few more gigs

[harveyd]

1.
http://photo.arandomurl.com/photos/CYHSY/Picture%20083.jpg

2.
http://photo.arandomurl.com/photos/CYHSY/Picture%20079.jpg

3.
http://photo.arandomurl.com/photos/Larrikin%20Love/Picture%20321.jpg

4.
http://photo.arandomurl.com/photos/Larrikin%20Love/Picture%20199.jpg

5.
http://photo.arandomurl.com/photos/Larrikin%20Love/Picture%20242.jpg

I havent had time to post process these, some from last night, top 2 from saturday, in 4 I will probably photoshop the wire coming out of the guitar away from his face. I like somewhat different compositions as opposed to taking every shot single performer full frame, but the wire does get in the way. Ive decided the 30mm 1.4 probably wasnt the best buy, its a nice lens but too short a focal length, So im thinking about saving up for the 1.2L. it is a bit of a hike in money though, but the build quality and focus on the 1.8 50mm (what i took these with) is annoying me

suggestions or opinions are appreciated

[kmb]

I like 4th most, as it has depth and an implied eye contact between performers (although that wire kind of tickles the other performer's face, as you point out yourself). #1 is also nice expression-wise, but I think I would've wanted to see more of the guitar, and the lighting comes across a bit harsh (not the photographer's fault, probably).

As a set, these images do not communicate energy or even too much emotion, but maybe that's the way it was (if not, I'd advise you to pay more attention on getting the special moments captured).

In the fifth image, the channel clipping bothers me.

50/1.2L is an overkill for concert photography (50/1.4 would not be), if you are interested in my opinion.

[harveyd]

I was making an attempt at getting things a little more technically correct than 'catching the moment' in these shoots. I havent done that much gig photography and this was my first time in the actual photographers area. plus i had previously wasted a lot of shots with silly mistakes previously, although I still ended up doing it again (different mistakes at least)

could you expand on the channel clipping? the only post processing involved was bumping up the midtones in the levels slightly as it was slightly shadowy before.

As for the lenses 1.4 I was also looking to check out, Im pretty confused at the other photographers who were at both gigs, 2 photographers at 2 seperate gigs with at the least 70mm + zoom lenses, they had the L series red band but they were black lenses, considering we were at the foot of the stage, I was using 50mm prime and had trouble getting a wide enough shot at time. I dont really get how they could compose a decent frame, that closely, with such a large zoom. and 2. how they got over the lighting conditions, 1.8 was still suffering from camera shake under that light, with a zoom L series coming in at 2.8, and obviously having more of a problem with camera shake. I guess they must have had nice sensors as well, im shooting with a rebel and its pretty pointless to go over ISO 800

[kmb]

could you expand on the channel clipping?

Digital cameras have three types of sensors, for recording red component of the light, and respectively for blue and for green. It is possible to overexpose only one of these colors ("channels"). This is called channel clipping.

Here's some discussion about channel clipping (and how to do something about it - never tried the technique represented here): http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/restore-clipped.shtml

[CanonXTuser]

As for the lenses 1.4 I was also looking to check out, Im pretty confused at the other photographers who were at both gigs, 2 photographers at 2 seperate gigs with at the least 70mm + zoom lenses, they had the L series red band but they were black lenses, considering we were at the foot of the stage, I was using 50mm prime and had trouble getting a wide enough shot at time. I dont really get how they could compose a decent frame, that closely, with such a large zoom. and 2. how they got over the lighting conditions, 1.8 was still suffering from camera shake under that light, with a zoom L series coming in at 2.8, and obviously having more of a problem with camera shake. I guess they must have had nice sensors as well, im shooting with a rebel and its pretty pointless to go over ISO 800


Hint ... they didn't and got crappy pics or they were really patient and waited for the right light to take their shots, which was likely few and far between.

[kmb]

As for the lenses 1.4 I was also looking to check out, Im pretty confused at the other photographers who were at both gigs, 2 photographers at 2 seperate gigs with at the least 70mm + zoom lenses, they had the L series red band but they were black lenses, considering we were at the foot of the stage, I was using 50mm prime and had trouble getting a wide enough shot at time. I dont really get how they could compose a decent frame, that closely, with such a large zoom.

A "black red ring lens" means that it's at least 28mm wide at the wide end if it is a zoom, if I'm not mistaken (not that the red ring or blackness has anything to do with that per se, except IIRC Canon does not have a recent "black" L zoom that would be less wide). And they might have been using 1.3x crop or full frame cameras.

and 2. how they got over the lighting conditions, 1.8 was still suffering from camera shake under that light, with a zoom L series coming in at 2.8, and obviously having more of a problem with camera shake. I guess they must have had nice sensors as well, im shooting with a rebel and its pretty pointless to go over ISO 800

They're probably exposing a bit darker images than yours, using ISO1600 or ISO3200 equiv., and shooting wider. And if they are shooting for one magazine, they need one or two "acceptable" shots, and that's it.

Does "rebel" mean the 300D?

It might be helpful to give exposure information (shutter speed and aperture) with the pictures when discussing these matters.

