Division 1 Women's Soccer

[900spg]

These shots are from Friday's home opener for the University of Montana Grizzlies who hosted the Washington State Cougars . The Cougars won the game by a score of 1 to 0. All shots were hand held with the 100 - 400. The game was in the evening and the light was pretty harsh. This was my first try at competitive soccer. Comments and criticism greatly appreciated (or any feedback at all).
1.
http://www.jpsphotos.net/images_1/20080822_UM_WashingtonSt_02.jpg
2.
http://www.jpsphotos.net/images_1/20080822_UM_WashingtonSt_03.jpg
3.
http://www.jpsphotos.net/images_1/20080822_UM_WashingtonSt_11.jpg
4.
http://www.jpsphotos.net/images_1/20080822_UM_WashingtonSt_23.jpg
5.
http://www.jpsphotos.net/images_1/20080822_UM_WashingtonSt_28.jpg
6.
http://www.jpsphotos.net/images_1/20080822_UM_WashingtonSt_35.jpg
The rest of the shots can be viewed here (http://www.jpsphotos.net/gallery/displaythumbs.cfm?e=122&c=1&m=1&l=potn). Thanks for looking!

[900spg]

Almost 100 views and not a single comment, critique or even off topic remark. Tough crowd.

[Big Hands]

1) Refer to this post for my views on the xxD series camera's tendencies to render shots with both too much lost shadow detail and blown highlights and how I address it:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=558418

2) The first thing I do when processing, is to level the shot (actually I plumb the vertices, but some say "huh" so I use the term 'level'): #6

3) I'm not a fan of using a stock crop ratio or not cropping at all. There is a lot of 'space' in these shots that (since it does not add to the shot) distracts from the subject(s). IMHO, a tighter crop would be better. JMHO.

4) I would also look to consistently shoot from a position that keeps the sun at your back to avoid shots where half of the face is sunlit and the other half shadowed: #4, #5 & #6

Overall, decent action and timing. Look forward to more!

Regards,
Jeff

[SteveBrown]

I'll make a comment, picture 3 is very funny, you caught some interesting facial expressions. Very cool.

[Keltab]

Good action and timing! I like the feel of the photos.
One thing to try - get down as low as you can and shoot up a bit - that will help eliminate some of the busy backgrounds (which also helps even out the exposure.)
I enjoyed the images and look forward to your next series!

[Palladium]

IMPO all the images could benefit from cropping.

[namasste]

I'd add that the action is solid but the images seem a little too contrasty for my taste and a bit blown. I suspect it was your shooting position relative to available light which was already mentioned.

[AdamLewis]

The images are indeed pretty contrasty. I dont know if thats a shooting style or a processing effect but it is a little on the strong side. I wouldnt say its too far ... but its more than sports will normally aim for.

#1 is a decent capture of player 10 but a boring one of #11 and the OOF white player. Both of those detract from the dynamic of the picture.
#2 Is decent as well but here the contrast comes to bite a little bit due to the far half of the face being sooo dark. The player in the background could also stand to be removed. She looks a little...awkward...
#3 Is blurry and the timing is a little off. Its a neat concept but the picture being blurry doesnt let it happen (if it would even work. Im not entirely sure. Its worth a try though). It also looks like it has been sharpened pretty strongly.
#4 Is decent but just isnt a very strong moment. Its just two people running down the field?..Just not much there really
#5 Is more dynamic than #4 and you should start keeping an eye out for more moments like this. Its not particularly special but it has more struggle and fight in it than prior pictures.
#6 Is again nothing special. It was captured at a less than optimal time which resulted in the players leg looking amputated and the angle also incorporates a walking player in the background.

Let me just say that I know these are not always things you can help but are always things you should be aware of.

Its a good outing.

[900spg]

Thanks everyone for all of the feedback, I really appreciate it and it was also exactly what I was looking for.

I agree that the photos have a lot of contrast and I believe it was part the harsh light from the side of the field as well as my processing as I really like a lot of contrast in my photos. I guess it is my personal liking or style but I think I need to hold back a bit as people tend to notice it and make comments which is probably a bad thing.

