Options

100 Meter Sprints

73Rocks73Rocks Registered Users Posts: 147 Major grins
edited May 21, 2011 in Sports
I finally caught a break in the weather and was able to take in the South Dakota Region 1B track meet. The conditions were near perfect . . . the only thing that was off was the fact that it was partly cloudy which made it tough to keep switching my White Balance all the time.

Today . . . not so much! Rain all day again (this makes it 11 out of the last 12 weekends it has rained or snowed in my neck of the woods). :cry
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
Just thought I would share 4 of my better 100 Meter Sprint pics. This track is unique in the fact that it drops off about 3 feet at the end which allows me to give my shots a “larger than life” perspective.
<o:p></o:p>
Shot with my trusty Canon 50D and my Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS at 1/2000 sec – f3.5 – ISO 250.
<o:p></o:p>
11-Rosholt-Track-Regions-114-L.jpg

11-Langford-Track-Regions-099-L.jpg

11-Summit-Track-Regions-110-L.jpg

11-Langford-Track-Regions-292-L.jpg

Thanks for looking.

Comments

  • Options
    johngjohng Registered Users Posts: 1,658 Major grins
    edited May 20, 2011
    I guess I'm just not a fan of showing all lanes. Lots of dead space and runners that are too far back. The potential compelling shots are when runners are close together IMO. Shot 1 & 2 have that potential but only 2 of the athletes in each. By framing tighter on just the athletes close you see more detail. Take shot #1 - does the athlete 8 feet back really add to the story? And getting him in the frame causes dead space on the right hand side. Just my .02
  • Options
    Molotov EverythingMolotov Everything Registered Users Posts: 211 Major grins
    edited May 20, 2011
    I think I agree with johng's sentiment. In shots 1,2 and 4 my eyes go right to the two people in front anyways so why not frame it tighter on them. The third shot though is an exception, I think that worked out just fine shooting all lanes at once, but you could really crop out some of the blurred pavement at the bottom of the frame.
    http://www.quickdrawphoto.com
  • Options
    donekdonek Registered Users Posts: 655 Major grins
    edited May 20, 2011
    Agree on the horizontals. My body spends 95% of it's time verticle. Your White Balance is kind of dull looking as well. Notice how the shaded skin in 1,2,&3 looks gray. I almost always shoot with a cloudy white balance, even when there are no clouds in the sky. It really gives your colors more punch and avoids the auto white balance making a mess of things.
    Sean Martin
    www.seanmartinphoto.com

    __________________________________________________
    it's not the size of the lens that matters... It's how you focus it.

    aaaaa.... who am I kidding!

    whoever dies with the biggest coolest piece of glass, wins!
  • Options
    73Rocks73Rocks Registered Users Posts: 147 Major grins
    edited May 21, 2011
    Points well taken guys . . . thanks for the CC. The white balance outdoors is one of my biggest headaches. Inside, once I get my camera set with the grey card I don't need to worry. I just need to work on my outdoor shots more.

    Because I am regulated to a 4 X 6 format for my business, I am kind of stuck with how I crop my shots. I would just love to have a wide angle lens and catch all 8 runners as they near the finish line but after shelling out $2,000+ for my 70-200 f2.8 IS a wide angle lens is a long ways off. Maybe by the start of next season.

    Again - thanks a lot for taking the time to critique my shots.
Sign In or Register to comment.