One quick NCAA hoops shot (Cleve St. v Milw)

[namasste]

Just one quick one since I have to edit still but the Vikes came close to blowing an 18 pt lead last night against a solid Milwaukee squad (who was actually playing without their top shooter). In the end, they pulled off the 70-61 victory. I thought I'd post one image just as something "different" from me since I seem to shoot hoops almost exclusively in portrait orientation. Tried a few landscape shots last night and kinda like the feel. Exif intact, but 1/500s f2.8 1600. Thoughts?

http://www.sephotos.net/img/v6/p879890378-5.jpg

[AdamLewis]

Nice moment.
Sometimes landscape works.

[nateut]

I like it! The horizontal orientation really compliments the action in the frame well.

I've also been trying to work more horizontal shots into my basketball shooting as it offers a unique view next to all the vertical shots you see, but have been focusing on using it primarily when the action is on the other side of the court. This is a great example of how to use it when the action is closer.

[namasste]

thanks guys. I find it pretty easy to get locked into one way of doing things and just stick with it. I have to force myself to change it up but I do think it makes us all more rounded shooters when we do. Glad you both liked.

[johndevane]

At first glance I thought it was too much wasted space to the left, but I held a piece of paper against my monitor to crop the shot vertically, cutting the picture at the left side of #55, and it looked worse to me. I think the shot needs his leg to give him that look of flying.

The thing I don't like is the main subect's face being dead center. The rule of 1/3's is not always a must for my eye, but this time I notice it.

What's impressive to me is how the colors pop. It almost looks strobed. Great PP.

Looking forward to more, you lazy one picture bum. :)

[hooday]

Hell- I must have been sitting right next to you Scott!

[namasste]

Hell- I must have been sitting right next to you Scott!
you'd almost think, huh?

[hooday]

One more. #55 in the background almost ran over me . PAINcake.

[namasste]

At first glance I thought it was too much wasted space to the left, but I held a piece of paper against my monitor to crop the shot vertically, cutting the picture at the left side of #55, and it looked worse to me. I think the shot needs his leg to give him that look of flying.

The thing I don't like is the main subect's face being dead center. The rule of 1/3's is not always a must for my eye, but this time I notice it.

What's impressive to me is how the colors pop. It almost looks strobed. Great PP.

Looking forward to more, you lazy one picture bum. :)
well ya, see, what I did was mentally strobe it. yeah, I just squeezed my eyes shut and concentrated real hard like and bam, it was like 4 Profotos just fired right then and there. On a side note, I had a headache later that I think might have been directly related to that so from now on, I'm leaving the mental strobes in the bag. FWIW, I set them to 1/2 pwr in my mind and no, I didn't use HSS, can you imagine the headache then??? :lol::lol:

Thanks though JD. I felt the same as you on the crop. Like I mentioned, shooting landscape was a change for sure so I suppose I need more practice to get it right. Thing is, I did need the foot in the shot and didn't want to crop the hoop or defenders hand. Just bad framing decision I guess but despite that problem, I still kinda like it.

[johndevane]

I knew you had secret powers. Why don't you mentally pop a new camera and a beer on my desk right now. Make it a MKIII and a PBR.

How much is your shot cropped from the bottom? Did you get his other foot by chance?

[namasste]

I knew you had secret powers. Why don't you mentally pop a new camera and a beer on my desk right now. Make it a MKIII and a PBR.

How much is your shot cropped from the bottom? Did you get his other foot by chance?
unfortunately no on the foot. one of the scourges of landscape from close with big guys.

PBR huh, I had no idea you were so snooty! :lol: Pegged you more as an Iron City kinda dude.

[AdamLewis]

Actually, after looking at it again, I would crop it to get him out of the center of the frame.

[namasste]

Actually, after looking at it again, I would crop it to get him out of the center of the frame.
I assume the left side up to the big man #55, right?

[AdamLewis]

I assume the left side up to the big man #55, right?

Yeah. Not all the way but close. No big deal losing the jumpers foot since the other one is already gone and it doesnt add much to the story.

[johndevane]

Yeah. Not all the way but close. No big deal losing the jumpers foot since the other one is already gone and it doesnt add much to the story.

Not for me, I need the foot to be in there. Just leave it be as is. That's just me though, humbly. Like I said earlier, the foot helps to make him look like he's flying.

[hooday]

I am new to this forum and did not know the proper rules for posting images in a thread I did not start. I apologize for doing this and if I offended anyone-sorry. Scott is a dear friend I want you all to know I would never do anything to offend him or to upset him. I hope you all are understanding. I have the upmost respect for everyone on this forum and look forward to learning and sharing info with all. Thanks for your understanding.

[namasste]

I am new to this forum and did not know the proper rules for posting images in a thread I did not start. I apologize for doing this and if I offended anyone-sorry. Scott is a dear friend I want you all to know I would never do anything to offend him or to upset him. I hope you all are understanding. I have the upmost respect for everyone on this forum and look forward to learning and sharing info with all. Thanks for your understanding.
all good.

