9/13 Wizards v. Galaxy

KCBearcat · September 15, 2008

Been a while since I dropped in to show some of my soccer shots... don't even have the last 2 home games posted to smugmug yet... but I thought I'd get these up because I've surprised myself at how good some of them are (seriously, I don't usually chimp while I'm at a game, so I was surprised when I got home)...

The game was played at Arrowhead Stadium, so this was the first time I'd shot on the field in an NFL stadium (even if the Chiefs weren't playing).

1. A banner in the Cauldron (Wizards supporters section):

2. I wonder if he was thinking, "Bend It Like Me...":

3. Boot to the head (almost):

4. Three body pileup on Route 1:

5. Claudio "El Piojo" Lopez:

Comments/constructive criticism are always welcome. If you've got time to kill or just want to look at the others, they can be found here: http://kcbearcat.smugmug.com/gallery/5971568_rqdSr/1/372627100_xY9Fk

KCBearcat · September 18, 2008

Anybody?

::poke

Surely someone can find something I did wrong.

donek · September 18, 2008

1. I'm more into action.

2. I'm a big one for things being level. The seam in that pad should be verticle. It also doesn't really show much action and the subject is tough to discern. The ref, player, flag, roll of something on the right. Just too much going on.

3. Good action and faces, but the image lacks pop. The background (even though it's out of focus) seems to compete with the player. A shot like this will work better verticle. There's too much dead space on either side.

4. Don't see the ball and the empty stands appear to be the subject as the players are out of focus and the empty stands are sharp.

5. pops a bit more, but still lacks a bit. The surface he's on is a bit unfortunate as the ball is almost lost in it.

All seem to be a bit orange. Perhaps the WB is off. Everything seems to be underexposed as well.

You might read this tutorial: http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/2292454/1

nipprdog · September 18, 2008

KCBearcat wrote:

Surely someone can find something I did wrong.

OVER saturation in #4.

KCBearcat · September 19, 2008

donek wrote:

1. I'm more into action.

I normally am too... I just really like the sign...

donek wrote:

2. I'm a big one for things being level. The seam in that pad should be verticle. It also doesn't really show much action and the subject is tough to discern. The ref, player, flag, roll of something on the right. Just too much going on.

Fair enough... Is this better?

donek wrote:

3. Good action and faces, but the image lacks pop. The background (even though it's out of focus) seems to compete with the player. A shot like this will work better verticle. There's too much dead space on either side.

I think you're right. I tried it vertical... Lots less dead space...

donek wrote:

4. Don't see the ball and the empty stands appear to be the subject as the players are out of focus and the empty stands are sharp.

I can see how you'd miss the ball as it kinda blends in with the feet of one of the players on the ground. Still don't understand how the stands were sharp when the players were closer.

donek wrote:

5. pops a bit more, but still lacks a bit. The surface he's on is a bit unfortunate as the ball is almost lost in it.

This any better?

donek wrote:

All seem to be a bit orange. Perhaps the WB is off. Everything seems to be underexposed as well.

You might read this tutorial: http://dgrin.smugmug.com/gallery/2292454/1

I had changed the wb to "cloudy", so that's probably the reason everything had an orange tint to it. It was cloudy and I thought it should match, I guess. As for the underexposure, I need a 2.8 version of my 70-200... a longer lens would be nice too to reach the other end of the field.

Anyway, hope you like these better...

jonh68 · September 19, 2008

I can see how you'd miss the ball as it kinda blends in with the feet of one of the players on the ground. Still don't understand how the stands were sharp when the players were closer.

It doesn't matter how close it is, AF grabbed the first thing it could focus on.

KCBearcat · September 19, 2008

jonh68 wrote:

It doesn't matter how close it is, AF grabbed the first thing it could focus on.

Manual focus would have helped that then?

jonh68 · September 19, 2008

KCBearcat wrote:

Manual focus would have helped that then?

When you were pointing the camera in an area to focus, that was the closest thing it found. The players were not in the sensor area when you focused. Manual focus for sports is one of the worst things you can do.

Zanotti · September 19, 2008

Hey, the new lens looks great!

There is a camera program that comes with most Canon cameras that shows where the focus point was at the time of shooting. If you are not using center point focus, that's another thing to consider.

Nice shots, love the color.

Z

donek · September 19, 2008

crops and color are a big improvement. The backgrounds are still distracting. If you can shoot tighter on your next outing, that will improve things.