With the cropping I have two questions. All of the shots have some cropping as soccer is on a big field and it is not always possible to get a tight crop in camera. These were all with the 100-400 at either 300mm or 350mm in some cases. My position is in the corner where the home team was shooting with the sun behind me in all situations. How much cropping is really acceptable if you still would like the option to make decent sized prints? Do many not even bother shooting if they can't get the tight crop in camera?

The other question with cropping is using non standard sizes. I typically avoid it as I often am thinking about prints and want to show what would be printed. Should I not even consider this when cropping and always crop per picture instead of consistently cropping the same size? I'm really interested in what other think as I've always stuck to the standard 2x3 aspect ratio.

Adam, thanks for the very up front comments about the timing and action of each shot. I was thrilled with them as it was my first time shooting soccer but then I read your post and looked at each photo after reading the comment and agreed with each. Your right that you can't always control these things but I need to think about it more.

I already shot another game against the University of Minnesota but have not posted them yet, maybe later tonight. I now have plenty to think about the next chance I get to shoot a game. Thanks again all.

[Big Hands]

If you're cropping for a print, I might have to crop differently than I would for web display. Even so, I would have generally cropped your shots much tighter.

Here's a gallery from a HS match I shot last winter. HS fields are about the same size as college fields in most cases. I have seen a few college fields that are pretty large, but most are similar to what I am shooting on.

http://imageevent.com/johansen01/westranchsoccer0708/wrhsgvhs011107

I shoot with a 70-200 f/2.8L and will normally shoot over 1,000 frames in a typical match. I can't cover the entire pitch from behind the end line, but if I can get over 1,000 shots with my 70-200, I don't really feel the need to.

This gallery will also give you a feel for how I prefer to crop... tight. Doesn't mean you always have to follow the rules, but cropping should be something you think about. It essentially gives you a chance to shoot a little loose and then take your time to get it just the way you like when post processing. You'll have to define "decent sized print" too, but you should have trouble getting very nice 8x10 prints from shooting soccer with a 100-400 on a 1.6x crop camera.

This is IMHO, a fairly tight crop:

http://photos.imageevent.com/johansen01/westranchsoccer0708/wrhsgvhs011107/IMG_3422.jpg

With 10MP, you should have plenty of resolution left to crop quite a bit and your 100-400 should have plenty of reach on any size pitch if your on the touchline or end line.

[900spg]

Thanks Big Hands, I appreciate the feed back and will keep this all into consideration the next time I process a batch of photos. You had some really nice shots in the gallery.

[disneydork06]

definitely do some tighter crops, it will help some. but not always. if you can you can even try and keep your shots tighter too. get it in camera. unless you are needing room to crop for a certain size. but I tend to like to crop it tight. oh and interesting to see other big sky teams on here :-) boo montana :-P

[namasste]

I shoot with a 70-200 f/2.8L and will normally shoot over 1,000 frames in a typical match.

dear Lord! How do you possibly find 1,000 moments of interest in a match? Not knocking you at all, just amazed. I rarely shoot more than 250 for a match and even there find that many of the images are discarded simply because they aren't of enough interest. I shoot to have 100-150 really solid shots for any given game. How many do you typically hang onto out of that 1,000?

[Big K]

dear Lord! How do you possibly find 1,000 moments of interest in a match? Not knocking you at all, just amazed. I rarely shoot more than 250 for a match and even there find that many of the images are discarded simply because they aren't of enough interest. I shoot to have 100-150 really solid shots for any given game. How many do you typically hang onto out of that 1,000?

I thought the same thing. I shot a match the other night with a handheld camera and two remote cams and was shooting both teams and ended up with 650 images. I kept about 150 but am very picky about what I keep.

[AdamLewis]

Thanks everyone for all of the feedback, I really appreciate it and it was also exactly what I was looking for.

I agree that the photos have a lot of contrast and I believe it was part the harsh light from the side of the field as well as my processing as I really like a lot of contrast in my photos. I guess it is my personal liking or style but I think I need to hold back a bit as people tend to notice it and make comments which is probably a bad thing.

