MUCH BETTER!!!!!

[QUASIPHOTO]

THANKS FOR ALL THE HELP EVERYONE!!!!!!!
I think these came out much better.....still need some tweaking.......but MUCH better.
Thanks again for all you imput and help.
Pls feel free to still give me comments and help......I'll always try what you say and suggest. Here are a few more pics from today.

[QUASIPHOTO]

more pics

[QUASIPHOTO]

one more

[triangle]

Nice shots, what settings and lens were you using?

[Huckaback Photo]

Jeff
Having helped you get your first image up on here, I'm still watching you, (in the nicest posible way of course)
pic no 1,2 & 4 would benefit from some levels adjustment in PS.
don't forget its pos to adjust only shadow...or only midtones...or only highlights.
also when using the levels pallette note there are 3 colour pickers to use try them, find the max black (preferably with some detail left and click the black colour picker on that spot, or same with white etc. sometimes this works good and will calibrate the image around that source point.
if you think of the midtone picker as sellecting mid grey (ie. 18% grey Kodak grey card).
look at your picture and decide whats a good midtone and work with that point, close to mid grey would skin tone or even a paving slab, in fact just look at the girls socks in the last shot.
Vary basic info..... all camera meters are set to read 18% grey, meter off a grey card and its a good basis for expossure...so this can also be used with the printing or indeed the software.
Years ago I would often shoot a set up indoors and the first frame had the grey card in the shot for callibration reasons, when printed you knew axactly what shade had to be reproduced a sort of
control panel if you like.

All good shots with 3 & 4 my favorites well done.

Martin (Huckaback Photo)
my Gallery
http://www.pbase.com/huckaback_photo
Just thought ,it may well suit you to look at a gallery for your images on PBase, you can then show all on here large higher quallity pics.

[kenyc]

Yep, #4 great shot, but the runner is safe. :)

KAC

[QUASIPHOTO]

Nice shots, what settings and lens were you using?

these shots were taken in the early afternoon around 2:00pm.....canon 70-200 f2.8 L IS, wide open, Av priority....so I'm not exaclty sure what the shutter speed was, but it was pretty high (can someone tell me how to get the EXIF file). This particular field is horrilbe for shooting (6ft fence all the way around it, and only one opening in the dugouts is at the furtherest point away). So some of these shots were taken from the "stands". I had to stand up on like the 3rd row to get over the fence. If you notice in the first pic, the dark shadow at the bottom of the pic, that is the fence. That shot hasnt been cropped and just used the "quick fix" adjustments on it before posting.
I havent done much to these photos.......I was WAY too excited to get the focusing thing dialed in. I just wanted to post them and say LOOK.....what you told me works.

[QUASIPHOTO]

Martin,
I owe you tons.......you've been such a great help!!! I know I have to work on that PS stuff....(that's going to be a handfull). I'm just so happy I got the focusing thing halfway figured out now. Now its not so frustrating to have the place where I wanted focused out of focus. So now........its on to getting the best shot and making them look the best in PS. Can I do most of the fixing in Elements 2, or am I going to have to move up to the full PS version?
Just keep the critiques coming....I can use all the help I can get. Is that Pbase a free site to put your pics on? ( thing is though, I dont have anything really worth posting as of yet......soon though ;) )
One thing if for sure though.......the larger files look much better.

[QUASIPHOTO]

thanks Ken.......hopefully we'll be able to see each other in Colo.
I dont know exaclty where we will be playing though. Ken there is a post explaning the AI Servo stuff and the focusing. I'll get it too ya.

[kenyc]

As far as the EXIF data, you can see it using the EOS viewer or the DPP software that should have come with your camera. It's also available (some of it anyway) in Photoshop under file-info.

Where you'll be playing is not far from where I work, so I may get a chance to stop and compare lenses. :)

KAC

[QUASIPHOTO]

Compare lenses????......hmmmm......I dont know if my ego can take it. LOL
You know what they say.......its not the camera....its the size of the lense that matters ;) .

