Found a great little local live music venue.

[dpurslow]

Found this venue just 20 mins from the house, went down tonight, the place holds about 300-350 and has live music all the time :-)

Here are a couple,

Halflight -

http://www.mpsphoto.co.uk/forumpics/halflight1.jpg

http://www.mpsphoto.co.uk/forumpics/halflight2.jpg

John James Newman

http://www.mpsphoto.co.uk/forumpics/JJ1.jpg

http://www.mpsphoto.co.uk/forumpics/JJ2.jpg

[bmoguy]

Those look great. I especially like #1. The guitar behind the guy in #3 is a little distracting. Looks like you've found yourself a great place to take some pics. Wish I had a place like that near by.

[Pauliev]

Really like No. 1, great lighting

[taygull]

When you are there next time, shoot the lighting guy. I just don't understand why they have to oversaturate the performers at small venues....

Funny thing is when you step up and get to shoot in a world class venue the "colored" light is more on the background with a white light more on the subject. I say this as "mostly" because of course some bands prefer colored light on them most of the time.

Oh yeah, very nice photos. I don't dislike the color as much as I'd like to see some with more of a natural color mixed in.

[taygull]

Those look great. I especially like #1. The guitar behind the guy in #3 is a little distracting. Looks like you've found yourself a great place to take some pics. Wish I had a place like that near by.


A Les Paul in the background is NEVER distracting!:lol:

[DwightMcCann]

Chris, the Brits are more saturated than we are here in the colonies so cut the lighting guys a break! Small venues usually don't have the lighting options that the places you are now shooting have.

David, they look a little soft to me and I could sider cloning or cropping out the extraneous guitar head here and there. BTW, how is everything going? I do not have a nostril above the waterline. And next week the local paper is doing an article on my Live Entertainment Photography business to run at the end of the month. I am shooting Etta James tonight and am supposed to get a picture of myself shooting! What a hoot.

[bmoguy]

A Les Paul in the background is NEVER distracting!:lol:

I stand corrected. :D

[taygull]

Chris, the Brits are more saturated than we are here in the colonies so cut the lighting guys a break! Small venues usually don't have the lighting options that the places you are now shooting have.



Is that a joke, my regular venue "Hanks" got much worse with the lights. The only way to get good shots now is to have the performer create his own light by breathing fire!:lol:

At least they did tell me last week they have ordered a substantial new lighting system...we will see....

My biggest complaint is not so much low light, we can learn to shoot in most of those conditions. I just don't understand why they think the heavy use of color 100% of the time looks "cool".

[narlus]

My biggest complaint is not so much low light, we can learn to shoot in most of those conditions.

;)

'low light' is diametrically opposed to f/2.8 zooms.

[taygull]

maybe so but my 70-200IS can do pretty good stuff. I get at least an extra stop or two with that.

[narlus]

i would like to try out an IS lens, to be honest, but since i've already got the 70-200 f/4 lens and i don't feel like tossing twice as much money to get one more stop + IS, i am thinking about the 17-55 E-FS lens...if the 24-70 had it, i might be all over that, but as it stands, i'm on the fence.

how well does IS work in a subject-moving environment?

[dpurslow]

Thanks for the comments guys,

Yes it’s a small venue and all the lights are either Red, Blue, Violate, Amber but the only white light is on the roof and used for setup etc. Nothing really on the drummer and nothing on the guys to the side of the stage.

I actually was not that fond of the blue light photo, but I also got it with red light.

Dwight - I have tried a different algorithm for sharpening these for the web - better ?

I also think once I really know the venue I will get some better shots - didn’t want to pee them off tonight by bouncing all over the place.

http://www.mpsphoto.co.uk/forumpics/halflight3.jpg

http://www.mpsphoto.co.uk/forumpics/jj3.jpg

And this is about the best drummer shot I could get but I still have tons of pictures to go thru yet.

http://www.mpsphoto.co.uk/forumpics/jj4.jpg

[taygull]

how well does IS work in a subject-moving environment?


If you can find any lens that will stop the subject from moving when you want it to I'll buy right now, any price.

The problem with catching great low light shots is not as much subject movement as it is camera shake at slow shutter speeds.

All performers will stop moving at some point. The point where subjects stop moving is when they change directions. This is why I shoot burst mode, I'm looking for that moment when they change directions.

With respect to only getting one stop difference you not really correct. The ability of my IS to let me go from say 1/100 to 1/50 on shutter speed gives me another stop (letting in twice as much light). So I'm actually getting about the same results as your 1.4 with much more flexibility and technically better glass which hopefully get me a better shot. Take into account that I can also get 1/3 stops with the lens/body combo and I've got pretty good ability to capture what a 50mm 1.4 would capture.

So if my 7:00am math is correct I'm getting 3 stops better than your 70mm/200mm f/4 because when I combine shutter speed with f/stop I can get the same light as your 50mm f/1.4 using comparative light and shutter speeds?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong because I am by no means a "techie" with this stuff.

There is a reason the 70mm-200mm f/2.8L IS is $2K and most pro concert shooters use this lens, because it is worth it.

I will never buy another zoom or large lens without the IS.

[taygull]

dp, the second set looks a little oversharpend, and I'm looking on my "soft" monitor.