With the cropping I have two questions. All of the shots have some cropping as soccer is on a big field and it is not always possible to get a tight crop in camera. These were all with the 100-400 at either 300mm or 350mm in some cases. My position is in the corner where the home team was shooting with the sun behind me in all situations. How much cropping is really acceptable if you still would like the option to make decent sized prints? Do many not even bother shooting if they can't get the tight crop in camera?

The other question with cropping is using non standard sizes. I typically avoid it as I often am thinking about prints and want to show what would be printed. Should I not even consider this when cropping and always crop per picture instead of consistently cropping the same size? I'm really interested in what other think as I've always stuck to the standard 2x3 aspect ratio.

Adam, thanks for the very up front comments about the timing and action of each shot. I was thrilled with them as it was my first time shooting soccer but then I read your post and looked at each photo after reading the comment and agreed with each. Your right that you can't always control these things but I need to think about it more.

I already shot another game against the University of Minnesota but have not posted them yet, maybe later tonight. I now have plenty to think about the next chance I get to shoot a game. Thanks again all.

Contrast is great with a lot of things but with sports and other photojournalistic/editorial types of photography, its best to keep it as close to real life as you can. This normally means shooting in a "neutral" picture style with Canon cameras and maybe even sometimes desaturating the red channel just a tad (all Canon cameras I have owned love to boost reds for some reason).

As far as crops, if you need to make a print from it, then youre pretty limited. To be honest, if Im at one end of the field, I dont shoot much from the other end. Ill keep an eye on whats happening just incase something really amazing happens, but its just too far away for me personally. To be honest, the corners or ends of the field are probably the last place I would choose to shoot anyways. To full answer your question, I aim to have to crop as little as possible off the original image.

With the sizes, it all depends. I try to stick to 2x3 also. The camera's VF is 2x3 so again it helps me to try and frame it in the camera before I take the picture. If youre just doing things for online viewing though, feel free to crop however you want to. There is no right or wrong with that.

Like I said in another post, I dont want anyone to think Im mean but I will not come in here if someone is looking for CC and give them a pat on the back. Ill purposely search for what is wrong in the picture and point that out since that is what needs to be corrected and thought about next time.

More important than what I or anyone else says though is that you just enjoy what youre doing.

[AdamLewis]

dear Lord! How do you possibly find 1,000 moments of interest in a match? Not knocking you at all, just amazed. I rarely shoot more than 250 for a match and even there find that many of the images are discarded simply because they aren't of enough interest. I shoot to have 100-150 really solid shots for any given game. How many do you typically hang onto out of that 1,000?

You dont find 1000 moments of interest. You just hang on the shutter.

[namasste]

I thought the same thing. I shot a match the other night with a handheld camera and two remote cams and was shooting both teams and ended up with 650 images. I kept about 150 but am very picky about what I keep. whew! I thought it was just me. probably worth noting that I rarely (and I mean rarely) fire more than 2-3 (and usually not 3) consecutive frames. I think it's a habit I developed shooting hoops with flash guns where you only get one shot at each bit of action between recycle times. That keeps the shot count down for sure. Makes you work on timing though and once you figure that part out, I find that you simply don't need that many shots.

[Big Hands]

If I wait until I think something interesting is developing on the pitch, I will miss some of my best shots. I don't usually 'hang on the shutter', but soccer is a fast moving game so I do shoot many frames on 'speculation'. You have to or you will miss out on a lot of good shots. That said, I only occasionally employ the burst feature and instead try to time my shots well. I shoot with a 70-200, so that means I can't cover the far end and rarely try, but I can still take over 1,000 shots and usually come away with over 100 fairly unique keepers. There are a lot of things that can go wrong in a fast paced soccer match.

Anyone that can take 250 shots in a HS or older soccer match and come away with anywhere near 150 keepers is my hero.