[narlus]

As for the lenses 1.4 I was also looking to check out, Im pretty confused at the other photographers who were at both gigs, 2 photographers at 2 seperate gigs with at the least 70mm + zoom lenses, they had the L series red band but they were black lenses, considering we were at the foot of the stage, I was using 50mm prime and had trouble getting a wide enough shot at time. I dont really get how they could compose a decent frame, that closely, with such a large zoom.

well if it was a black L zoom lens, it was either the 16-35L or the 24-70L (possibly the older 28-70L). both of these would be plenty wide. the 70+ zoom Ls are all white lenses.

and 2. how they got over the lighting conditions, 1.8 was still suffering from camera shake under that light, with a zoom L series coming in at 2.8, and obviously having more of a problem with camera shake. I guess they must have had nice sensors as well, im shooting with a rebel and its pretty pointless to go over ISO 800


i didn't see yr EXIF data, so i can't make any assumptions on shutter speed/aperture, but if you were @ f/1.4 and ISO 800, they would have the same shutter speed @ f/2.8 and ISO 3200. i don't like to use 3200 that much if i can help it, but i've definitely gotten usable images using it w/ my 30D.

[harveyd]

the rebel is the 350d

I usually shoot @ 800 ISO, leave my aperture wide open (mostly) @ 1.8 then try to shoot at least 1/60

Another thing I found problematic, only recently, is autofocus goes to the mic stand, with a shallow dof i get @ 1.8 this leaves the performer out of focus, you can see with the last shot the focus is on the violin, his face is slightly out. I generally try to focus on the performer then compose, but that isnt helping much

Sorry, I assumed a red ring meant L series

[kmb]

the rebel is the 350d

I usually shoot @ 800 ISO, leave my aperture wide open (mostly) @ 1.8 then try to shoot at least 1/60


Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but the Rebel XT (350D) produces perfectly acceptable images at ISO 1600, much like the 20D from the same era.

Another thing I found problematic, only recently, is autofocus goes to the mic stand, with a shallow dof i get @ 1.8 this leaves the performer out of focus, you can see with the last shot the focus is on the violin, his face is slightly out. I generally try to focus on the performer then compose, but that isnt helping much

Make sure you use the center focusing point only (or if there's enough light for the camera not to hunt, any other _single_ focus point). Also, if you're using the shutter button to trigger auto focus and you recompose, make sure you're using the "normal" focus mode (forgot its name) - not AI or servo focus. And make sure you have locked the focus before recomposing.

Sorry, I assumed a red ring meant L series

It basically does, but L series does have wide lenses :).

[narlus]

the rebel is the 350d

I usually shoot @ 800 ISO, leave my aperture wide open (mostly) @ 1.8 then try to shoot at least 1/60

don't be afraid of using 1600 on yr 350D...shoot RAW...you will be fine.

Another thing I found problematic, only recently, is autofocus goes to the mic stand, with a shallow dof i get @ 1.8 this leaves the performer out of focus, you can see with the last shot the focus is on the violin, his face is slightly out. I generally try to focus on the performer then compose, but that isnt helping much

Sorry, I assumed a red ring meant L series

yep, the wire weave of the mic can cause focus to lock onto that...definitely an issue to watch out for w/ fast lenses wide open.

a red ring does mean an L lens, but some are black and some are white.

[CanonXTuser]

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but the Rebel XT (350D) produces perfectly acceptable images at ISO 1600, much like the 20D from the same era.



you're not wrong.

can't figure out how somebody buys and XT and not know that it is great at iso 1600. every review I've read about the xt comments on its low noise at iso1600. i've never seen a review that ever said otherwise about the XT at iso1600.

[harveyd]

all my 1600 shots are very flared, I took a few to start with at the clap your hands gig and the details are just lost

examples of some photos I lost to flaring are
http://photo.arandomurl.com/event/Spinto-Band

these are the best out of a bunch i took, all at 1600, so ive been trying to stick to 800 which seems to be the practical limit. a shot at 800 exposed at 1/60 as opposed to a 1600 @ 1/120 and the 800 comes out on top every time it seems on my experiments

[narlus]

not sure how flaring (lens flare?) is related to ISO choice...

are you shooting RAW? what's yr histogram look like typically? lost details to me sound like blown channels.

i never had any issues using 1600 when i had my 350D (if i had, i'd likely never get any photos).

[CanonXTuser]

all my 1600 shots are very flared, I took a few to start with at the clap your hands gig and the details are just lost

examples of some photos I lost to flaring are
http://photo.arandomurl.com/event/Spinto-Band

these are the best out of a bunch i took, all at 1600, so ive been trying to stick to 800 which seems to be the practical limit. a shot at 800 exposed at 1/60 as opposed to a 1600 @ 1/120 and the 800 comes out on top every time it seems on my experiments

you must have really really really poor lighting. everything i shoot is at iso1600. i'd have to be there to figure out what more could be done.

[René Damkot]

Not too exciting, as kalle stated.
They also need a bit of processing.
Expose more carefull: I see a lot of clipping going on.

all my 1600 shots are very flared, I took a few to start with at the clap your hands gig and the details are just lost

examples of some photos I lost to flaring are
http://photo.arandomurl.com/event/Spinto-Band

these are the best out of a bunch i took, all at 1600, so ive been trying to stick to 800 which seems to be the practical limit. a shot at 800 exposed at 1/60 as opposed to a 1600 @ 1/120 and the 800 comes out on top every time it seems on my experiments

I don't see flare, I do see clipped channels and bad lighting (not your fault)
Iso 1600 is perfectly usable IMO. Heck, even ISO 6400 is usable if exposed right.