[Croasdail]

To get the exit info for any image is quit easy. Let take one of your here for example. Just go up to image hit1 - right click on it - select "save image as...." then go to file browser - select the file - right click on it - then select "properties" - then select summary tab.... this will give you all your exif info... and the info for most any other image here. You can also see this easily in PhotoShop Elements in the image Browser - high light the image and then over in the left had corner in the browser in a box is all the exit info. By the way you were shooting ISO 100, f2.8, at 1/2500 - plenty fast enough. You are still cropping these alot - next time out try to fill the frame with the action - you'll get it and will be a lot happier with the results. You were at 200 mm this time - so that is good. If you like to shoot this type of material - eventually you may want to invest in a 1.4 teleconverter to give yourself a little more reach.

cheers.

[Huckaback Photo]

Jeff
If your pictures are in a folder, say the my pictures folder .
just right click the thumbnail and select properties..when the properties box is on screen then sellect general ...click on advanced or simple depending what you want..and there you should have all the exif data for that image.
when open in PS go...file....file info....from the drop down box choose...exif and all the data is there.
now say i edit another of your shots from here Going back to one i edited...i can right click the image..save as...open in PS and then check the exif data, now this is really usefull as others can then advise about the settings you used on that shot. there are other ways in fact i think a special program can just get the exif. i dont use that.
just checkedyour shot Hit 1
exif reads..eos 20D .....1/2500....f2.8.....200mm....ISO 100....etc.
the date is curious it shows 18/07/2005
check to se if your date is set up on the camera correctly cos i think were in the 6th month.
Pbase is about $24 a year .
best wishes
Martin

[blinking8s]

well, some suggestions...from my softball experiences (not many, but some)

I usually avoid WIDE open unless im shooting right down the baseline, DOF is pretty darn tight, and f4 will give you enough blur for the bg at 200mm focal length. At least I think so...2.8 is so tight, its hard to keep 2 people in motion in focus when you have a tight shot

you are on iso 100 @ around 1/4000...pretty darn fast, id knock the iso up a setting and close it just a bit for deeper dof. Your going to freeze everything other than the threads on the ball and bat near that speed...

lots of action going on, thats good, I never got multiple sliding shots in a day, my favorite places to shoot from are:
- behind home plate aiming at the pitcher, they show a lot of emotion, i prefocus and use M for these
- home plate up the baseline at third, when bases are loaded and/or a run is about to be scored, usually Ai Servo and Av settings
- 1st baseline dugout (usually on top) at home
- 3rd base dugout, at home, covering 2nd, and runners coming into 3rd

thats about the extent I feel good with at 200mm though...i really needed a 300mm to cover 2nd base with ease, but I haded checking out the nikon gear at work.

Also, anticipate the play, you CANT cover the whole field with a 70-200 and get top notch shots, you have to know whats going down, and setup for it...the quality in what shots you will get will be a greater ratio this way.

[QUASIPHOTO]

thanks again and again Croasdial.....very helpful. I know, about the 1.4x......I think this next week I'm getting one of those for sure. That first shot....was like "buck fever"
it was the tail end of a double play that started at first base then over to 3rd. I forgot to unzoom (it all happened to quick). I liked the expression on the girls face getting tagged out thats why I posted it. Practice....practice.....practice. And everyones help, comments and advice is just making me more excited to get out there and shoot and try harder to get better.

[Huckaback Photo]

While typing out my reply looks like Croasdail put up similar reply, oh well you cant get to much of a good thing.
interestingly i had also thought about the 1.4 extender but did not post it.
He is spot on with that and woul be a good investment for the type of shots you do.
I actually use both D60 and 1D mk 2. my 1.4 extender works real well behind the 100 to 400 L is
and also use it with my 200mm f2.8 that gives me a 300mm f4.
the longer focal length will also throw the background more out of focus.