Anyways, I let my work speak for itself. I'm certainly not the best, but I think I do OK with what I have.

http://imageevent.com/johansen01/westranchsoccer0708/wrhs011508

[Big K]

If I wait until I think something interesting is developing on the pitch, I will miss some of my best shots. I don't usually 'hang on the shutter', but soccer is a fast moving game so I do shoot many frames on 'speculation'. You have to or you will miss out on a lot of good shots. That said, I only occasionally employ the burst feature and instead try to time my shots well. I shoot with a 70-200, so that means I can't cover the far end and rarely try, but I can still take over 1,000 shots and usually come away with over 100 fairly unique keepers. There are a lot of things that can go wrong in a fast paced soccer match.

Anyone that can take 250 shots in a HS or older soccer match and come away with anywhere near 150 keepers is my hero.

Anyways, I let my work speak for itself. I'm certainly not the best, but I think I do OK with what I have.

http://imageevent.com/johansen01/westranchsoccer0708/wrhs011508

Sorry Big Hands, I was not trying to insult your style of shooting or question your methods, just adding my $0.02. Like Scott, I don't burst too long as a general rule which has helped keep the total count down. Covering 1-3 events a night, six days a week the pics pile up like a mother and the time spent sorting through everything was killing me.

[Big Hands]

Sorry Big Hands, I was not trying to insult your style of shooting or question your methods, just adding my $0.02. Like Scott, I don't burst too long as a general rule which has helped keep the total count down. Covering 1-3 events a night, six days a week the pics pile up like a mother and the time spent sorting through everything was killing me.

I'm certainly not here to battle either, but I do enjoy a good discussion, so no hard feelings on my end. Many ways to climb the same mountain :lol: .

My 'hero' comment was sincere. I've already replaced my 20D shutter once ;)

I hear you on the processing time, during the season, I'll shoot 2-3 matches a week and if I don't get right on it after I get home, it gets rough.

Sounds like you may be shooting for publications. If I were not shooting for a team, I'd likely cut back a bit on the number of images too.

Regards,
Jeff

[namasste]

I'm certainly not here to battle either, but I do enjoy a good discussion, so no hard feelings on my end. Many ways to climb the same mountain :lol: .

My 'hero' comment was sincere. I've already replaced my 20D shutter once ;)

I hear you on the processing time, during the season, I'll shoot 2-3 matches a week and if I don't get right on it after I get home, it gets rough.

Sounds like you may be shooting for publications. If I were not shooting for a team, I'd likely cut back a bit on the number of images too.

Regards,
Jeff

Jeff, your work does speak for itself and it's outstanding. When I shoot for a publication, I don't shoot as many but it's usually because I'm looking for something specific (perhaps a player) but I also work as a team photog and honestly don't shoot much more than for the pubs. I shot a prep game last night for our local HS and shot only 155 frames of which I processed 122 throwing out a few that were too similar and a few that just kinda sucked. Like you, I prefer to let my work do the talking but I do find that I simply don't have the time to process much more than what I am doing already so I'm thankful that my style is consistent with that. If you can make it work with 1000, then have at it man and God bless ya. One other thing I find (and this isn't directly at you at all) is that the more you get to know a game, the less speculation there is in shooting. You KNOW what to expect most of the time and are ready for it. This really can cut down on the image count for those interested in doing so.

[Big Hands]

**Jeff, your work does speak for itself and it's outstanding. When I shoot for a publication, I don't shoot as many but it's usually because I'm looking for something specific (perhaps a player) but I also work as a team photog and honestly don't shoot much more than for the pubs. I shot a prep game last night for our local HS and shot only 155 frames of which I processed 122 throwing out a few that were too similar and a few that just kinda sucked. Like you, I prefer to let my work do the talking but I do find that I simply don't have the time to process much more than what I am doing already so I'm thankful that my style is consistent with that. If you can make it work with 1000, then have at it man and God bless ya. One other thing I find (and this isn't directly at you at all) is that the more you get to know a game, the less speculation there is in shooting. You KNOW what to expect most of the time and are ready for it. This really can cut down on the image count for those interested in doing so.

