Bikinis!

[drisley]

Ok, Ok, I must admit that title was to get your attention ;)
Anyway, I had the privelage to attend the National Fitness & Figure competitions this weekend, and had primo seats for my 20D and lenses. Unfortunately, I was actually too close (row 3) to use my 85 or 135 lenses. Luckily there was room about 8 rows back and off to the side in some temporary seating. This was almost perfect for the 135/2L.
Apparently lighting was turned up especially high for this event, so I was able to get almost the same great speeds as I did last month at the novice event (different venue, better lighting).
There were SO many photographers there, amateur, and professional. I saw atleast 2 amateurs approach the judging team and ask if they needed somebody to take pictures for their website. Both were turned down. I also talked to a couple other people taking pictures including one guy from a photo school who was pumped because he was going to "take pictures that blow the rest away!" He was using a DRebel and a 17-40L which really didnt seem appropriate for the work if you ask me. However, he seemed like a very knowledgeable and talented photographer, so he may have been right.

Anyway, the entire gallery can be seen here (http://www.fotop.net/sharpnsmart/fitness2005).

Btw, you may notice a small watermark I've added. I have run into quite a few people who have told me they knew people who were downloading and printing these tiny web images, so I figured it was time for a watermark. I hope it's still unobtrusive...

135.0mm, f/2.2, 0.0020 s (1/500), iso1600
http://images2.fotop.net/albums/sharpnsmart/fitness2005/IMG_7982.jpg

135.0mm, f/2.5, 0.0008 s (1/1250), iso1600
http://images2.fotop.net/albums/sharpnsmart/fitness2005/IMG_8026.jpg

135.0mm, f/2.5, 0.0003 s (1/3200), iso3200
http://images2.fotop.net/albums/sharpnsmart/fitness2005/IMG_8138.jpg

135.0mm, f/2.2, 0.0010 s (1/1000), iso3200
http://images2.fotop.net/albums/sharpnsmart/fitness2005/IMG_8226.jpg

135.0mm, f/2.5, 0.0012 s (1/800), iso1600
http://images2.fotop.net/albums/sharpnsmart/fitness2005/IMG_8273.jpg

[sixshot]

Not to be messed with hey.....Good shots.

[charlesu]

I agree. Good shots!

[pehabe]

wow... #3 and #4 were taken in iso3200... did you use neat image or so?
they are so cleeean. no noise and sharp!
thanks for sharing

[RI Xterra]

Nice captures on them all...

[AngelaS]

Way cool shots!

[kduncan80]

Great job of catching the Flip!!

[cfcRebel]

Wow, i am totally surprised (pleasantly) by the high ISO & low noise results. Nice pics, drisley!

[markubig]

Great shots, Dris . . . did u use any noise reduction on these?

[Dante King]

Looks like the event was a blast. Great job!

[bigrob]

Great shots but those girls frighten the life out of me.

[chris.bailey]

Great shots. I bet none of them have to ask hubby to open jars for them :-)

[Andy_T]

Great shots but those girls frighten the life out of me.

Make that Lil'rob, then :wink:

I like danger :)
Thanks for sharing ... post some more!

Best regards,
Andy

[Benuch]

Who won????

[bigrob]

Make that Lil'rob, then :wink:

You'd be dead right on that one if they got their kit off in front of me. :D

[RbrtPtikLeoSeny]

Ooooommmggggg!!!!! Those woman are jacked! Takes a lot of work to look like that especially as a woman. I'm a teen body builder and those woman are more ripped than me. That's so crazy. Anyway GREAT shots! Those are absolutely fantastic. The photos are so sharp. Keep up the great work!

[huminuh83]

I could take them on eeeeaaaasy ::runs in closest bush and shudders::

[drisley]

Thanks for all the great comments people! Very nice of you!
Yes, ISO3200 and ISO1600 on the 20D are superb. I never hesitate to use them.
The only time I used noise reduction is on a few images that were severly underexposed, and even then I only used Ninja at a very low level (50% below normal). Honestly though, if I posted a comparison at web size of a before and after ninja, you would be hard pressed to tell a diff.

