Q & A: Dwight McCann (Event Photography) [Archive] - Canon Digital Photography Forums

DwightMcCann

26th of June 2005 (Sun), 10:27

CyberPet, there's no such thing as too many questions (I have a three year old daughter!) and any question worth asking is worth asking twice (or more.) :)

White balance is a darn good question! I shoot Live Performance almost exclusively in indoor venues with stage lights. In one venue, the Maverick Saloon(s) the lighting is very incandescent even though they have a few cans with gels. I use my incadescent setting when shooting there when I remember! You can see those images on my website in the Maverick Saloon Project, http://www.dwightmccann.com/MaverickSaloonProject.html ... you can also see how my images have matured in the couple of years that I have been shooting there. The other venue where I shoot is the Chumash Casino Resort and when I shoot there I usually just use Auto White Balance. They have $750K (yes, $750,000) worth of lighting including "daylight" spotlights ... couldn't do anything about the light there if I tried! :)

Let me go on to say that among my "friends" I get ongoing complaints that the performers "look orange" at the Maverick and no amount of explaining that it is beyond my control satisfies them! OTOH, the folks who have been there or who really love these artists seem to love that look ... I'm with the second group.

There is so much color variation that I don't think there's much to be done "in camera" with white balance in these situations. I would have much different opinions of shooting in 'open shade' or overcast outdoors.

BUT, I DO shift the color balance a little to improve skin tones when I can see a slight to moderate color cast on a white object that is part of the main subject. My "dirty little secret" is that I still use PhotoImpact 10 [I have all the PS CS software and have read books and books about CS, but until I run into things I can't do in this under $100 program I will continue to use it.] PI has a 'Colorcast' tool that use a dropper and a color gradient, so you don't have to make things white ... you can just sorta' shift the white balance a bit. Very nice.

Please remember, any question worth asking is worth asking twice ... if I didn't answer your question, try again! I will put more answers in separate replies.

DwightMcCann

26th of June 2005 (Sun), 10:39

CyberPet asked about metering. I spot meter on faces when I can, although this has turned out to be a bit problematical with my 1D Mark II. With my Fuji S2, it works pretty well, but the Canon spots are smaller and skin is "too bright" causing underexposure. This is a hard lesson to learn because the images in the LCD on the camera tend to show up brighter. I have learned and am relearning 'the hard way' to use the histogram! About every dozen images or so I review AND CHECK THE HISTOGRAM. Depending on the histogram, I adjust the compensation either way up to about 1-1/3 (that's 4/3's) stops. I strongly suggest bracketing. And I also think bracketing is a good idea. But if it's a new or tough venue, then try bracketing. Which leads me off to another point: SHOOT UNTIL YOU HAVE NO MORE STORAGE! I keep forgetting this and pay the price every time. You can't get too many images. I can't tell you how many times I've thought I had the perfect image in the can (well, on the CF card) and it turned out not to be quite as good as I thought when I saw it on the computer monitor and how many times that happened when I had just kept shooting anyway and then found the truly perfect image way down near the bottom of the thumbnails. BRACKET! SHOOT UNTIL FULL!

OK, I know that's a lot of images! I am now shooting with a 4 GB card and I admit that going through 1000 images takes a long time. If you wanna' be the best it's gonna' take a long time! I'm sure I will dwell on this at some later point, but I spend five to ten times more time and effort post processing than I do shooting. Get over it if you want to be the best.

I know I have the bad habit of going off on tangents. I'm not going to change. I also frequently answer the question that I think should have been asked rather than the one asked. Feel free to drag me back to the actual question. And, any question worth asking is worth asking twice.

