Lacrosse Quiz

KMCC · February 17, 2008

Here's a little test of your knowledge of lacrosse; as well as your visual acuity.

Which of the following two shots on goal from this afternoon's game between Kennesaw State University and Coastal Carolina University was good and which was not?

a)

b)

(NOTE: No Photoshop enhancements were used in the creation of this test.)

I wonder what #3 was thinking at the moment that I took this photograph?

oldtime · February 17, 2008

A=not
B=good

pantherlax · February 17, 2008

lol not B.

Nice shots. And seems like they got nice turf too lol.

ASkip · February 19, 2008

KMCC wrote:

Here's a little test of your knowledge of lacrosse; as well as your visual acuity.

Which of the following two shots on goal from this afternoon's game between Kennesaw State University and Coastal Carolina University was good and which was not?

I wonder what #3 was thinking at the moment that I took this photograph?

I'm sure he's wondering why everyone's yelling "ball down", then saying ow.

Nice pictures! Icky grass. I guess it's better than snow.

oldtime · February 20, 2008

So Kent which one
A- the guy is setting up to shoot across his body very low percentage shot unless your good

B- the follow through shows player stepping towards goal stick pointing towrd intended target- Classic form which often produces intended result

KMCC · February 20, 2008

oldtime wrote:

So Kent which one
A- the guy is setting up to shoot across his body very low percentage shot unless your good

B- the follow through shows player stepping towards goal stick pointing towrd intended target- Classic form which often produces intended result

It was A.

Go back and look at B. You'll see the ball hovering in mid-air directly behind him.

Form without ball = no goal.

oldtime · February 20, 2008

KMCC wrote:

It was A.

Go back and look at B. You'll see the ball hovering in mid-air directly behind him.

Form without ball = no goal.

Must have been asleep looking at this

Or to many pain pills after my surgery
These guys are small I coach middle school and have players bigger than these guys

wmstumme · February 20, 2008

Well --not to hijack the thread--but looks like oldtime may have some new big-guys to shoot. The MLL team that was in Philly is looking for a home...

http://www.wral.com/sports/story/2442652/

oldtime · February 20, 2008

wmstumme wrote:

Well --not to hijack the thread--but looks like oldtime may have some new big-guys to shoot. The MLL team that was in Philly is looking for a home...

http://www.wral.com/sports/story/2442652/

Yeah there is alot of excitment here concerning this Hope it works out

wolfie · February 20, 2008

oldtime wrote:

Yeah there is alot of excitment here concerning this Hope it works out

My 10 year old son will be playing lacrosse for the first time and I was hoping to get some action shots of him. I usually use my camera (canon 30D 2.8 canon IS lens) in sports mode and am trying to break away from that. Any suggestions on settings, ISO, etc.???

Thanks in advance,
Sally

KED · February 20, 2008

wolfie wrote:

My 10 year old son will be playing lacrosse for the first time and I was hoping to get some action shots of him. I usually use my camera (canon 30D 2.8 canon IS lens) in sports mode and am trying to break away from that. Any suggestions on settings, ISO, etc.???

Thanks in advance,
Sally

We're in some humbling company on this thread in terms of lax shooting experience, but I'm on-line and they mostly are not so I will give you my 2 cents first. You're shooting outdoors, so there's no need to use ISO > 200 in my experience, at least not most of the time. I shoot in aperture priority and stay at f/2.8 for the dual purposes of maximizing shutter speed and maximizing background blur. 2.8 is plenty of depth of field to get the "whole" player and not just his facemask. You would push ISO to maintain shutter speed of at least 500, and based on recent experience (but with college players) you'd probably want to be at 800 or higher to eliminate motion blur on the stick head and the ball. Focus on the player's number or his face. Finally, and maybe most importantly, understand the game in-depth; it will help you to anticipate where the ball is going, when a bone-rattling check is likely to happen, etc., and that's where you will want to be pointing that lens! There's just one problem with that last point, though, and this is a dilemma for me: you can either concentrate on the game, or on shooting the game. I have found it so difficult to do both that I need to order DVDs of the games just so I can really see, afterwards, how my son, and the team, played.