RbrtPrikLeoSeny, today's fitness and figure competitors are more ripped and often more muscular than most female bodybuilders. I think the main reason is genetics. The women in these contests already have great physiques, and could win bikini competitions without even trying. But then you add in the hard work, diet, and yes, sometimes certain "questionable" substances, these girls become truly spectacular.
Dante, the event was indeed a blast. But I have to say that the show didnt quite have the energy of some of the past bb shows I've been to. Probably could be because there was less local talent in this event.

[froman98]

Great shots! I find the women very intimidating as each one could probably kick my ass without breaking a sweat. Somehow, that has a tiny bit of appeal! ;)

[drisley]

Great shots! I find the women very intimidating as each one could probably kick my ass without breaking a sweat. Somehow, that has a tiny bit of appeal! ;)
I agree ;)
For the most part, in person, these girls are very petite. It's just the lighting, tan, and low bodyfat that give the illusion they are huge.

[drisley]

Good news. The local bodybuilding federation is using the last picture above on the main page of their website. No money, but I'm still very happy they chose it.

[Raj]

Congrats Drisley ! pics were well shot & deserving.



Good news. The local bodybuilding federation is using the last picture above on the main page of their website. No money, but I'm still very happy they chose it.

[smudge]

Great photos. Don't dig the bods though. Give me a fleshy soft woman any day.

[drisley]

Great photos. Don't dig the bods though. Give me a fleshy soft woman any day.
Thanks Raj and Smudge :)

[Michaelmjc]

They look pretty strong but I doubt it, they're girls!;) haha ok I was kidding, I would run as fast as I could away from them, they'd snap me in half.

Great shots!

[drisley]

IMHO, Fitness and Figure girls are god's greatest creation! :)

[nat869]

I agree ;)
For the most part, in person, these girls are very petite. It's just the lighting, tan, and low bodyfat that give the illusion they are huge.

Exactly!!! Most of these women are really petite, dress sizes 0-3 I would guess. Most have small joints and sexy sweeping muscles so they just look big. It is a great look!!! I agree......the figure/fitness women have reenergized the sport, they used to look like that when Rachel McLish hit the scene in the early 80's. I have been a fan ever since.

Drisley, as usual you produce the best contest shots of anyone out there. I wish I had the problem of being too close to the action!!!! The physiques are really impressive, as they should be, being a pro qualifier. Samantha was really impressed too, seeing great pics always energizes her. I will get to shoot at the NPC Contra Costa on May 14th. I am in the 9th row, but it is an isle seat so at least I can move around easy. Once again, great job!!!!, also I think you produce the best high iso pics around.

[schmoelzel]

Excellent! Super sharp which I love and contrast is to die for!! Really nice composition as well......

[drisley]

Thanks nat869 and schmoelzel!
Nat, I knew you would back me up about these amazing athletes ;)
I saw a Penn & Teller show last nite about "Excercise vs Genetics" which really tells alot about how these competitors can look so good... lots of hard work, and excellent genetics.
I look forward to your pictures from the NPC! 9th Row would be perfect for the 135, as long as it was steep enough to keep people's heads out of the way!

Schmoelzel, the lighting really helped the contrast alot. I actually had to turn down saturation a bit, and keep post processing to a minimum since the lighting and skin tone were so perfect.
Also, since rooibos has no caffiene, all shots were hand-held ;)

[HJMinard]

Fantastic shots, drisley ... I'm not into that type of woman (at all), but your photographs are really well done.

Edit: Congrats on the website selecting your image!!

Give me a fleshy soft woman any day

Me too ... soft and feminine (I don't think fleshy is the word I'd use, though ;) )

IMHO, Fitness and Figure girls are god's greatest creation!

I think I'd give most of the credit to Balco ... :)

[G2Jim]

I may be old fashioned, but I feel they are too skinny and too defined to be sexy, attractive, or feminine. My opinion is why waste the time and effort to look like a freak?

Great photos though!

[drisley]

Thanks HJM and G2JIm.
Again I agree to disagree. These girls are feminine and sexy as heck!
But, it seems NAt and I are in the minority. I honestly cant wrap my brain around how these girls are anything but sexy. The funny thing is when most men see them walking down the street, their jaws drop. But when they see these pictures, they seem to get grossed out.

