Nighttime sports shooters: Advice please

HarveyMushman

I've got another flat track motorcycle race coming up this Saturday evening. The race is at night, under lights. The last time I shot one of these races I used the flash for fill lighting in the fading early evening light, which worked well. But once the sunlight was truly gone I was lost. My results were terrible. I have very little experience with flash shooting and I didn't have a manual for the flash unit I was using so I probably didn't set it up correctly. I have a manual now but does anyone have any tips?

I use a SB-800 flash and a Nikon D70, which has a flash-synch of 1/500, although I'd rather shoot at a slower speed, say 1/320 or 1/250 (while panning). Lens will be Nikon's 70-200/2.8.

sirsloop

I personally don't like night time flash racing shots. It doesn't look right, usually cause of the range. The flash at that range just makes it look like you shot a spotlight on the car. IDK what focal range you find yourself at the most, but a fast prime and ISO 1600-3200 would be my choice. Shoot manual, and raw, and underexpose the photos a touch if you are finding yourself low on shutter speed. Also, tracks usually are not lit evenly. Find a good angle on a bright spot and shoot cars there.

mercphoto

I've done some night MX before under the lights and this is what I did. First, don't shoot head-on, the flash is too strong. You will probably limit yourself to profiles. Go manual on the camera, and automatic on the flash. ISO 1600, maybe possibly 800 if you are lucky. I would set the aperture to f/4 and the shutter speed to the fastest synch speed of my flash unit. Avoid high-speed-synch of the flash. Shoot RAW and prepare to do some noise reduction, hand adjustments to the RAW conversion, and probably even some shadow enhancements.

The other thing I learned was that an elevated shooting position helped with the flash metering. I understand why but I'm not sure how well I can explain it, but here goes. The lower you are shooting the more ground you get in the foreground, and that ground covers a large distance from near the camera to the bike and beyond. And, as we know, flash output varies with the inverse square of distance. That means the ground nearest the camera gets a lot of light. In the least this makes your foreground really bright. In my case it also fooled the flash metering. So if you elevate yourself your relation to the ground changes and this becomes much less an issue as the plane of the ground changes in relation to the plane of the film. Hope that made sense.

HarveyMushman

mercphoto wrote:

I would set . . . the shutter speed to the fastest synch speed of my flash unit. Avoid high-speed-synch of the flash.

Thanks, gentlemen. Bill, can you explain the above some more?

By the way, the last time I tried this I discovered--entirely by accident--what you wrote about better metering from above. This weekend's race will be at a different venue however, so I don't know if such perches will be available.

sirsloop: I don't care for flash photography either, but the main event is after dark so I don't have much choice. I will certainly be looking for opportunities to use available light but I figure I need to learn how to use the flash too. Besides, every once in awhile I see a flash image I like so who knows, maybe I'll get lucky.

RandySmugMug

2.8 is not enuf and nikon is too noisey > 800 iso
try an 85 1.4 maybe but then u need to get close
the 200/2 would be ok w/ a d2hs body

mercphoto

HarveyMushman wrote:

Thanks, gentlemen. Bill, can you explain the above some more?

High speed synch on the flash works by having the flash on for the entire duration that the shutter is (at least partially) open, and this is the synch speed of the camera/flash unit. On my Canon that is 1/250 a second. Its the only way you can get a properly flashed photo at faster shutter speeds. But if you shoot at or below your synch speed then your flash burst is actually very rapid. If you are 2 or 3 stops under-exposed from ambient and you hit it with a very short duration flash that very short burst of light can, in effect, make it appear as if your shutter speed is faster than it really is.

One reason that is beneficial is your flash will recycle faster. Another reason its beneficial is that your background will be a bit better exposed because you are shooting at 1/250, not 1/500, etc. The other reason its beneficial is you are shooting a rapidly moving target in poor light, and that short burst of light can make it easier to get a crisp picture of that moving object.

Canon 1D Mark II and 580EX, ISO 1600 at f/4 and 1/200, 70mm. Normally this shot at 1/200 of a second would have quite a bit more blur in the spokes.

H2H

HMMM

I shot Sprint Cars at night at least twice a week

I start at 320/400 and work my way to 400/500 and run my flash unit in manual at 1/1 - ISO hardly ever goes above 600

Brandon Wimmer



Steve Kilcup - Jason Bloodgood



Steven Allard

HarveyMushman

RandySmugMug wrote:

2.8 is not enuf and nikon is too noisey > 800 iso
try an 85 1.4 maybe but then u need to get close
the 200/2 would be ok w/ a d2hs body

This helps me not at all, unless you are buying.

HarveyMushman

mercphoto wrote:

High speed synch on the flash works by having the flash on for the entire duration that the shutter is (at least partially) open, and this is the synch speed of the camera/flash unit. On my Canon that is 1/250 a second. Its the only way you can get a properly flashed photo at faster shutter speeds. But if you shoot at or below your synch speed then your flash burst is actually very rapid. If you are 2 or 3 stops under-exposed from ambient and you hit it with a very short duration flash that very short burst of light can, in effect, make it appear as if your shutter speed is faster than it really is.

One reason that is beneficial is your flash will recycle faster. Another reason its beneficial is that your background will be a bit better exposed because you are shooting at 1/250, not 1/500, etc. The other reason its beneficial is you are shooting a rapidly moving target in poor light, and that short burst of light can make it easier to get a crisp picture of that moving object.

