Concert Frustrations

anwmn1 · February 21, 2007

Okay while on the long weekend I went up to my old home town to watch a buddy and his band play.

I am pretty un happy with the results but do not know what I can do better next time.
Issues/ questions:

Bars are extremely dark with poor rig lighting- these are local bands not tour bands so they have 3 to 7 cans with blue- red- and green lights

Bands are Heavy- let me reinforce that - HEAVY Metal so there is a lot of movement- fast guitar playing- the mosh pit to deal with- and lots of hair

I had to shoot no flash so the settings were F2.9 to 3.5- ISO 800 to 1250 (Oly gets noisy!) and Exposure 1/8 to 1/30 just to get anything to turn out.
Granted none of these bands really care about fantastic shots but is the enviroment too much for my E-500 or any camera for that matter??

Here are some of the better shots-

Any suggestions?

firedancing4life · February 21, 2007

You need to break out your 1.4.

mmroden · February 21, 2007

yeah, you'll need about f/2.0 to get the kind of light you need.

It's not the same beast exactly, but I shot a school play recently:
http://mmroden.smugmug.com/gallery/2408807#126283964
All shot with an 85 mm, auto iso set to 1/125th of a second, f 2.0. Your Oly (zoom) lenses are not up to this task; you'll need to get something faster to shoot inside like that. I'd think you'd want to go even higher with the ISO, to 1600, since you'll have less light to work with than what I did.

Bob&Glennie · February 21, 2007

Actually these don't look too bad considering the lighting and I'm not seeing a lot of noise or softness on this monitor.

The E500 is as capable as any camera in it's price range (and I'll dare say better than some costing more). What lens were you using? Your 14-54mm F2.8 is the best one you have for this if you can get close enough. That lens is really good wide open (I use one on an E1).

Too bad you can't use flash as I see you have an FL50. Awesome torch! You could get creative using your flash sync'ed to 2nd curtain and slow your shutter speed down to about 2-3 seconds. It's a bit tricky to balance the ambient exposure with the flash exposure but if you wanted to try it then you need to underexpose the ambient portion of the exposure about 2/3 stop and then use just enough flash intensity to make up what's lacking in the exposure.The flash will freeze enough detail to make the picture legible but it will be full of movement and color and ghost images.. It takes some practice and the movement patterns that you get are the luck of the draw but you can get some very beautiful images this way. Just don't expect other photographer who are "ruled by the rules" to get it.

If you can get you hands on an E1 you'd find that it has better high ISO performance than the E500 and 20x24's are gorgeous from this camera.

\Goog luck

Bob

wxwax · February 21, 2007

1/ Don't worry about the noise. You need to get a good shutter speed and a good exposure. You just have to learn to accept what comes with that commitment.

2/ In unattractive lighting like that, consider making the images B&W. Helps heaps.

saurora · February 21, 2007

I think the 2nd image is very good. Some blurring and motion is acceptable as, hey!, that's what it's all about! If you are only doing this occasionally and if new equipment is out of the question, then it definitely comes down to improving your timing during shooting and some different post-processing technique. Like Sid suggests, B&W is always an option. The red, blue and green jells get a little repetitive. I borrowed one of your shots and popped it into Virtual Photographer and experimented with some filter actions. They can filter out the jell colors and give you some options. If you are a purist and don't like using PS to change a shot, then that's not an option. Interestingly, some of the low contrast shots or badly exposed images can work best in these actions. It's worth attempting when you mess up on your exposure. Good luck!

anwmn1 · February 21, 2007

Bob&Glennie wrote:

Actually these don't look too bad considering the lighting and I'm not seeing a lot of noise or softness on this monitor.

The E500 is as capable as any camera in it's price range (and I'll dare say better than some costing more). What lens were you using? Your 14-54mm F2.8 is the best one you have for this if you can get close enough. That lens is really good wide open (I use one on an E1).

Too bad you can't use flash as I see you have an FL50. Awesome torch! You could get creative using your flash sync'ed to 2nd curtain and slow your shutter speed down to about 2-3 seconds. It's a bit tricky to balance the ambient exposure with the flash exposure but if you wanted to try it then you need to underexpose the ambient portion of the exposure about 2/3 stop and then use just enough flash intensity to make up what's lacking in the exposure.The flash will freeze enough detail to make the picture legible but it will be full of movement and color and ghost images.. It takes some practice and the movement patterns that you get are the luck of the draw but you can get some very beautiful images this way. Just don't expect other photographer who are "ruled by the rules" to get it.

If you can get you hands on an E1 you'd find that it has better high ISO performance than the E500 and 20x24's are gorgeous from this camera.

\Goog luck

Bob

Thanks for the feedback Bob. I was useing the 14-54mm and I was able to get preety close until the mosh pit got going. Then I said forget it! I wasn't told I couldn't use my flash but I didn't ask either. I was afraid of lighting the place up

or blinding the performers. I will see about useing it next time and messing with the settings. I still have a lot to learn about shooting with a flash.

I have thught about an E-1 but am kind of hopeing something new will come out with better high ISO and fps. I know the 500 has some limitations but I am impressed with the detail of landscape shots I can get- which is my primary focus. I have printed to 16x20 and even 24x36 and was pretty impressed with the sharpness and color.

anwmn1 · February 21, 2007

wxwax wrote:

1/ Don't worry about the noise. You need to get a good shutter speed and a good exposure. You just have to learn to accept what comes with that commitment.

2/ In unattractive lighting like that, consider making the images B&W. Helps heaps.

Thanks Sid-

I have adjusted some to b&w and Sepia- I always mess around with those no matter what I am shooting- but I can't do that to all of them.

