Equestrian Eventing - trying something new

troutstreaming · May 28, 2007

I am trying to add some variey to the usual mix of jumping images - any thoughts? I think that given the angle and technique that strong to severe backlighting is frequently going to be an issue and image quality not up to 'normal' quality, but is the novelty factor high enough to compensate?

Images shot by me for Poulsen Photography - to order prints, discuss any and all useage rights, or to view the entire collection of images from the Baywood PC Memorial Day 1 Day Event event please visit http://www.poulsenphoto.com or http://www.photoreflect.com/pr3/thumbpage.aspx?e=2918539

Thanks for looking,

Andy

Images shot with 30D, cropped, to 4x5 aspect ratio and auto processed for color and contrast.

CookieS · May 28, 2007

They really do Nothing for me, I find the distortion bothersome.

HoofClix · May 28, 2007

While I'm sure someone would buy one of those photos, maybe Tim Poulsen actually did, most people are going to agree with CookieS, and hence not buy them. It's just not a high percentage shot. I've done it before at schooling shows to see for myself, and they didn't sell, and it wasn't because of any focus, exposure, or backlighting issue. I've even tried some similar low angle shots from the other side of the jump.

This doesn't mean that it can't be a cool shot on an artistic or journalistic basis, but equestrian event photography from the rider's perspective is all about "me, me, me." If the rider doesn't feel flattered and the central subject of the photo, they'll pass it by.

Also Andy, when someone starts out taking pictures for me at shows, I also tell them to stay much farther from the jumps than that, as I don't want my crew to get blamed for any type of interference with the rider.

troutstreaming · May 28, 2007

HoofClix wrote:

While I'm sure someone would buy one of those photos, maybe Tim Poulsen actually did, most people are going to agree with CookieS, and hence not buy them. It's just not a high percentage shot. I've done it before at schooling shows to see for myself, and they didn't sell, and it wasn't because of any focus, exposure, or backlighting issue. I've even tried some similar low angle shots from the other side of the jump.

This doesn't mean that it can't be a cool shot on an artistic or journalistic basis, but equestrian event photography from the rider's perspective is all about "me, me, me." If the rider doesn't feel flattered and the central subject of the photo, they'll pass it by.

Also Andy, when someone starts out taking pictures for me at shows, I also tell them to stay much farther from the jumps than that, as I don't want my crew to get blamed for any type of interference with the rider.

Thanks for the replies. The jury (i.e. the customer base) is still out with respect to its interest- there were lots of interesting comments by parents and riders at the booth, but it is too early to tell if they are actually going to buy them. There is a cost, hassle, and a risk to equipment factor to setting up to shoot this way and before I commit to trying it again, want a broad range of inputs.

Thanks also for the concern - my first rule in shooting sports is not to effect the outcome, be it at equine events, college volleyball, or kids soccer I refrain from flash if at all practical (high ISO, fast primes, and noise ninja keep me shooting with ambient under all but the darkest conditions) and try and choose angles and distances to insure that I am not putting myself or the participant at increased risk. I was no where near this close to the jump ( in fact 30 - 100+ feet away depending on the location) and the equipment was situated such that only in the most freakish occurance could someone have come in to direct contact with it (given that this was cross country and the obstacles immobile it would have taken some sort of fall with the horse and or rider rolling back in to the back side edge of the jump to create any direct contact with camera equipment) nor was the equipment visible to the horse or rider unless they looked backwards after clearing the rail. That is the reason that I had to live with the backlighting as I was letting safety dictate equipment placement and not light or angle. The sound of the shutter coming from below and to the side of the horse as it was in the air was my only concern - that and the equipment getting hit with flying hoof debris.

Thanks again for looking/commenting. I appreciate the thoughts.

Andy

Phyxius · May 28, 2007

Hey Andy, I don't know if the other two posters ride or show as well, but I do. So, I am the customer base too.

I think the biggest problems with this style will be a) image quality from a technical standpoint and b) image desireability. If shot really well this could be an AWESOME shot.

This shot is quite cool, the rider is looking at her next jump or at least at her next turn, the horse a good size for her and takes up her leg (unlike the haflinger which makes the person look very tall and lurch-ish). The rider is in a fairly nice position, good release, good eyes, good leg position though her heel good be down more, nice flat back. You may have been a tiny bit late with the shutter, as it looks like she's past the point of bascule and her horse is starting to unfold in the front. I think the slightly blown background is okay, but what gets me is that the image is a bit soft. Focus is obviously on the jump.

This kind of gets in to the later pictures like this one:

Focus again is on the jump, and because your using a smaller aperature you've got a wide enough depth of field that your background doesn't have much bokeh. So, because the background seems so in focus I wonder if maybe your shutter speed was a just a bit too slow and the OOF is actually motion blur?

