quite a bit. (I was on the side, players were in the middle.) In the second, I was standing about twelve feet from the player.
Thank you!
Myra
IMG_19170 by M.J. Hencher, on Flickr
Canon 40D
85mm f/1.8 1/500 ISO 1000 manual WB spot metering
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
IMG_4431 by M.J. Hencher, on Flickr
Canon 40D
85mm f/1.8 1/400 ISO 800 auto WB multi-segmented metering
0
Comments
My hockey photography tips can be found here
Also, I wouldn't give away the photos away for free or for photo credit only. In general, it hurts photography in general when people do this and you harm your market if/when you want to shoot for a profit in the future. People wont' buy your images because you have trained them to get them for free...
As for CC for those two images, you did a good job of stopping action and getting some emotion, but you watch the horizons.
Thank you! That is a very nice compliment from someone who has such great photos on her site. And yes... horizons. I get so busy trying to follow the puck that I get a bit lopsided with the camera.
I will definitely read through the tips again to make sure I didn't miss any of the links, and make some notes for my next time out at the rink.
Thank you!
<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Dont worry to much about the horizons when taking pics, this is very easily fixed in PP.
Keep up the good work!
http://www.chrisfowlerphotography.net
http://blog.chrisfowlerphotography.net
Facebook Fan Page
Good Luck
Steve
www.slipkid.com
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money". -- Margaret Thatcher
There is a practice on Friday night, so the plan is to try a few different things. Just figured out Highlight Tone Priority on the 40D. We'll see if that makes a difference. Also, I've been shooting in Al Focus for stopping and starting, but will see if Al Servo would be better. Will try different metering modes, too, just to see if there is any meaningful change. (Have been using spot).
WB tends to stay in auto as I use Manual mode and RAW. However, no time better than a practice to learn how to use that feature better than I do.
I've tried panning, but those results were quite dismal with nothing really in focus. This is quite the steep learning curve:)
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact
I don't wish to hijack the thread or start a flame war, but I disagree with the previous poster IRT giving away photos. There are situations where I believe it is an entirely ethical practice. And my experience is that it does not hurt you in the future, in fact, it may well be what brings you business. YMMV.
Are you post processing your photos? Horizons can be easily fixed in post.
My responses was a general one to the OP's statement:
For me "at this point" signifies that she wants to make a profit at a later day. In general, it's very hard to charge money for something when the same item was free before. A good photo to customer isn't similar to something addictive like drugs. "The first hit is free" usually doesn't quite apply to a photo.
When I first began photography years ago, I just posted everything on line in an unlocked gallery and people just grabbed images and loved them. After a while, people expected me to be at their games even when I didn't have a reason to be there and some even gave me grief when I didn't show up. I guess you can say that my gear/experience/time (e.g. hour+ round trip to the rink, an hour and a half game, post processing time, etc). was not valued or even respected. One person even came up to me at a game and told me my photos are not good enough to be worth anything.
For a while, I even stopped posting public galleries because I started getting rude emails/conversations from players/spouses/parents and angry/threatening e-mail from a pro photographer for shooting an event from the audience in which cameras were allowed.
From my experience and from reading the experiences of others, there's a very gray and fuzzy line between hobbyist and someone who charges money for a photo. This is an example of a good discussion.
As for money/free... you have to do what you're comfortable with. Have I ever given away photos away for free? Yes. I have developed a strict set of rules that I've developed over the years and I can say that I'm happy with them. I have also set a price on the hockey photos at the games in which I shoot, but at the same time, I don't expect to make a single sale and am okay with that.
I pay my taxes, have my insurance, have gear and know how to use it, etc, but I'm a hobbyist by choice. I shoot because I love it.
You have to decide what's right for you...
I respect those who have made the decision to charge for all sizes/formats. I am sure their reasons are valid and based on experience in their local area/market. Aktse, your experiences must have been so discouraging when you were starting out. My game plan would be to continue allowing folks to use the small file sizes for their facebook profiles or whatever, but my name would be on the bottom with the date. ( I started signing my hockey photos about two months ago.) Otherwise, the person wanting a photo would pay for a print without a signature. Selling the actual file would not be an option. Of course, one can't carve anything in stone, but in general I can't see myself selling an original or large file. Perhaps I should have clarified that my providing photos is only via putting medium sized files on a hosting site and allowing the interested parties to download the file from there. Again, in the future, I should post smaller versions etc etc.
Rick, I can see the advantage, too, of printing off some copies (maybe with name attached or a business card) and giving them as complimentary copies so people can see your work, and as little gifts for kids/parents who really can't afford their own digital camera or prints from a photographer. There are many people who are just scraping by and using any extra income to make sure their kids have the chance to play, take part in events and so on. What goes around, comes around.
Re. Lens- It would be nice to rent a lens and try it out, but our one and only photo shop does not rent. Brad, this might be something I should know, but I don't: Would better glass decrease the amount of noise I am seeing in the photos? I thought it was the sensor that was responsible for that side of things. I know the photo would have superior optical quality in good light.
Overall, if I had to choose, I would continue photography for the love of capturing a moment and providing a moment of happiness for someone. That might sound sappy, but I am in a very small market in a very small town. My main goal is to improve for my own satisfaction. It would be wonderful to have a photography career, but I am not going to hold my breath
The conversation on this forum certainly provides food for thought.
Thanks!
Pictures | Website | Blog | Twitter | Contact
I shoot the kids i coach and give the parents the shots as part of the hockey experience (i do the same in baseball)(using a 70-300 is and a 100-400L). The parents love this and i won't even consider taking money for this , however I may eventually go to the 70-200 2.8 . but i need to find other uses for this lense that may be profitable.I shoot for the love of it.But that lense is pretty spendy and i would have to jusify it.
Aktse does amazing work and should be compensated for that ! she obviously has a huge (to me ) investment .I can certainly see her point on the freebee thing and peoples mindset . I guess it's all in the people and the expectations they may have ...kepp up the good work!!
JMP2204, this is not a cheap pastime, is it? I think the 70-200 2.8 could do just about anything. To name only a few: weddings, outdoor portraits, and sports. Plus, you have your 100-400L for a longer reach to shoot outdoor sports, wildlife and open air concerts. If you really need convincing to buy one, I'm sure the list could get a lot longer
Steve
www.slipkid.com
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money". -- Margaret Thatcher
If you want a photo career, you need to go after it since it won't come to you. I heard a handful of cases in which it just happened, but in general, nearly every single pro photographer that I've meet has worked extremely hard in order to make a living clicking the shutter.
In today's world of facebook and e-mails, most people only care about small photos rather than large/originals or even prints. Search dgrin. There are many discussions about watermark (or signatures).
Note: I'm not trying to discourage you, but trying to share the various tidbits I've learned over the years. As David duChemin says... "Gear is good. Vision is better"
Thanks for the kind words. If I wanted to go the pro path, I should be compensated because I provide an unique, quality image with professional service. Owning a bunch of gear does not make someone a pro, but these days, there are a bunch of people who believe that since people equate gear with quality. He's not a sports photographer, but Damon Winters, (NYT, photographer of the year by POYi, etc) has been known to shoot using a iphone and published a series on Afghanistan using that camera.
That being said.. gear helps. The 70-200 f/2.8 lives on my camera and I call it my desert island lens. (if I was stuck on an desert island, and can only have one lens, which one could I bring?). You can use this lens for mostly everything... It's worth saving your pennies for this glass.