I know the conditions were pretty tough and I still need to fork out the money for PS- I am still just playing in Iphoto- so I guess I can't be too hard on myself right?

wxwax · February 21, 2007

I think you're right not to use flash. It kills the atmosphere and looks ugly.

I've struggled with the same problems. I told you my solutions. I delete tons of shots in post. Even when you have shutter speed, autofocus can let you down in low light.

Shoot lots and lots, be creative. Be careful of overexposing one color channel - a combined histogram won't show you what's happening, but you'll still lose detail when a red light, for example, blows out your red channel.

A few piccies taken in small clubs.

anwmn1 · February 21, 2007

saurora wrote:

I think the 2nd image is very good. Some blurring and motion is acceptable as, hey!, that's what it's all about! If you are only doing this occasionally and if new equipment is out of the question, then it definitely comes down to improving your timing during shooting and some different post-processing technique. Like Sid suggests, B&W is always an option. The red, blue and green jells get a little repetitive. I borrowed one of your shots and popped it into Virtual Photographer and experimented with some filter actions. They can filter out the jell colors and give you some options. If you are a purist and don't like using PS to change a shot, then that's not an option. Interestingly, some of the low contrast shots or badly exposed images can work best in these actions. It's worth attempting when you mess up on your exposure. Good luck!

The band thing is definetly not a regular thing but I am shall we say - particular- so I always expect to get some good shots, no matter how much experience I have with it.
I am interested to see the shot you took and played with. Would you mind posting it?

Here are a couple other shots from the show which I did a conversion on.

Rhuarc · February 21, 2007

I think the black and white that you did looks REALLY good!! Keeps that gritty no flash feel, but makes so you don't have to deal with the massive amount of red in the shot.

Bob&Glennie · February 22, 2007

Hi Aaron, it's me again. Now that I'm home and looking at my own monitor I can see more noise than I could see at work. But it's still not bad except for shot #1 which is just too underexposed.

I'm going to post a picture here to demonstrate the technique I described earlier using a balance of flash to slow sync ambient light. Now this is the sort of thing that some people won't get ... especialy photographers who will judge a picture by the rules commonly accepted as defining a "good" photograph. This sort of thing is outside of the "rules?" and it's mostly right brain, graphicaly oriented people who will get it. I had this picture up here earlier and nobody got it except Harry and he might have just been trying to smooth me out after I got into an argument with some guys in another thread.

I shot a series for this younge man and his manager and out of all the images that I submitted to them it was these slow syc ambient images that they loved and chose for the posters and album cover.

Jamie.jpg

Study it closely. You might find that you want to pursue this technique. It can save the day when nothing else will work or provide sufficient imagination.

On another note: I expect the new Oly pro body (E3?) will be pretty pricey and pretty awsome but I can assure you that if you can pick up a leftover or used E1 you'll love it! We have an E500 and an E1 and even though I said that the E500 is respectable for the price, the E1 is superb

Happy imaging

Bob

anwmn1 · February 22, 2007

Bob&Glennie wrote:

Hi Aaron, it's me again. Now that I'm home and looking at my own monitor I can see more noise than I could see at work. But it's still not bad except for shot #1 which is just too underexposed.

I'm going to post a picture here to demonstrate the technique I described earlier using a balance of flash to slow sync ambient light. Now this is the sort of thing that some people won't get ... especialy photographers who will judge a picture by the rules commonly accepted as defining a "good" photograph. This sort of thing is outside of the "rules?" and it's mostly right brain, graphicaly oriented people who will get it.
Study it closely. You might find that you want to pursue this technique. It can save the day when nothing else will work or provide sufficient imagination.

Bob

I like the picture but don't feel the technique would have helped at all with the bands I was shooting. In fact I have been searching and do not come across hardly any good shots of heavy metal bands. The lighting is one factor but they are also more active than other performers- causing a blur of hair and of hands on guitar.

I will be shooting again in a few weeks so I will play with the flash and see what I get.

Rhuarc · February 22, 2007

http://www.usa.canon.com/templatedata/pressrelease/20070221_1dmark3.html

ISO 6400!!! Couple that with f1.4 and you're golden!

wxwax · February 22, 2007

Rhuarc wrote:

http://www.usa.canon.com/templatedata/pressrelease/20070221_1dmark3.html

ISO 6400!!! Couple that with f1.4 and you're golden!

No kidding.

One other trick I use, is to shoot in bursts. My hope is that in one of the frames, an important part of the performer will be sharp. It helps to use a machine gun, like the 1D mkII.

Pezpix · February 22, 2007

Rhuarc wrote:

http://www.usa.canon.com/templatedata/pressrelease/20070221_1dmark3.html

ISO 6400!!! Couple that with f1.4 and you're golden!

Har har! Imagine the 50 f1.0, at iso6400.... you could nearly freeze the action at 1/1000th a second

Anwmn1 - Try mixing your channels in B&W and make that thing pop! I bet the tones could easily be made to look even more dramatic. Thanks for sharing and good luck!

Rhuarc · February 22, 2007

Pezpix wrote:

Har har! Imagine the 50 f1.0, at iso6400.... you could nearly freeze the action at 1/1000th a second

In the dark!! Serisouyl though, I'm sure that camera will help people in exactly this situation quite a bit!!

anwmn1 · February 22, 2007

Rhuarc wrote:

http://www.usa.canon.com/templatedata/pressrelease/20070221_1dmark3.html

ISO 6400!!! Couple that with f1.4 and you're golden!

Okay when I get on tour with Metallica, U2, or the Stones than maybe I can afford that heavy equipment. The price- not so nice!

I don't think the $5 and $10 covers these clubs get are going to pay for that anytime soon!!

Thank you all for the comments- I am shooting some of these bands again March 3rd so we'll see if there are any improvements.

Concert Frustrations

Comments