Martin

[Croasdail]

and as much as it pains me to do this.... you can also pump up the images by adding some "UpSharp Masking". If you haven't found it yet - in PhotoShop Elements it is located under Filter->Sharpen->Upsharp Mask. Use it to make the contrast lines really pop - just dont over do it as it will make any strong contrast line pop as well - like dirt, grass, etc. And too much will make the image look really un-natural. But play with it - you will be able to give your shots some extra punch.

I raced the USM up on one of your image just so you can get an idea of how it helps. This was a very quick and dirt job just to show you the differnce... it is by no means done right. That takes time and patience to get it right. Have some fun with it....

[QUASIPHOTO]

well, some suggestions...from my softball experiences (not many, but some)

I usually avoid WIDE open unless im shooting right down the baseline, DOF is pretty darn tight, and f4 will give you enough blur for the bg at 200mm focal length. At least I think so...2.8 is so tight, its hard to keep 2 people in motion in focus when you have a tight shot

you are on iso 100 @ around 1/4000...pretty darn fast, id knock the iso up a setting and close it just a bit for deeper dof. Your going to freeze everything other than the threads on the ball and bat near that speed...

lots of action going on, thats good, I never got multiple sliding shots in a day, my favorite places to shoot from are:
- behind home plate aiming at the pitcher, they show a lot of emotion, i prefocus and use M for these
- home plate up the baseline at third, when bases are loaded and/or a run is about to be scored, usually Ai Servo and Av settings
- 1st baseline dugout (usually on top) at home
- 3rd base dugout, at home, covering 2nd, and runners coming into 3rd

thats about the extent I feel good with at 200mm though...i really needed a 300mm to cover 2nd base with ease, but I haded checking out the nikon gear at work.

Also, anticipate the play, you CANT cover the whole field with a 70-200 and get top notch shots, you have to know whats going down, and setup for it...the quality in what shots you will get will be a greater ratio this way.

Thanks blinking8s.......those are the things I have to work on now for sure!! I'm going to print all this out and read and re-read all this info till it sinks in. I sure appreciate all the help from all of you with all the experience. I just marvel at you expericenced ppls shots......I'm in awe most of the time. There is nothing cooler than one of those "perfect moment" shots that you guys create.

[QUASIPHOTO]

and as much as it pains me to do this.... you can also pump up the images by adding some "UpSharp Masking". If you haven't found it yet - in PhotoShop Elements it is located under Filter->Sharpen->Upsharp Mask. Use it to make the contrast lines really pop - just dont over do it as it will make any strong contrast line pop as well - like dirt, grass, etc. And too much will make the image look really un-natural. But play with it - you will be able to give your shots some extra punch.

I raced the USM up on one of your image just so you can get an idea of how it helps. This was a very quick and dirt job just to show you the differnce... it is by no means done right. That takes time and patience to get it right. Have some fun with it....

Oh OK.......I kind of tried that before.......but since I dont have a clue as to what I'm doing.....I didnt see much of a difference. I'll just have to play with all this stuff.
But I can see how what you did.....made it a bit sharper. I have just hit Unmask before.
Is that what your taking about?.......and what if you do sharpening instead?

[blinking8s]

be sure to grab some stills too, looking out of the dugout, emotion, high-fives, thats a big part of sports photography as well...generally makes a sports photo set a lot more interesting, showing character of the players and intense concentraion, joy, celebration ect.

keep it yup though, now you;re on the right track it should be a cakewalk from here on out...

college world series just finished didnt it? id dig up some photos from there and write down what shots you might want to try, postion, ect...often helped me out a lot

[Croasdail]

Sharpening is a hammer... it will take any contrast line and jump the difference between the two... and the image degrades pretty fast. UpSharp Mask will open a dialog box with 3 sliders. The nice thing is you got live preview of what you are doing. the main slider is "amount" - I generally don't like to go higher the 75% - but have gone to extremes before. Radius I usually keep below 1 - it is the area impacted by the change and too much of this will give you thick lines. I haven't totally figured out what how to use "threshold" yet - I leave mine at about 4... there are those that are much more well versed at this.