Incidentally, nearly everything I know about this, I have learned first from the generous people on this forum and second from putting their advice into practice.

wolfie · February 20, 2008

KED wrote:

We're in some humbling company on this thread in terms of lax shooting experience, but I'm on-line and they mostly are not so I will give you my 2 cents first. You're shooting outdoors, so there's no need to use ISO > 200 in my experience, at least not most of the time. I shoot in aperture priority and stay at f/2.8 for the dual purposes of maximizing shutter speed and maximizing background blur. 2.8 is plenty of depth of field to get the "whole" player and not just his facemask. You would push ISO to maintain shutter speed of at least 500, and based on recent experience (but with college players) you'd probably want to be at 800 or higher to eliminate motion blur on the stick head and the ball. Focus on the player's number or his face. Finally, and maybe most importantly, understand the game in-depth; it will help you to anticipate where the ball is going, when a bone-rattling check is likely to happen, etc., and that's where you will want to be pointing that lens! There's just one problem with that last point, though, and this is a dilemma for me: you can either concentrate on the game, or on shooting the game. I have found it so difficult to do both that I need to order DVDs of the games just so I can really see, afterwards, how my son, and the team, played.

Incidentally, nearly everything I know about this, I have learned first from the generous people on this forum and second from putting their advice into practice.

Thank you for the advice...too bad I have to wait a few weeks for the season to start (Maryland). I went on your site and your pix are amazing!!! So the next question is (if you don't mind) do you do any post processing and if so what do you use and what do you "fix"?

Thanks

KED · February 20, 2008

wolfie wrote:

Thank you for the advice...too bad I have to wait a few weeks for the season to start (Maryland). I went on your site and your pix are amazing!!! So the next question is (if you don't mind) do you do any post processing and if so what do you use and what do you "fix"?

Thanks

Thank you for the compliment about my shots. Don't be so regretful about waiting a few weeks for play to start in Maryland -- I have only gotten to shoot so far in mid-30 degree weather and in one case, in the snow (probably snow again this coming weekend). I'd take March in Maryland over February in Providence anyday if my boy weren't playing for Brown!

I spend more real-time post-processing than I do shooting the game. So far, I have shot lax exclusively with my 70 - 200 lens, and I shoot the action no matter how far away I am from it [Aside: there are two positions I like: sideline about halfway between midfield and goal-line extended for both offense and defense, and behind the endline on my team's offensive end], so cropping is required I'd say 80% of the time. I'm still learning about exposure adjustment and "pushing the histogram to the right" [Aside: search that phrase here and on Luminous Landscape], so I have to spend time making exposure adjustments too. Those are the main things, then there's always minor additional tweaking (some of which can be done wholesale depending on your software, but for outdoor sports I can't even be bothered with sharpening as one example); but as my mentors here have taught me, the more you get right "in camera", the less time you have to spend in post. I shot 330 images at the last game and posted 150; that doesn't suggest 180 "misses", I just only put up the best ones, and eliminated a lot of redundant shots of the same players who just happened to touch the ball a lot that day. Still, you have to go through all 330, and that is inevitably time-consuming.

When the Big Boys come back to this thread they will probably have a field day with me, but that's my experience so far.

cecilc · February 21, 2008

KED wrote:

We're in some humbling company on this thread in terms of lax shooting experience, but I'm on-line and they mostly are not so I will give you my 2 cents first. You're shooting outdoors, so there's no need to use ISO > 200 in my experience, at least not most of the time. I shoot in aperture priority and stay at f/2.8 for the dual purposes of maximizing shutter speed and maximizing background blur. 2.8 is plenty of depth of field to get the "whole" player and not just his facemask. You would push ISO to maintain shutter speed of at least 500, and based on recent experience (but with college players) you'd probably want to be at 800 or higher to eliminate motion blur on the stick head and the ball. Focus on the player's number or his face. Finally, and maybe most importantly, understand the game in-depth; ...

Good advice ... I would add one more item to all of that - particularly since the discussion came up about shooting 10-year olds (but this point actually applies to ALL levels of play in just about every sport!) .... Shoot from a low position. Either bring a collapsible stool with you to sit on to get lower; or kneel; or take a knee ... or just sit down! But don't stand and shoot "down" on the younger kids ... get in a position where you're shooting level with them or "up" at them ....

Lacrosse Quiz

Comments