Hold that line!!!!!

jeffreaux2

I shoot people photos mostly, but am an enthusiast at heart. This is my first attemp at football action. I can definately see what attracts you guys to this. It was tough in the afternoon sun tring to expose for faces ....especially when the sun was at their backs. Here are a few samples from a nube to this type of photography.

I was using a borrowed dust pump type 100-200mm F4.5 canon lens.

jonh68

Football is a hard sport to get faces. While some of your pictures do expose the faces of the players, it's at the expense of blowing out the white uniforms. Because there are rich colors in football uniforms, the general rull of capturing a good face shot can be broken.

IMHO, I feel it's better to properly expose for the uniforms than the face in regards to football because of the football helmets. However, I do think you did a great job of getting faces and it would make a parent proud. If you shoot more football, get those face shots of course. However, also work on exposing for the total package. When you do get that great face shot with a properly exposed uniform, the picture will be dynamite.

jeffreaux2

jonh68 wrote:

Football is a hard sport to get faces. While some of your pictures do expose the faces of the players, it's at the expense of blowing out the white uniforms. Because there are rich colors in football uniforms, the general rull of capturing a good face shot can be broken.

IMHO, I feel it's better to properly expose for the uniforms than the face in regards to football because of the football helmets. However, I do think you did a great job of getting faces and it would make a parent proud. If you shoot more football, get those face shots of course. However, also work on exposing for the total package. When you do get that great face shot with a properly exposed uniform, the picture will be dynamite.

I thought of trying, but didnt use my shoe mount flash to offer fill. I am not sure if this would have helped, but it stands to reason it would have. Just curious if any football afficiandos have ever used fill in daylight.

RandySmugMug

WOW do i disagree with that (exposing for the uniforms and not the faces).....maybe shoot in RAW and try to repair the unforms latter...the faces are everything IMO

rwells

RandySmugMug wrote:

WOW do i disagree with that (exposing for the uniforms and not the faces).....maybe shoot in RAW and try to repair the unforms latter...the faces are everything IMO

No doubt about it... And I'll repeat Randy's comment "the faces are everything"

jonh68

RandySmugMug wrote:

WOW do i disagree with that (exposing for the uniforms and not the faces).....maybe shoot in RAW and try to repair the unforms latter...the faces are everything IMO

Wow, read my whole write up. I did say expose for the faces. Just get some exposing for the uniforms if it suits your fancy. I personally don't like blown out uniforms, but that's me. If you have proper exposure, you are going to get the faces. They don't have to be mutually exclusive. Part of football is the dirt and grass stains on the uniform and if it's blown out, you can't repair it because that detail is lost.

If you want face shots in football, you need to get where the sun is hitting their faces. That means always shooting with the sun behind you if possible. If the game is in the middle of the day, then it is much more difficult. However, I don't see too many shots in SI with blown out uniforms and they still manage to get great faces shots so both can be achieved.

RandySmugMug

the general rull of capturing a good face shot can be broken.

IMHO, I feel it's better to properly expose for the uniforms than the face

did i miss something ?
so it's done on SI, another WOW and who cares...
If you set EV to get good uniforms you will usually get dark faces and will probably lose detail especially with helmets

jeffreaux2

Well, I cannot claim to be a SI photographer as evident in the photos. I was only trying to capture some middle school aged children playing football. I personally think the photos would hold far less value (even if only sentimental) without faces. Anyway I am back to the question.....in harsh daylight and afternoon sun conditions does anyone think it would be benificial to attempt using a flash for fill?

RandySmugMug

jeffreaux2 wrote:

Well, I cannot claim to be a SI photographer as evident in the photos. I was only trying to capture some middle school aged children playing football. I personally think the photos would hold far less value (even if only sentimental) without faces. Anyway I am back to the question.....in harsh daylight and afternoon sun conditions does anyone think it would be benificial to attempt using a flash for fill?

