Long Jump w/strobes

[shaktipalooza]

Went out with a track athlete to shoot some images for her sports portfolio. Long jump, not easy to capture a graceful image. We'll probably go back and shoot until we get a keeper. And I get better protection for my lenses...

http://www.largelifephotography.com/photos/453498062_z4D2o-XL.jpg

[northlander]

That's a great angle, perhaps use a bit longer lens a little further back. I like the side lighting. If you have access to a high enough ladder directly overhead would be and interesting view as well.

[Chicle]

I like the angle and the lighting lot. But I think different timing would make the shot better.

[cwood]

That's a great angle, perhaps use a bit longer lens a little further back. I like the side lighting. If you have access to a high enough ladder directly overhead would be and interesting view as well.

The wide-angle lens is what makes this shot. Perhaps 1/10 sec earlier just before her butt touched down it would have been better... but its a great capture. A light sphere would soften the light/shadow a little too

[shaktipalooza]

I agree with the wide angle. What throws it a bit is the foot appears a bit enlarged (clownlike) compared to the rest of the body. If I considered this a keeper I'd probably shrink it a little with some PS manipulation.

I have probably 40 images in various positions. As a learning experience it's important to make the athlete understand they are not looking to jump as far as they can. Don't think compete, think kung fu zen like motion.

I did a search for long jumps in this forum and noticed the mid-air shots really don't show the nature of high jump any better. Jumping styles can also vary widely. Before doing the shot I just sort of thought everyone would look the same, not even close.

I will definitely give it another shot when the weather is a little nicer.

[northpointphoto]

I like the lighting and the color of the image. I don't like the frame you caught her in. I would try to get her face in it a little more. Also if you have a telephoto lens I would use that so you dont get the sand flying into your gear.

Here's one I took a few years back. Its not the best but might give you some ideas for the future. I also have the next frame somewhere where from the same angle but his feet had just hit and sand was flying away from them (if you can imagine that in your head).

http://c4.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/28/l_1e08422aeb071aef6a801049fdfac493.jpg

[shaktipalooza]

I've got a few of those mid air shots, but I really didn't care for them.

[cwood]

I've got a few of those mid air shots, but I really didn't care for them.

I agree - I like your shot much better. I have not shot this event before but the only other way I can think of to take a good picture would be to try a pan... or maybe try a slow shutter - rear curtain flash (on a tripod) - That could be cool.

Longer lenses shorten perspective.... This is the long jump after all - why would you want to shorten the perspective. I can't tell if the guy in the other photo just jumped 5 feet or 20 feet

[chris270]

This is indoor with some very busy backgrounds, but my best advice is get low and at a slight angle so the sky is your bg.
http://rochesterccphotography.smugmug.com/photos/465947952_WVSKp-M-1.jpg (http://rochesterccphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/7247490_aFzZt/1/465947952_WVSKp)

[shaktipalooza]

I'm still prefering the ground contact.

That image is a good example of how different every athlete seems to be, nothing like what I had imagined before the shoot.

Additionally, I'd like to shoot it from the side with multi flash but don't have a cable that would enable full ETTL control.

Video would give a much better feel for the action, but that's a whole different medium.

This is indoor with some very busy backgrounds, but my best advice is get low and at a slight angle so the sky is your bg.
http://rochesterccphotography.smugmug.com/photos/465947952_WVSKp-M-1.jpg (http://rochesterccphotography.smugmug.com/gallery/7247490_aFzZt/1/465947952_WVSKp)

[jfc3po]

Awesome. Although it would be better if you captured a little sooner, but i love the lighting. Almost has a Nike ad feel to it.

[TopGear1Ds]

I'm still prefering the ground contact.

That image is a good example of how different every athlete seems to be, nothing like what I had imagined before the shoot.

Additionally, I'd like to shoot it from the side with multi flash but don't have a cable that would enable full ETTL control...
I like the ground contact too. I think you should go for a different lighting setup like you want to. ETTL isn't very important in repeatable shots like this. Dial in a good manual exposure, and get the light you want.

[jbergdoll]

Looks killer. I usually am turned off by a lot of strobed sports except for the extreme stuff (skating, BMX, inline etc), but you pulled this one off. rad.

[Simon Turkin]

Looks very good but the shadow is harsh.

[tkoutdoor]

If you do a google for "Carl Lewis" and look at the pics you'll find a lot of classic long jump shots. Some of the most interesting ones are from the side (and sequential) IMO. That's probably gonna mean a telephoto and AF tracking, but maybe not depending on what you have in mind. The apex of the jump just before they "unspring" so to speak always looks cool to me.

[barryvj171]

Shak, I think it is a very cool image anyway.... shows the action and the face, and would have been very difficult to make it better....

Barry.