[rssfhs]

Technically and artistically perfect shots! Just one question: Why are those guys all wearing bikinis like that?

[drisley]

Technically and artistically perfect shots! Just one question: Why are those guys all wearing bikinis like that?
:evil:

[rssfhs]

:evil:

What's with the evil bit? I was complimenting you. :-/

[drisley]

Sorry, I forgot to say thanks for the compliment too.

[Wazza]

heh, these posts are amusing.

Great work as usual, Drisley. :)

Shows true dedication from the performers as well, to maintain their rigorous fitness regime. There's a few woman that fit at the big gym I belong too. Just I don't look that toned. LOL

ISO 1600 and 3200 is amazing. I haven't had the chance to use it that often, but it's been pretty decent when I have used it. :)

[mr.photoguy]

#2 just made me loose my breath... ohh my gosh she is gorgeous... I would sooooo date her.

I like the composition of all the others, I think you did great. #1 I don't like the subject (which has nothing to do with the photo you took) I just think she looks deflated, but #2.. my gosh I can't shut up about her.

[drisley]

Thanks Wazza! Very nice of you. I would say that for some of them to be that toned, they must be using some sort of "herbal" concoctions. For others, it is due to diet, and genetics.
I never hesitate using ISO1600 or even ISO3200 anymore.

Mr. Photoguy, I'm glad you liked her. If I get to meet her at a future competition, would you like me to pass on your email addy?
Oh, just for you, here is another, much BIGGER picture of her (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/20d/IMG_8020.jpg).
Enjoy! :)

[mr.photoguy]

Sure why not hehehe...
The detail in her muscles are excelent, down to her tatoo on her stomach. Legs, and arms are excellent. I think you did a great job, and that 135 f2L is making me nuts.. lol...

[nat869]

Thanks HJM and G2JIm.
Again I agree to disagree. These girls are feminine and sexy as heck!
But, it seems NAt and I are in the minority. I honestly cant wrap my brain around how these girls are anything but sexy. The funny thing is when most men see them walking down the street, their jaws drop. But when they see these pictures, they seem to get grossed out.

Reality is, these women probably range in the 6.5-8% bodyfat range. It is really only realistic to attain that for a contest. Most of the time I bet they are in the 9-11% bodyfat range. That makes a big difference in how you look just walking around, so Drisley is right, most of you would go nuts to see them on the street.

Drisley, thanks for posting the large image for mr.photoguy, she is indeed gorgeous and pretty perfectly put together!!

[Mills]

Talk about Fit! Nice series!

[HJMinard]

Reality is, these women probably range in the 6.5-8% bodyfat range. It is really only realistic to attain that for a contest. Most of the time I bet they are in the 9-11% bodyfat range. That makes a big difference in how you look just walking around, so Drisley is right, most of you would go nuts to see them on the street.

Drisley, thanks for posting the large image for mr.photoguy, she is indeed gorgeous and pretty perfectly put together!!

I'm certain they work very, very hard. But reality also is ... many of them are at the same time abusing their bodies with steroids. It bothers me that this is ignored - or worse, accepted. I'm sure they're not all doing it, but I will quite directly call you naive or a liar if you say that it's not a common practice amongst these women.

I'm not trying to flame anyone, and I certainly don't want to detract from drisley's wonderful, professional images ... but I think if you're going to praise their looks, work ethic and other positive traits, then the negative reality should be made public, too.

[nat869]

I'm certain they work very, very hard. But reality also is ... many of them are at the same time abusing their bodies with steroids. It bothers me that this is ignored - or worse, accepted. I'm sure they're not all doing it, but I will quite directly call you naive or a liar if you say that it's not a common practice amongst these women.

I'm not trying to flame anyone, and I certainly don't want to detract from drisley's wonderful, professional images ... but I think if you're going to praise their looks, work ethic and other positive traits, then the negative reality should be made public, too.

I would never be so naive as to say steroids were not involved. There are 3 distinct classes of women who compete, bodybuilders, fitness and figure. I would guess that most every female bodybuilder abuses steroids. It becomes more of a gray area in fitness and figure. The women in these two classes do use drugs, but there are quite a few that do not. One of the criteria I have noticed for judges, in SOME contests, is beauty. Women who abuse steroids lose their feminine look, especially in the face, and some judges are penalizing them for it. Perhaps I should have qualified my original post with ....... most of you would go nuts to see them on the street, provided she was a non-steroid using competitor..........Honestly, I know first hand, there are plenty of these types.