YES, def !
I have used it on numerous occasions...
also try center weighted metering and AF on the face w/ the center sensor or increase the size of the CW metering area. If you shoot into the sun try some pos EV, +.3 or +.7, also AF on the face and use CW metering

JESTER

jeffreaux2 wrote:

Well, I cannot claim to be a SI photographer as evident in the photos. I was only trying to capture some middle school aged children playing football. I personally think the photos would hold far less value (even if only sentimental) without faces. Anyway I am back to the question.....in harsh daylight and afternoon sun conditions does anyone think it would be benificial to attempt using a flash for fill?

Jeff I wouldn't think it would be benificial because the flash probably wouldn't carry that far (Unless you are right on the sideline taking photos of player coming right at you). I would go for matrix or center weighted metering and focus on the face or chest area of the players. Another thing about flash is that it limits your shutter speed. I don't know what it is on your Canon but Nikon is only about 250 and I like to shoot sports faster than that. It just takes practice Jeff. Keep at it and keep experimenting.
You will get it. I've seen some of your photos and you will get it I am sure.

Dave J.

RandySmugMug

JESTER wrote:

Jeff I wouldn't think it would be benificial because the flash probably wouldn't carry that far (Unless you are right on the sideline taking photos of player coming right at you). I would go for matrix or center weighted metering and focus on the face or chest area of the players. Another thing about flash is that it limits your shutter speed. I don't know what it is on your Canon but Nikon is only about 250 and I like to shoot sports faster than that. It just takes practice Jeff. Keep at it and keep experimenting.
You will get it. I've seen some of your photos and you will get it I am sure.

Dave J.

fill flash works alot farther than you think....
set a d200's flash sync option to TTL-FP and you can use any ss you want (the flash's pwer is reduced though)

Mr. 2H2O

RandySmugMug wrote:

fill flash works alot farther than you think....
set a d200's flash sync option to TTL-FP and you can use any ss you want (the flash's pwer is reduced though)

Randy is absolutely right. I've benefitted from on-camera fill flash up to 80ft. It doesn't sound right, but you're dealing with the reflections of the light off of lighter colored stuff like skin, clothing, etc.

Remember Randy's wake boarding photos (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=69510)
done with fill-flash.

- Mike

JESTER

RandySmugMug wrote:

fill flash works alot farther than you think....
set a d200's flash sync option to TTL-FP and you can use any ss you want (the flash's pwer is reduced though)

Thanks Randy...I'll have to try that.

Dave

jeffreaux2

JESTER wrote:

Jeff I wouldn't think it would be benificial because the flash probably wouldn't carry that far (Unless you are right on the sideline taking photos of player coming right at you). I would go for matrix or center weighted metering and focus on the face or chest area of the players. Another thing about flash is that it limits your shutter speed. I don't know what it is on your Canon but Nikon is only about 250 and I like to shoot sports faster than that. It just takes practice Jeff. Keep at it and keep experimenting.
You will get it. I've seen some of your photos and you will get it I am sure.

Dave J.

The 580EX flash has a high speed sych mode that will synch at any shutter speed....even those above the 1/200 sync that is normally available on my camera. It works well, and I have used it at up to 1/1250. What I don't know is how well a fresh pair of batteries would hold up to continuos shutter...rapid fire mode.

jeffreaux2

Mr. 2H2O wrote:

Randy is absolutely right. I've benefitted from on-camera fill flash up to 80ft. It doesn't sound right, but you're dealing with the reflections of the light off of lighter colored stuff like skin, clothing, etc.

Remember Randy's wake boarding photos (http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=69510)
done with fill-flash.

- Mike

I havent tried that far in daylight...I am more of a portrait person.....but I do know that the flash will overpower the sun. That is....at +Flash exposure compensation, it will take over and if on ETTL the sky will start to darken.
It is pretty powerful.

jonh68

did i miss something ?
so it's done on SI, another WOW and who cares...
If you set EV to get good uniforms you will usually get dark faces and will probably lose detail especially with helmets__________________

If you pick and choose you do.

My point is when the sun is high like it was in those shots, exposing for the face will leave blown out uniforms. When the sun sets or gets on the horizon, it's much easier to get shots with good light on their faces. If you set EV for faces if they are HEAVILY shadowed as the conditions were, you BLOW out detail that can't be repaired. If you have a dark face, it can be brought out some if exposed for the uniform.

If fill light helps, use it. It never hurts to try.