[richbindians]

Hey Scott,

I agree, I really like the framing, the right foot makes the shot. I like how it draws the eye from the bottom left to the top right of the shot. Beautiful example of using landscape for action that usually lends itself more to portrait orientation! As always, looking forward to seeing the rest of your stuff from that night.

Also, for those wondering - Yes, #55 is as BIG (or BIGGER) than he looks! He is listed on the roster as 6'7", 310 lbs. But, as Scott can tell you, he moves, shoots, and plays almost like a guard.

Anyway, great stuff as always, Scott. Take care of that ankle.

Rich B.

[Dan-o]

Don't crop the foot. I think this is prob. my favorite of the season Scott. I love the way landscapes display on the screen compared to portrait which we seem to shoot a lot more of.

Don't worry about it hooday I did it also in the beginning and got shouted down for it.

[namasste]

Don't crop the foot. I think this is prob. my favorite of the season Scott. I love the way landscapes display on the screen compared to portrait which we seem to shoot a lot more of.

Don't worry about it hooday I did it also in the beginning and got shouted down for it.thanks Dan, appreciate that.

Rich, likewise, thanks. I won't see you there today as I am going to do my best to be romantic for V-Day. Try as I might to convince her, my wife just can't get how seeing me sitting baseline amidst a group of 18-20 year old cheerleaders shooting hoops is a great date. Women! See you on the 18th.

[Sauk]

scott,

I like the use of landscape on this one. I find myself trying to use more landscape shots. One reason is for digital downloads I am offering now. Landscape would be better for people who purchase to put it on their monitors.

Scott the first image looks like it was a touch to aggressive with the noise reduction. Can you post the original? Or one that is not as aggressive?

[namasste]

scott,

I like the use of landscape on this one. I find myself trying to use more landscape shots. One reason is for digital downloads I am offering now. Landscape would be better for people who purchase to put it on their monitors.

Scott the first image looks like it was a touch to aggressive with the noise reduction. Can you post the original? Or one that is not as aggressive?Thanks Matt, I appreciate the feedback. I'll post one with no NR after I process some other stuff form the past few days. Oddly, I ran these in Noise Ninja at only -3/-12 and nothing in the color channels. Tough to actually use NR at a lower level. Part may be the big man's skin since, well, he's a big man and there was almost no definition at all going on there. Think that's what you might be seeing? I ask just b/c my NR settings were really low (and nothing in camera as I turn it off)

[AdamLewis]

Thanks Matt, I appreciate the feedback. I'll post one with no NR after I process some other stuff form the past few days. Oddly, I ran these in Noise Ninja at only -3/-12 and nothing in the color channels. Tough to actually use NR at a lower level. Part may be the big man's skin since, well, he's a big man and there was almost no definition at all going on there. Think that's what you might be seeing? I ask just b/c my NR settings were really low (and nothing in camera as I turn it off)

Nothing on the color channels? Do you only run NR on the luminance channel?

[namasste]

Nothing on the color channels? Do you only run NR on the luminance channel?
I'll confess, I don't actually understand NR on the color channels so I don't do anything with them. Do you find that using a combination of the two works better? If so, what am I really looking for to see the levels of color NR being performed (if that makes any sense?). Basically, how do you go about adjusting those?

[AdamLewis]

I'll confess, I don't actually understand NR on the color channels so I don't do anything with them. Do you find that using a combination of the two works better? If so, what am I really looking for to see the levels of color NR being performed (if that makes any sense?). Basically, how do you go about adjusting those?

Reducing chrominance noise gets rids of the red/blue splotchiness that high ISO images have.

Reducing luminance noise gets rid of the grain that high ISO images have.

Generally speaking, NR on the chroma channel is more subtle than NR on the lumi channel. Reducing too much on the lumi channel leaves images looking like plastic.

Generally, I only reduce on chroma channels and if something is terribly grainy, Ill start to mess with luminance channels.

[namasste]

Reducing chrominance noise gets rids of the red/blue splotchiness that high ISO images have.

Reducing luminance noise gets rid of the grain that high ISO images have.

Generally speaking, NR on the chroma channel is more subtle than NR on the lumi channel. Reducing too much on the lumi channel leaves images looking like plastic.

Generally, I only reduce on chroma channels and if something is terribly grainy, Ill start to mess with luminance channels.thanks. I know you have a higher tolerance than I do for noise so perhaps I need to just find a happy medium between.

[Sauk]

Scott,

I have not applied noise reduction to an image in a long time. I have learned to like the look of noise these days. And plus if you ever print out the image you will never see it unless you're doing 16x20 and larger

[namasste]

Scott,

I have not applied noise reduction to an image in a long time. I have learned to like the look of noise these days. And plus if you ever print out the image you will never see it unless you're doing 16x20 and larger
thanks for the advice Matt. That's interesting to know and I think I'll try to use a good bit less or none for a bit and see how things go. I did post the image you asked about (this thread) in my other CSU v Milwaukee thread but with no NR at all. If you have a second, I'd love to hear what you think.