** Thank you for the compliment!

But, I guess having been a ref since 1994, currently coaching U19B and having been asked to coach at three different local high schools hasn't helped me as much as I had hoped it would :lol:.

Oh well, I usually hear that a 70-200 won't get me enough shots on a full sized pitch, so I'll take this as a good sign. I always look for ways to improve and this is something I could obviously improve on.

Cheers,
Jeff

[namasste]

** Thank you for the compliment!

But, I guess having been a ref since 1994, currently coaching U19B and having been asked to coach at three different local high schools hasn't helped me as much as I had hoped it would :lol:.

Oh well, I usually hear that a 70-200 won't get me enough shots on a full sized pitch, so I'll take this as a good sign. I always look for ways to improve and this is something I could obviously improve on.

Cheers,
Jeff

I shoot with w 70-200 for a pro team (often with a 1.4 though) and can cover the pitch fairly well. I prefer tight action anyway so it suits me (and you obviously).

I'm not so sure you need to improve anymore than any of us should always seek to do so. My comments are more aimed at giving you a chance to spend less time sitting in front of a computer editing.

[900spg]

Contrast is great with a lot of things but with sports and other photojournalistic/editorial types of photography, its best to keep it as close to real life as you can. This normally means shooting in a "neutral" picture style with Canon cameras and maybe even sometimes desaturating the red channel just a tad (all Canon cameras I have owned love to boost reds for some reason).

As far as crops, if you need to make a print from it, then youre pretty limited. To be honest, if Im at one end of the field, I dont shoot much from the other end. Ill keep an eye on whats happening just incase something really amazing happens, but its just too far away for me personally. To be honest, the corners or ends of the field are probably the last place I would choose to shoot anyways. To full answer your question, I aim to have to crop as little as possible off the original image.

With the sizes, it all depends. I try to stick to 2x3 also. The camera's VF is 2x3 so again it helps me to try and frame it in the camera before I take the picture. If youre just doing things for online viewing though, feel free to crop however you want to. There is no right or wrong with that.

Like I said in another post, I dont want anyone to think Im mean but I will not come in here if someone is looking for CC and give them a pat on the back. Ill purposely search for what is wrong in the picture and point that out since that is what needs to be corrected and thought about next time.

More important than what I or anyone else says though is that you just enjoy what youre doing.

Thanks for the additional feedback. The feedback you gave on your original post is exactly what I wanted. Nice shots or similar comments are not going to help me get better and that is what I'm after. I post here every once in awhile and often get little to zero feedback so this thread was a nice change once I prodded. It gave me things to think about when shooting the game this evening.

[AdamLewis]

Thanks for the additional feedback. The feedback you gave on your original post is exactly what I wanted. Nice shots or similar comments are not going to help me get better and that is what I'm after. I post here every once in awhile and often get little to zero feedback so this thread was a nice change once I prodded. It gave me things to think about when shooting the game this evening.

I used to be the same way. Even still, I post stuff and get virtually nothing. It can be irritating, but at the same time, it probably means people just dont know what to say. Dont take it personally.

[Big K]

Sorry I did not provide any feedback to the OP with my earlier post.

On days with the sun similar to the conditions in your photos, I let the shadow on the ground from my monopod (or your body if not using a mono) serve as a sight and try to shoot directly down that line. Obviously you can't always get people coming straight at you but when you do the shadows are dramatically reduced. The photo Big Hands posted is an excellent example. Note the direction of the players shadows.

With the reduced shadows, your dynamic range narrows considerably and you can then push your contrast for the effect you like without blowing so much in both the highlights and shadows. You can get that harder look without it looking so cooked. It also allows you to shoot at a higher shutter speed.

Most of the fields here run north-south. Unless it is overcast, I will shoot from the west side of the field and like to set up about half way between the goal and mid field.

Hope that is at least marginally helpful.

[namasste]

I used to be the same way. Even still, I post stuff and get virtually nothing. It can be irritating, but at the same time, it probably means people just dont know what to say. Dont take it personally.