Canon 1D Mark II and 580EX, ISO 1600 at f/4 and 1/200, 70mm. Normally this shot at 1/200 of a second would have quite a bit more blur in the spokes.

This helps quite a bit, and explains a few things I have noticed (particularly the lack of motion blur at slowish shutter speeds). Thank you.

RandySmugMug

HarveyMushman wrote:

This helps me not at all, unless you are buying.

knock yourself out trying

HarveyMushman

H2H wrote:

I start at 320/400 and work my way to 400/500 and run my flash unit in manual at 1/1 - ISO hardly ever goes above 600

Why the slow-to-fast shutter-speed progression?

When I shoot motos in available light I often use a faster-than-optimum shutter speed to get my panning skills warmed up before progressing to the slower speeds that yield better images. Different requirements, maybe.

HarveyMushman

RandySmugMug wrote:

knock yourself out trying

I hope your day improves.

RandySmugMug

HarveyMushman wrote:

I hope your day improves.

thx Harvery, I appreciate that, altho it is a little slow it's been a pretty good day....

I spent 6 months and a bunch of money trying to solve the low light motion problem w/ Nikon, then I tried it w/ Canon. This was done shooting high school football. I came to the conclusion that the problem was not solvable w/o flash and I hated the look of flash. I wish you luck.

H2H

HarveyMushman wrote:

Why the slow-to-fast shutter-speed progression?

When I shoot motos in available light I often use a faster-than-optimum shutter speed to get my panning skills warmed up before progressing to the slower speeds that yield better images. Different requirements, maybe.

I've been just about each short track on the west coast and know from the past what works at different tracks my learning curve was a couple years ago. I hit about 90 + shows a year mostly three shows a week

Tire motion is what the drivers want to see and the fans mostly want froozen tires so I go for the motion tires

When I first started using the 70 - 200 f2.8 that sucker was heavy and now I walk around with it for up to 6 hours at each race

It's just getting use to use it; started by going to the local interstate freway and shoting cars at night

H2H

Here is something you'll have to get use to



and



Dust and glare off of some flourence vinly (sp)

HarveyMushman

RandySmugMug wrote:

thx Harvery, I appreciate that, altho it is a little slow it's been a pretty good day....

I spent 6 months and a bunch of money trying to solve the low light motion problem w/ Nikon, then I tried it w/ Canon. This was done shooting high school football. I came to the conclusion that the problem was not solvable w/o flash and I hated the look of flash. I wish you luck.

No worries. I don't like flash photos either, but I'm hoping to come home with some decent results. Stay tuned!

HarveyMushman

That was real difficult . . .
I'm still editing my flash photos, but I'm not optimistic I'll have anything good. :cry

This one was captured without the flash (obviously). 200mm, ISO800, 1/100 @ 2.8. Some levels, noise reduction, and USM applied in post.

mercphoto

Not bad! Remember, this is night racing, and your photos will never look like daytime (nor should they). I like that photo.

wxwax

I like that shot too, Tim. This is an very helpful thread. I'm glad you started it.

HarveyMushman

Thank you, gentlemen.

Okay, I have a few flash photos I can share. These were all captured with the flash set to auto TTL mode and the camera in manual. Mostly I used Bill's recommended setting of 1/200 @ f/4. ISO800 for all of 'em (the grain is bad enough as it is, I didn't bother going to 1600). All are RAW captures with plus-EV, levels, noise reduction, and USM in post.

1.



2.



3.



A few things I learned:
> You don't need a lens longer than ~85mm, because the flash can't reach any further than that.
> Auto-focus was an issue, due to the lack of light I assume. Many of the photos--much more so than normal--are out of focus. Next time I'll spot focus manually and wait for bikes to pass in that specific area.
> There seemed to be a noticeable shutter delay when using the flash. Did I imagine that?
> Nikon Noise is real.

mercphoto

Nice shots! They came out rather well.

HarveyMushman wrote:

A few things I learned:
> Auto-focus was an issue, due to the lack of light I assume. Many of the photos--much more so than normal--are out of focus. Next time I'll spot focus manually and wait for bikes to pass in that specific area.
> There seemed to be a noticeable shutter delay when using the flash. Did I imagine that?
> Nikon Noise is real.

The auto-focus is mostly a function of your D70. When I moved from a 20D to a 1D Mark II the improvement in dim-light auto focus was significant. Night action shots that left the 20D confused were no problem for the 1-series. A Nikon pro-body is what you want. The shutter delay is likely also an issue with the body. The pro cameras have more horsepower and can calculate things like exposure and flash power more rapidly. As per the Nikon noise issue the only solution is Canon.

HarveyMushman

mercphoto wrote:

The auto-focus is mostly a function of your D70. When I moved from a 20D to a 1D Mark II the improvement in dim-light auto focus was significant. Night action shots that left the 20D confused were no problem for the 1-series. A Nikon pro-body is what you want. The shutter delay is likely also an issue with the body. The pro cameras have more horsepower and can calculate things like exposure and flash power more rapidly.

That's what I suspected.

As per the Nikon noise issue the only solution is Canon.

Thankfully I don't shoot after dark very often.

Thanks for your help, Bill. I feel like the learning process has begun, whereas before I was totally lost.