The two like this:

Are too blown for me, they maybe kinda cool, but I don't think they'll print well. I'm sure quite a bit of the brightness is from the i2e or whatever program you ran it through, it's quite contrasty too. And, again here the shot was a bit late.

Can you focus lock one you get the focus set? I think that if you can get consistant quality on this it could be worth it. If I was the rider in the first or second shot I'd buy.

troutstreaming · May 28, 2007

Phyxius wrote:

Hey Andy, I don't know if the other two posters ride or show as well, but I do. So, I am the customer base too.

I think the biggest problems with this style will be a) image quality from a technical standpoint and b) image desireability. If shot really well this could be an AWESOME shot.

This shot is quite cool, the rider is looking at her next jump or at least at her next turn, the horse a good size for her and takes up her leg (unlike the haflinger which makes the person look very tall and lurch-ish). The rider is in a fairly nice position, good release, good eyes, good leg position though her heel good be down more, nice flat back. You may have been a tiny bit late with the shutter, as it looks like she's past the point of bascule and her horse is starting to unfold in the front. I think the slightly blown background is okay, but what gets me is that the image is a bit soft. Focus is obviously on the jump.

This kind of gets in to the later pictures like this one:

Focus again is on the jump, and because your using a smaller aperature you've got a wide enough depth of field that your background doesn't have much bokeh. So, because the background seems so in focus I wonder if maybe your shutter speed was a just a bit too slow and the OOF is actually motion blur?

The two like this:

Are too blown for me, they maybe kinda cool, but I don't think they'll print well. I'm sure quite a bit of the brightness is from the i2e or whatever program you ran it through, it's quite contrasty too. And, again here the shot was a bit late.

Can you focus lock one you get the focus set? I think that if you can get consistant quality on this it could be worth it. If I was the rider in the first or second shot I'd buy.

Thanks for the in depth comments on rider form and the images - it will definetly require some time to get the feel for the shutter lag and that is probably the least of my current concerns. The lens was in MF mode theoretically prefocused to the middle of the jump with the camera in Manual: shutter speed was 1/1000 - 1/1250 and aperatures 5.6-8 with the 16-35 at 17 mm . As the camera is being operated by remote fine tuning for each rider was not possible. Looking at the DOF calculators this should have given me DOF's of 3.2-11 feet at 5.6, but manually setting the focus distance and fiddling with the camera on a plastic mini tripod that was not up to the task certainly added some error. I will probably tape the focus ring next time I try this. Given that the jump and background look better than the horse in most of the images I would have to go with motion blur too - in retrospect and using a shutter speed calculator the 1/1000 should have been sufficient for an object moving at 5 MPH. If I try again will ramp up the ISO and increase the shutter speed further to at least 1/2000 which would give me 10 mph. Exposure settings were chosen to expose the jump hoping that the horses would be close and knowing that I was going to totally blow the sky - especially as the high clouds randomly exposed the sun. Unfortunately that put the sky anywhere from 2 to 4+ stops overexposed. I figured that if anyone ordered a larger print I would blend in a partially washed out blue sky to give it some background contrast. Things will also look better with a manual contrast/color work-up. I am able to shoot with the 70-200 at the normal angles as well so they still have the typical set to choose from until this is dialed in - or I get lucky.

The next opportunity to try this is going to be at an 'A' Rated HJ show with the Jumpers. Either side of the jump will be just as vunerable to damage so I can at least avoid shooting the shade side.

Thanks again for commenting,

Andy

HoofClix · May 28, 2007

I've grown to wonder why it is that a horse lover will be particularly unfond of one "photographic instant" that comes at a certain timing of the stride, then particularly unfond of another. Wouldn't one think that any instant should be just fine?

And that's precisely the point, as Christina points out, there will be folks who will buy the shot, because she likes that shot. I'm a rider as well (which I don't think matters at all here) and if the shot were taken correctly, I might even buy it. It's just not a high percentage sales shot based on my exprience.

And be clear that I think the shots are all nice shots as far as timing, etc. I don't know what the condition was that you couldn'' go to the other side of the jump to keep it from being backlit, but it's not always possible out on course to get a postion that facilitates every shot being properly lit. You sometimes have to take the angles that are available.

Andy, as for how you actually got these shots, were you able to follow the horses on approach in order to get the timing correct? Seems you had no problem with it! Were you able to get other shots of each rider?

If the jump were my choice and I were taking that shot, I think I'd pick one closer to a treeline so that the sky wouldn't be the background

Then there's always such thing as knowledge of your individual customers, so Christina, if I see you on a rider list, just know I'll be parked underneath one or more of the jumps!:hide Maybe at Loch Moy..