I like to take a shot at you from time to time...c'mon Adam, post something, you knwo I'll have sumthin' to say, right?:lol::lol::lol:

[AdamLewis]

I like to take a shot at you from time to time...c'mon Adam, post something, you knwo I'll have sumthin' to say, right?:lol::lol::lol:

Well I got nothing right now :( However, the annual UL/UK game comes up on Sunday and Im going to cover some HS football tomorrow night for the paper. If I have the time, Ill throw them up here. You did comment on my last field hockey stuff :lol:

[900spg]

Sorry I did not provide any feedback to the OP with my earlier post.

On days with the sun similar to the conditions in your photos, I let the shadow on the ground from my monopod (or your body if not using a mono) serve as a sight and try to shoot directly down that line. Obviously you can't always get people coming straight at you but when you do the shadows are dramatically reduced. The photo Big Hands posted is an excellent example. Note the direction of the players shadows.

With the reduced shadows, your dynamic range narrows considerably and you can then push your contrast for the effect you like without blowing so much in both the highlights and shadows. You can get that harder look without it looking so cooked. It also allows you to shoot at a higher shutter speed.

Most of the fields here run north-south. Unless it is overcast, I will shoot from the west side of the field and like to set up about half way between the goal and mid field.

Hope that is at least marginally helpful.
That is more than marginally helpful. It helps me rethink my positioning a bit and I appreciate the ideas on how to keep the harder look that I like.

[Big Hands]

Thanks for the additional feedback. The feedback you gave on your original post is exactly what I wanted. Nice shots or similar comments are not going to help me get better and that is what I'm after. I post here every once in awhile and often get little to zero feedback so this thread was a nice change once I prodded. It gave me things to think about when shooting the game this evening.

Sometimes it just takes a day or two for the right posters to see a thread, but most of the time I will eventually get comments/feedback before a post drops off into the abyss.

I always make sure to ask for the C&C and thank all those that take the time to do so by name. It's the least I can do for someone that took the time to look, critique and post.

[picken]

If everyone is taking so many shots, what software do they use when viewing their shots.

[manutd101]

If everyone is taking so many shots, what software do they use when viewing their shots.
Lightroom, Aperture, DPP are the most common for Canon users.

[namasste]

Lightroom, Aperture, DPP are the most common for Canon users.

I always view in DPP first and make my first round of cuts. I don't edit there. Once I may group to be edited, I open each in ACR, adjust, open in PSE6, make any final edits, save as jpeg, and move to next image. If absolutely necessary, I will run them through Noise Ninja after adjusting in ACR.

[Big K]

I shoot everything in RAW. I import everything into Aperture and use this for 98% of my editing. If necessary I will run the final JPEGs created out of Aperture through Noise Ninja. For sports shooting I very, very rarely use Photoshop for anything. If it is not pretty close out of the camera, unless it is some mega critical play, I just delete and go to the next shot.

I am a huge fan of Aperture.

[Big Hands]

I just open the folders and select 'view as a slideshow'. When I come across a shot I want to PP, I select 'open with Photoshop'. As soon as it opens in Photoshop, I use the tab in the taskbar to return to the slideshow. Once I have reviewed all the shots, I return to Phpotoshop to do all my PP at the same time.

I use the Noiseware plug-in more than I do the stand-alone version.

[namasste]

I shoot everything in RAW. I import everything into Aperture and use this for 98% of my editing. If necessary I will run the final JPEGs created out of Aperture through Noise Ninja. For sports shooting I very, very rarely use Photoshop for anything. If it is not pretty close out of the camera, unless it is some mega critical play, I just delete and go to the next shot.

I am a huge fan of Aperture.

I keep hearing more and more about Aperture. Might need to look into that. I agree that if it ain't really close out of the camera, fuhgetaboutit!

[manutd101]

I keep hearing more and more about Aperture. Might need to look into that. I agree that if it ain't really close out of the camera, fuhgetaboutit!
Me too. I might compare the demo to Lightroom. Apparently the new Aperture is pretty good...

[AdamLewis]

Photo Mechanic -> DPP and call it a day.