These are nice images, the key for me when I get these over saturated images is to fake out the shot by playing with the WB in RAW. You can probably do it in jpg as well I'm just not use to doing it that way, Dwight can probably help with that even though he probably does not have to fix major WB issues very often. Understand I'm not saying your WB is off, I just sometimes think you can get a better "viewable" image by getting rid of some of the color. Then we go into that whole dilemma about "well that is not what the conditions were when I took it", that is good for another thread and debate.

[Steve Parr]

Is that a joke, my regular venue "Hanks" got much worse with the lights. The only way to get good shots now is to have the performer create his own light by breathing fire!:lol:

At least they did tell me last week they have ordered a substantial new lighting system...we will see....

My biggest complaint is not so much low light, we can learn to shoot in most of those conditions. I just don't understand why they think the heavy use of color 100% of the time looks "cool".

I shot a band about a week ago, and the lighting guy was awesome. The venue, Humphrey's (http://www.humphreysbythebay.com/backstageMusicClub.cfm), has a so-so lighting set-up (better than most bars, not nearly as good as large venues), and the lighting guy was constantly asking me how the lights were; did I need more of this? Less of that?

That was a nice change...

[bmoguy]

i would like to try out an IS lens, to be honest, but since i've already got the 70-200 f/4 lens and i don't feel like tossing twice as much money to get one more stop + IS, i am thinking about the 17-55 E-FS lens...if the 24-70 had it, i might be all over that, but as it stands, i'm on the fence.

how well does IS work in a subject-moving environment?

fwiw, I love my 17-55. I wrestled between it, the 24-70, and the 24-105IS when deciding on a primary everyday/on the calera most of the time/walking around lens to replace my 17-85IS. To make a long story short, I really missed the IS and the range from 17-24, I sent back the 24-70, got the 17-55, and I'm very happy with the decision.

The all the pictures I took at the Scrooge Finds His Groove (http://photos.1branson.com/v/2006Shows/1HisOfThe60s-Scrooge/) show were taken with the 17-55IS. As were some of the pics from the Jim Stafford show.

As for helping in the subject moving environment, as taygull said, no help at all. Just helps in the photographer moving environment, and I'll take all the help I can get. ;)

[kmb]

The problem with catching great low light shots is not as much subject movement as it is camera shake at slow shutter speeds.

For me, there is no replacement for the stopping power f1.4-f1.8 prime lenses. Here are a few photos that would not exist if I had used f2.8 IS lens (posting as urls only to not to hijack this thread):

http://kuvat.huumakuva.net/albums/userpics/10002/_MG_0569.jpg
(1/160 s, f1.4)

http://kuvat.huumakuva.net/albums/userpics/10002/_MG_2273.jpg
(1/160 s, f1.4)

http://kuvat.huumakuva.net/albums/userpics/10002/_MG_1806.jpg
(1/200 s, f1.4)

http://kuvat.huumakuva.net/albums/userpics/10002/_MG_0234.jpg
(1/25 s, f1.4)

http://kuvat.huumakuva.net/albums/userpics/10002/_MG_7557.jpg
(1/200 s, f1.8 )

Of course there are situations where IS does help you produce some really interesting results (in certain situations) even though there are not much light to use:
http://kuvat.huumakuva.net/albums/userpics/10002/_MG_1992.jpg
(1/25 s, f2.8, IS on)

[DwightMcCann]

Thanks for the comments guys,

Yes it’s a small venue and all the lights are either Red, Blue, Violate, Amber but the only white light is on the roof and used for setup etc. Nothing really on the drummer and nothing on the guys to the side of the stage.

I actually was not that fond of the blue light photo, but I also got it with red light.

Dwight - I have tried a different algorithm for sharpening these for the web - better ?

I also think once I really know the venue I will get some better shots - didn’t want to pee them off tonight by bouncing all over the place.

And this is about the best drummer shot I could get but I still have tons of pictures to go thru yet.


These look a little oversharpened. I'm not the one to ask about how to sharpen them as I use PhotoImpact and a preset. Rene can point you to the best algorithms.

[DwightMcCann]

For me, there is no replacement for the stopping power f1.4-f1.8 prime lenses. Here are a few photos that would not exist if I had used f2.8 IS lens (posting as urls only to not to hijack this thread):

http://kuvat.huumakuva.net/albums/userpics/10002/_MG_0569.jpg
(1/160 s, f1.4)

http://kuvat.huumakuva.net/albums/userpics/10002/_MG_2273.jpg
(1/160 s, f1.4)

http://kuvat.huumakuva.net/albums/userpics/10002/_MG_1806.jpg
(1/200 s, f1.4)

http://kuvat.huumakuva.net/albums/userpics/10002/_MG_0234.jpg
(1/25 s, f1.4)

http://kuvat.huumakuva.net/albums/userpics/10002/_MG_7557.jpg
(1/200 s, f1.8 )

Of course there are situations where IS does help you produce some really interesting results (in certain situations) even though there are not much light to use:
http://kuvat.huumakuva.net/albums/userpics/10002/_MG_1992.jpg
(1/25 s, f2.8, IS on)

Karl, these are stunners ... I haven't needed to use my 50mm f/1.4 or 85mm f/1.2 because of my venues but I do have more fast small primes on my wishlist. I think having the range of tools at hand is the key.