Drisley, I saw some other pics from a guy who runs a pay site and is constantly attending shows. I know him, he always has big white lenses on his 1D MKII.......his pics are good, but yours seemed to have better color saturation and contrast.

[HJMinard]

Women who abuse steroids lose their feminine look, especially in the face,

... and many - you could even say most - of the women in drisley's images have that semi-masculine look to their faces ... which is part of the reason many of us don't find them attractive.

Perhaps I should have qualified my original post with ....... most of you would go nuts to see them on the street, provided she was a non-steroid using competitor..........Honestly, I know first hand, there are plenty of these types.

I don't think there was any need to qualify your remarks. I felt kind of bad about my post (after I posted it :( ) but it's a subject that bothers me - especially with the whole baseball fiasco ... not to mention the story I just read in the paper about high school, and even pre-high school girls doing steroids purely for aesthetic reasons. It's frightening to me - how vain human beings can be ...

Drisley ... I'm very sorry for hijacking your thread ... I'll leave it alone now. Congrats on the outstanding, very professional images!

[drisley]

Drisley, I saw some other pics from a guy who runs a pay site and is constantly attending shows. I know him, he always has big white lenses on his 1D MKII.......his pics are good, but yours seemed to have better color saturation and contrast.

Thanks Nat869. That's nice of you to say. Helps my confidence. Perhaps I should start a pay site and travel the country :lol:

As far as steroids go, I already mentioned a couple times in this thread that some use "questionable substances". Although, I have to emphasize "some". The majority just have great genetics, work hard, and diet strictly. In the fitness and figure competitors, those that use these substances generally are taking them to get lean, not create huge muscles. The ones that do will never win because they look to masculine and muscular and are penalized.

HJM, I honestly can only find 1 or 2 in my images that have a semi masculine look to their face. Don't worry about hijacking the thread at all. I actually like discussing this. The president of my local amateur bodybuilding federation has talked with me many times about the "juicing" that can go on, and it just drives him crazy. As a competitor himself, he just can't compete against these "juicers". I have a feeling though that the times are changing, and more stringent rules are being put in place all the time.

[markubig]

The ones that do will never win because they look to masculine and muscular and are penalized. Women with voices deeper than mine and chests hairier than mine (i have none) are also fishy . . . hehe http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gifhttp://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gifhttp://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif

[drisley]

Women with voices deeper than mine and chests hairier than mine (i have none) are also fishy . . . hehe http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gifhttp://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gifhttp://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif
Yeah, the voice is a dead giveaway!, and that does in fact turn me off.

Btw, here is a fitness competitor who is currently not in contest shape.
I think she would turn many heads walking down the street.


http://images2.fotop.net/albums/sharpnsmart/fitness2005/IMG_8006.jpg

[Jon Foster]

Wow! Those shots are perfect! Your making me think my 300D and lowly assortment of lenses aren't worth the effort to lug them around! I can't believe how sharp and noise free they are at ISO 1600 and 3200!

Jon.

[drisley]

Thanks Jon,
The 300D produces very good high ISO images too. The thing is you can't really judge by a viewing 100% in Photoshop. That is not a good method. What counts is the output ( ie, web size and print).
I've printed ISO1600 shots from the 300D that look amazing. In fact, any Canon DSLR will blow away any film camera when it comes to noise. When you need it, the latest noise reduction software does wonders. I only use it if I underexpose a high ISO shot too much, and occasionally for ISO3200. The trick is to not overdo it, or the result will look plastic-y. I always turn down the noise reduction to about half or lower. A little noise can be a good thing (makes the image look sharper).
And, your kit lens is actually a very good wide angle, and the 50/1.4 is better than the one I have. It's just your tele-zoom that could be improved to maybe a 70-200L :)

[roanjohn]

WOW!!! GReat dynamic shots!!! That 135 is a winner!!! It's such a winner that it dictated your seat location :-)!!!

