St. Louis vs. Breckenridge Volleyball District Tournament 11/7/2008

[PhotosGuy]

My high school won their District Championship while I shot my third of a series of tests. Go Sharks!

These were shot in RAW with some flash fill bounced off the ceiling. Only minimal tweaking of the highlights at the top of the ball were made, along with resizing & USM. I expect that these will look best in a color managed browser. They should look a tad dark in others.

Links to the first two threads are at the bottom.


1.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v218/PhotosGuy/SLHS%20Volleyball/SLHS_District-Champions_0948.jpg?t=1226596826

2.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v218/PhotosGuy/SLHS%20Volleyball/SLHS_District-Champions_0957.jpg?t=1226596844

3.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v218/PhotosGuy/SLHS%20Volleyball/SLHS_District-Champions_0925.jpg?t=1226596860


1/500 sec., without flash fill.

4.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v218/PhotosGuy/SLHS%20Volleyball/SLHS_District-Champions_0978.jpg?t=1226596875

5.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v218/PhotosGuy/SLHS%20Volleyball/SLHS_District-Champions_0936.jpg?t=1226596891

6.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v218/PhotosGuy/SLHS%20Volleyball/SLHS_District-Champions_0940.jpg?t=1226596909


I liked the hands in this one. A purist would crop tighter from the left, but the hair was doing nice things?

7.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v218/PhotosGuy/SLHS%20Volleyball/SLHS_District-Champions_0840.jpg?t=1226596925


I only included this one because I so seldom got the timing right! ;-D

8.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v218/PhotosGuy/SLHS%20Volleyball/SLHS_District-Champions_0899.jpg?t=1226596955


All images but #4 are at 1/250 sec. with some bounce flash fill.


Ever tried 1/500 sec. strobe "Sync"? Maybe you should!
Strobe sync @ 1/400: Pushing the limits. (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=599450)
I will next time.

Shooting v-ball is a steep learning experience. Here's mine:

10/22/08 SLHS V-ball tournament (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=594045)
Post #9 shows how I set the exposure: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=7192661&postcount=9

Poster (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=593841) thread from that shoot.

9/29/07 Some Volley Ball Tournament Tests **56K Warning!** (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=394723)

Curtis's excellent thread: No more excuses about high ceilings and bounced flash (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=451770)

[sidx001]

I really like these shots! I'm not as much of a purist when it comes to volleyball, so I agree that the hair in 7 works well :) I love the capture in #4, great job!

[PhotosGuy]

Thanks, James!

[scot079]

Nice timing on your shots!

You should change your name to LinksGuy

[PhotosGuy]

Nice timing on your shots! Thanks, Tim!
Pro trick: Don't show the bad ones! And I had a pile of them. ;) You should change your name to LinksGuy You aren't the first to suggest that. :D

[geoff.curtis]

But the bad ones make ME feel better about all the bad ones I get!!!

[PhotosGuy]

But the bad ones make ME feel better about all the bad ones I get!!! http://photo.klein-jensen.dk/smilies/rotfl2.gif

I know the feeling! But since this is an educational forum, I usually post some of mine if I think it will help someone. But I'm not going to give you a link. You'll have to find them for yourself! ;)

Welcome to POTN!

[SwiftFootTim]

Nice shots PhotosGuy! Nice to see a fellow Michigander on here. For me though fall is all about football, volleyball is too challenging with lighting and such :p. Go Aggies!

[PhotosGuy]

For me though fall is all about football, I did my time on football fields & it's cold, wet, & no nice looking girls? :D volleyball is too challenging with lighting and such That's why I shot it. I get bored in the off-car season.

Did you ever go to a car meet there? I think you had one every Thursday night.

[HornPlayer]

J-PEG!!!

[PhotosGuy]

J-PEG!!! Well, thanks for the <bump>, but WTH does that mean?

[HornPlayer]

I do think that if you shot in JPEG format that the pictures would be of a better quality. Sharper, I think you would agree with me?

[Dan-o]

I think you would agree with me?

I think you will have a hard time getting anyone to agree with you on that one.

[PhotosGuy]

I think you will have a hard time getting anyone to agree with you on that one. Certainly not me!
Some excellent comparison images: RAW vs. JPEG - the real story (http://prophotolife.com/2008/04/29/tech-raw-vs-jpeg-the-real-story/)

[Croasdail]

Nice stuff squezing a little extra out of the "old" 20D. You will probably think I am a little crazy but I think you were actually a little over exposed here. I think you could have come back 1/3 to 1/2 stop. But were nit picking here. Nice effort.

I read the RAW article you posted. I will only add one caveat to this. The tool you use makes a huge difference. Aperture does a far better job for what ever reason bringing images up then does PS. Not sure why. It sucks a many other things. But image recovery it really does well. The other point the article makes is that each time you save a jpg you loose detail. Not always true. For example, I took one image, did a save as jpeg max res, opened that image, did a save as jpeg max rex, and then finally a third time, opened that copy, did a save as jpeg max res, and every time the file size came out to the same size, even the third generation. JPEG does not go out and recompress files, it only looks at the delta or change and acts on those segments. So generational change could happen if you do it using different compression settings, but if you do the same level, you would should not really loose visible detail. That said, tools like Aperature don't do destructive editing. The changes or new jpegs are always based off of the original, not the copy, so there really is not concept of a 2nd or third generation. It will simply create a stack of first generation children from the master. I love Photoshop, but I wish it handled edits the same way aperature does. Other parts lhough, Aperature really can make you fell constrained. Merge the two, and you have nervana.

[PhotosGuy]

I think you were actually a little over exposed here. I think you could have come back 1/3 to 1/2 stop. But were nit picking here. Nice effort. Thanks, Mark! I agree, they are a touch light in FF3.
For prints of a few, I'm going to try a bit of NNinja & then bring them back down a little bit. Others that were shot a bit darker, I'll convert at 'normal', NN them, & bring them up a bit, then compare. It should be an interesting Winter project. I read the RAW article you posted. I will only add one caveat to this. The tool you use makes a huge difference. I'm still using RSP & aren't familiar with Aperture. Maybe what you posted will help someone else.
SO many tools... so little time. ;)