Dusty Sensiba · May 28, 2007

DOF idea...
I think the shots with the trees in the background are better than the blown out sky. Maybe using an ND filter to get a wider aperture could result in a blurred background and the focus on the rider, horse and part of the obstacle.

If I were there I might try out a lensbaby for a shot or two...it would definitely look cool.

What do you all think?

For the others, I'm gointa have to agree that the blown out backgrounds are too much.

troutstreaming · May 29, 2007

HoofClix wrote:

I've grown to wonder why it is that a horse lover will be particularly unfond of one "photographic instant" that comes at a certain timing of the stride, then particularly unfond of another. Wouldn't one think that any instant should be just fine?

And that's precisely the point, as Christina points out, there will be folks who will buy the shot, because she likes that shot. I'm a rider as well (which I don't think matters at all here) and if the shot were taken correctly, I might even buy it. It's just not a high percentage sales shot based on my exprience.

And be clear that I think the shots are all nice shots as far as timing, etc. I don't know what the condition was that you couldn'' go to the other side of the jump to keep it from being backlit, but it's not always possible out on course to get a postion that facilitates every shot being properly lit. You sometimes have to take the angles that are available.

Andy, as for how you actually got these shots, were you able to follow the horses on approach in order to get the timing correct? Seems you had no problem with it! Were you able to get other shots of each rider?

If the jump were my choice and I were taking that shot, I think I'd pick one closer to a treeline so that the sky wouldn't be the background

Then there's always such thing as knowledge of your individual customers, so Christina, if I see you on a rider list, just know I'll be parked underneath one or more of the jumps!:hide Maybe at Loch Moy..

The basic set-up was the camera on a 6 inch tripod placed on the ground about 1 ft behind the jump. So no panning - just trying to anticipate the speed and instant from a distance. Placement was such that a horse would have had to jump through the flag at the edge of the obstacle to have any shot at landing on the camera and even then it was about a foot closer to the obstacle than the horses typically landed- the side was ideally picked as to provide the best light/background while protecting the camera/riders. The last two shots were beginner and hopeful riders jumping a small log, so I needed to get the camera horizontally away from the obstacle and on the 'good' side this would have been on the ground to the side of the log where a last minute refusal with an inexperienced rider might well have trampled the camera as it would have just been sitting out on the ground by itself. The shadow side allowed me to place the camera set-up under the edge of the adjacent Novice table jump, where nothing was going to land on it. The other two obstacles were higher, meaning I could have the camera within the edge of the obstacle. The secondary question - 'then why did you pick those jumps?' The first two were chosen as they allowed me to shoot a water hazard with a normal set-up and still be within triggering range of the remote camera obstacle - or in the case of the beginner and hopefulls - allowed me to shoot an angle that I wanted with the 'real' camera while still having the remote in a safe place - got to get shots that I know will sell while playing with something new.

For what it is worth - here is a hand processed version of one of the blown out skies images - probably should push the midtones a little brighter, but pasting in the hint of sky, not having a computer do heavy shadow rescue, and a touch of sharpening goes a long way in getting the image to a more pleasant form.

Thanks again for looking and commenting!

troutstreaming · May 29, 2007

Dusty Sensiba wrote:

I think the shots with the trees in the background are better than the blown out sky. Maybe using an ND filter to get a wider aperture could result in a blurred background and the focus on the rider, horse and part of the obstacle.

If I were there I might try out a lensbaby for a shot or two...it would definitely look cool.

What do you all think?

For the others, I'm gointa have to agree that the blown out backgrounds are too much.

I still had a stop + to play with for shutter speed and a two stops + of ISO left, but as the camera was fixed I wanted the larger DOF to compensate for those that might jump closer or further than the middle of the jump or taller -for different size horse and rider combos or those that just skimmed it versus clearing it big. A cir pol would have helped some with the skies, but then it looks like I needed higher shutter speeds for many of the shots than the 1/1000 that I was shooting at anyway. And a graduated neutral density would not have been very friendly to the heads of the horse and rider. In a pick your poison situation I will try and shoot for the subject and hope that I can repair the background should the composition merit it.

Thanks for looking and the suggestions. I would love to play with a lens baby or tilit-shift sometime - or even add in some more panning shots, but the joy of shooting to sell to competitors is that you try and concentrate on what you know will sell first - playing - like these shots comes as a secondary consideration.

Andy

HoofClix · May 29, 2007

Andy, your message just previous to my last one came through as I was typing that one, and you answered one of my questions. You were using a remote on that trial shot, which is a great idea. I might try that coming up. I also figured you must have had a "primary" jump that you were shooting..

Sounds like you set it up that way I was thinking of, using a narrow aperture to account for the fact that the rider doesn't always cross the jump right over your pre-focus point.

As a matter of fact, if it were my face in one of those pics, I'd probably even buy it myself.

Equestrian Eventing - trying something new

Comments