And those ISO 1600 and 3200 shots are STUNNING!!! .....makes me miss my 20D a bit :-(

Ro1

[cdhender]

I definitely need to pick up that 135. By the end of the year for sure. Maybe a nice Xmas present.

[nat869]

Thanks Nat869. That's nice of you to say. Helps my confidence. Perhaps I should start a pay site and travel the country :lol:

As far as steroids go, I already mentioned a couple times in this thread that some use "questionable substances". Although, I have to emphasize "some". The majority just have great genetics, work hard, and diet strictly. In the fitness and figure competitors, those that use these substances generally are taking them to get lean, not create huge muscles. The ones that do will never win because they look to masculine and muscular and are penalized.

HJM, I honestly can only find 1 or 2 in my images that have a semi masculine look to their face. Don't worry about hijacking the thread at all. I actually like discussing this. The president of my local amateur bodybuilding federation has talked with me many times about the "juicing" that can go on, and it just drives him crazy. As a competitor himself, he just can't compete against these "juicers". I have a feeling though that the times are changing, and more stringent rules are being put in place all the time.

Pretty much dead on. The IFBB (the official PRO sanctioning organization) has asked to see a reduction in the amount of muscle on female competitiors, presumably in an effort to make them more appealing to mainstream folks.

HJM, no worries here, I find the same things as you abhorrent. Since I have a 5 year old son and he sees his mom (my wife) compete nationally, it is very important to both of us that he knows being healthy is a lot more important than just having muscle mass. I could rant all day about my disgust for pro sports..........some other time.

Perhaps what is seen as semi-masculine is just the hard look they get from having no fat to soften their facial features. This is always temporary. When I see pics of Samantha (wife) on stage and then the pics I take in the studio of her.......wow what a difference. I can see why people insist she must be on juice, when in fact she is 100% natural. Never even taken ephedra. Anyway, just my eternal $.02 on the subject.

[nat869]

I definitely need to pick up that 135. By the end of the year for sure. Maybe a nice Xmas present.

Ditto!!! Christmas might be just about the time I could convince anyone I need more camera gear.........LOL.

[drisley]

WOW!!! GReat dynamic shots!!! That 135 is a winner!!! It's such a winner that it dictated your seat location :-)!!!
And those ISO 1600 and 3200 shots are STUNNING!!! .....makes me miss my 20D a bit :-(
Ro1
Haha, that is too funny. Definately a case of the tail wagging the dog, eh?
Btw, where is your 20D?

Nat, I agree with everything you said.
Btw, it is VERY impressive how Samantha can get so ripped and muscular and be clean. She is a perfect example that drugs are not needed, just hard work (and I guess good genes too ;))

[roanjohn]

Haha, that is too funny. Definately a case of the tail wagging the dog, eh?
Btw, where is your 20D?



:( :( :( :oops: It took a dive in the ocean..............

Ro1

[Andy_T]

WOW!!! GReat dynamic shots!!! That 135 is a winner!!! It's such a winner that it dictated your seat location :-)!!!


So .... what if next time all seats are taken and you can't move:shock:

Better have a look at that 85/1.2 as well :wink:

Best regards,
Andy

PS: And please please please post some more pictures :p

[drisley]

Andy, I have the 85/1.8 which would be much more suited to this than the 85/1.2 because of it's slow autofocus.
I also have the 50/1.8II, however, I would rather not use it due to it's slower AF. That 50/1.4 USM may be calling my name ;)
Then again, I would rather not have to use such a short lens. I like using a longer lens to give shallower dof.

Here are a couple more for you:

1/1000, F2.2, ISO3200
http://images2.fotop.net/albums/sharpnsmart/fitness2005/IMG_7970.jpg

1/3200, F2.5, ISO3200
http://images2.fotop.net/albums/sharpnsmart/fitness2005/IMG_8133.jpg

1/1600, F2.5, ISO3200 - OUCH!
http://images2.fotop.net/albums/sharpnsmart/fitness2005/IMG_8167.jpg

1/1200, F2.2, ISO1600
http://images2.fotop.net/albums/sharpnsmart/fitness2005/IMG_7991.jpg

[tim]

URGH, my eyes, my eyes!