The thing you need to know is USM is used very liberally on images here - and often it is easy to pick out. Done well - it makes average optic shots look great. I have also found that reducing images almost always needs some gentle USM to get the lines sharp again. Reduction averages pixels and you loose sharpness when this happens.

Bottom line - don't use "sharpen"... use "upsharp mask" (usm)... you will be a lot happier with the results.

[QUASIPHOTO]

Sharpening is a hammer... it will take any contrast line and jump the difference between the two... and the image degrades pretty fast. UpSharp Mask will open a dialog box with 3 sliders. The nice thing is you got live preview of what you are doing. the main slider is "amount" - I generally don't like to go higher the 75% - but have gone to extremes before. Radius I usually keep below 1 - it is the area impacted by the change and too much of this will give you thick lines. I haven't totally figured out what how to use "threshold" yet - I leave mine at about 4... there are those that are much more well versed at this.

The thing you need to know is USM is used very liberally on images here - and often it is easy to pick out. Done well - it makes average optic shots look great. I have also found that reducing images almost always needs some gentle USM to get the lines sharp again. Reduction averages pixels and you loose sharpness when this happens.

Bottom line - don't use "sharpen"... use "upsharp mask" (usm)... you will be a lot happier with the results.

OK......I'll work on my post processing skills. I have nunchuck skills and bow staff skills but no post processing skills........lol. That unsharp mask is in Elements 2?

[QUASIPHOTO]

be sure to grab some stills too, looking out of the dugout, emotion, high-fives, thats a big part of sports photography as well...generally makes a sports photo set a lot more interesting, showing character of the players and intense concentraion, joy, celebration ect.

keep it yup though, now you;re on the right track it should be a cakewalk from here on out...

college world series just finished didnt it? id dig up some photos from there and write down what shots you might want to try, postion, ect...often helped me out a lot

Cakewalk?????? Hey I'm just a dad trying to get some good shots of his daughter and her team and hopefully make them a little dvd to remember the year by.
HOWEVER........unfortunately for me....I'm a bit of a perfectionist and I want to take photos like you "PRO" guys. Your shots are so awesome.
Cakewalk hardly.........but I'm going to try my hardest and get better.
Somehow you experienced guys make it look sooooooo easy........lol. :rolleyes:

[blinking8s]

haha...it's never easy realyy...a lot of it is just plain ol'fashion luck. the right spot, right settings, right time...

but im yet to concider myself a "pro" i just got lucky with a job that let me shoot A LOT and i got some ok shots out of it :)

i still have yet to gerab some peak action baseball/softball shots though, just didnt really see it happen in front of the viewfinder at all this season :(

[QUASIPHOTO]

your much to modest blinking8s, I went to the sports shooter site and your stuff is great. with that in mind.......thinking a million steps ahead here. My daughter also plays volleyball and basketball.......soooooooooooo.
shooting indoors without a flash.......ISO 1600 with my lens wide open? will that give me pretty good shots? and whats up with the "white card" for inside......so you really have to do that to get your white balance correct?

[blinking8s]

depends on the lighting..auto (AWB) on the 20d is pretty good with average indoor stadium lights, i only used the custom WB for rare situations, like outdoor floodlights ect...exposure always seemed a little low/off indoors...but very minor. I tried white balance in the dome here, but every 1/3 of the court the WB reading varied...and leaving it on auto worked well, minor corrections in PS were needed. It'sa neat tool though, learn it well, makes life indoors/colored lighting much easier

basketball...i took one lens to games with me, the 85mm 1.8 and kept it pretty open, iso1600, no strobes present in the mini dome here...now you have the 70-200, also a lens of choice...and if you are allowed under the goal (baseline of couse) a wider lens would com ein handy...

ive never shot a college volleyball game, i know its fast though, spokes and stuff are hard to freeze in our gym, without strobes i dont think it would be possible, but the gym on campus has worse lighting that any highschool within the area...