[tkoutdoor]

I'm not suggesting the image isn't nice. The strobe has made the subject and the background balance and it looks pretty cool, but it's the opposite of graceful. Looking at other images will give any photographer other useful ideas. Capturing a graceful image will probably have more to do with getting an "in flight" image before impact, so it would be useful to see if there are other ideas that will look good to you. Carl Lewis is or was state of the art as long jump subject matter goes, you're guaranteed to find some good photos and good ideas by looking over his pics. If I were shooting a long jump pic I'd want to capture the moment that says, "I'm defying gravity" rather than capture the moment that says, "I have no choice but to come back to earth". ...Unless you're trying to show the grueling or "agony of defeat" side of it, in which case I'd focus on landings or any other difficult points like possibly the strain of lift off.

[Big K]

I think all the angles mentioned are good for long jump. My thought would be what is the intent of the photo? I find shots of the landing typically draw my eye to the feet and the flying sand and not as much on the face of the subject. Because of this, I think the landing shots make better action captures but the in flight shots with a clean sky background make for better portraits.

I don't think there is a right or wrong, just throwing out a slightly different perspective.

[shaktipalooza]

Wow, I never expected so much input on that photo. It was simply an outtake of a shot that didn't quite get there. My intent with such a photo is purely to sell the athlete, the images I was shooting that day were for an woman seeking representation by an athlete modeling agency.

Personally I think there's a lot of second guessing and naive assumptions on what would make a 'better' image. Capturing the athlete flying through the air would be one possibility. However, after capturing many frames of my subject in the air I decided that it would be more interesting to focus on the landing. As I stated earlier, the perception of graceful movement in this event has little to do with the actual motion that occurs. Googling the long jump confirms that other photographers have had the same issues.

Unless you're trying to show the grueling or "agony of defeat" side of it, in which case I'd focus on landings I don't think Sports Illustrated was trying to illustrate the 'agony of defeat' in the following shot.


http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/si_online/covers/images/1996/0805_large.jpg

It would also be difficult to say it's a graceful shot.

Longer lenses were encouraged in this thread. I suppose that's because 99% of the images out there are done with long lenses. That's because in large part, a photographer has no access to the pit during competition. I wanted something more intimate, her foot was about six inches from my leg when the shutter released.

This thread has been a good reminder that forums are often filled with critiques that are less than beneficial to creating one's own artistic vision. I know exactly what I'm after, and none of the critiques will have any bearing on that. When time allows we'll go out and reshoot.

Hopefully this doesn't come off as being oversensitive because I'm actually very thick skinned. This thread is just making me wonder out loud how many people get derailed on their vision when others keep adding differing opinions?

[tkoutdoor]

Wow, I never expected so much input on that photo. It was simply an outtake of a shot that didn't quite get there. My intent with such a photo is purely to sell the athlete, the images I was shooting that day were for an woman seeking representation by an athlete modeling agency.

Personally I think there's a lot of second guessing and naive assumptions on what would make a 'better' image. Capturing the athlete flying through the air would be one possibility. However, after capturing many frames of my subject in the air I decided that it would be more interesting to focus on the landing. As I stated earlier, the perception of graceful movement in this event has little to do with the actual motion that occurs. Googling the long jump confirms that other photographers have had the same issues.

I don't think Sports Illustrated was trying to illustrate the 'agony of defeat' in the following shot.

It would also be difficult to say it's a graceful shot.

Longer lenses were encouraged in this thread. I suppose that's because 99% of the images out there are done with long lenses. That's because in large part, a photographer has no access to the pit during competition. I wanted something more intimate, her foot was about six inches from my leg when the shutter released.

This thread has been a good reminder that forums are often filled with critiques that are less than beneficial to creating one's own artistic vision. I know exactly what I'm after, and none of the critiques will have any bearing on that. When time allows we'll go out and reshoot.

Hopefully this doesn't come off as being oversensitive because I'm actually very thick skinned. This thread is just making me wonder out loud how many people get derailed on their vision when others keep adding differing opinions?
No, but I'd say it qualifies as grueling though. Opposite of graceful as your stated objective. Carl had a way of making things look easy too. His running in the air style always impressed me. I liked to watch him. I'm not inclined to think that the average long jumper makes it look that good.

If your remarks are about my comments I'd say you are plenty sensitive. My remarks are loaded with caveats and deference to your own style and what photos you're trying to get. If you didn't want input, why are you here? You seem to be the one saying you haven't nailed it yet. Show us what it's like when you've nailed it. Always interested in good photography. I'm far less interested in personality issues.

[dshankar]

Other than what has already been said, one small note - clone out those red traffic lights in the background..

[4Bucks]

Shoot through a pane of glass to protect your lens... my two cents. Or, did you really not want any input?

???

[tkoutdoor]

Shoot through a pane of glass to protect your lens... my two cents. Or, did you really not want any input?

???That would make for a bad crash and burn as close as he is to the action! Maybe something like optical grade plastic, eh? :-) I'd say longer glass, but it's already been said. I like the effect he's getting though and how he's using the flash. It's making the feet look like clown shoes however. I think primarily because of the focal length and his proximity to the feet. A longer lens or somewhat different angle could help that. I'm not suggesting supertelephoto, just long enough to fix the issues. Still... If he gets something good, it'd be nice to see. For what it's worth I'd say that Carl Lewis cover looks like it's showing telephoto compression from a 200mm+ lens.