DwightMcCann

26th of June 2005 (Sun), 10:49

Cyber, my equipment is listed in my Gear List with a link in my signature. I use EVERYTHING! But my favorite is to get in the front row with a big lens and get a pot full of head shots. With the 1D Mark II I set it on 3 fps and then with my 70-200mm f2.8 L IS USM (currently busted from an apparent drop, sigh) or my 300mm f2.8 L IS USM I figure who I want to shoot next, get the focus (I use autofocus ... be sure to get the latest firmware since they make autofocus improvements with it) and sit with the half-depressed button to keep the IS running and wait for some light ... then I shoot maybe 15 frames as the light changes.

Now, this gets back to a previous question that you asked, about metering. The biggest problem with Live Performace shooting is that the darn performers want to perform ... they just won't hold still ... most of the time ... so when I shoot 3 fps for 15 frames, I am hoping that somewhere in that 3-5 seconds or more they will have accidentally been still and I will get a sharp image. SHOOT UNTIL YOU ARE FULL ... don't save that memory for a rainy day!

Oh, yes, well, back to the question. I try to get full stage shots with my 24-70mm and sometimes even put on the 16-35mm to shoot the stage from the side with the first few rows of audience showing. Try stuff! Experiment. Develop a style!!!

UncleDoug

26th of June 2005 (Sun), 11:38

How about auto-bracketing?
Do you ever do this?
Takes up more room on the card but could get you THE shot.

DwightMcCann

26th of June 2005 (Sun), 11:49

Didn't I mention bracketing? Oh, yes, I see I did. But that was only exposure bracketing. And with that you may have two choices: aperature bracketing or shutterspeed bracketing, eh? Of course, on my 1D Mark II there is also white balance bracketing! Yes, BRACKET! Use a monopod or tripod! Hehehe ... there is so much more to do than you will ever have time for ... just keep experimenting until you find what fits you.

BTW, I just posted Tower of Power at http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=81785

CyberPet

26th of June 2005 (Sun), 12:12

Dwight, I can't tell you how pleased I am with your answers. So indepth and clear. I'm very grateful that you took the time to answer my questions!

Do you have a "minimum" shutter speed, where you know that with several frames, you'll get at least one good? I asume you do have to push the ISO pretty much too. Do you use any noise reduction in post processing?

DwightMcCann

26th of June 2005 (Sun), 12:32

Cyber, on minimum shutter speed there is a rule of thumb: 1/focal length in mm. That is, with a 50mm lens you should not handhold at slower than 1/50th (or 1/60th) sec. With a 300mm, no slower than 1/300th sec. That is a really gross rule and is often used to forgive oneself for not using a tripod or monopod, etc. Of couse, with IS, it is not such a problem.

But in Live Performance shooting the biggest problem is the movement of the performers ... much worse than camera movement for me. However, it is sometimes surprising to see the blur when shooting 1/250th and the sharpness when shooting 1/20th ... go figure! I like a minimum of about 1/30th but I have some good images at 1/10th.

Something I didn't say in this thread was my process, so I'll run over over it in abbreviated mode: when I start, I almost always use Program Mode and ISO 1600. I shoot a few bursts of a couple of different things and review ... CHECK THE HISTOGRAM! ... then I may set the ISO down to 1250 (I don't know about the other bodies, but the 1D Mark II has a zillion ISO settings) to try to reduce noise. Then I shoot another few bursts and review ... CHECK THE HISTOGRAM (I should cut that so I can keep pasting it in!) ... then if I am comfortable, I will switch to Aperature Priority and start working with wide open, usually f2.8 ... sometimes this reveals that the camera was selecting a smaller f-stop and I could have been shooting faster. Anyway, I don't do this so much for the DOF but because the lenses usually shoot crisper/sharper nearer f8/f11 and the lighting and separation of the performers in my venues doesn't require using a shallow DOF to make them stand out. If the light is really bright (I can't figure out how this changes from show to show in the same venue) then I will edge down to ISO 800 (the slowest ISO I use in Live Performance) and work with the aperature.

I should note here that I attend to the exposure on the faces. Sometimes, when far away with lots of blackness in the frame, the exposure will want to be way too bright for the face of the performer. That is when I use the -1-1/3 compensation to darken it down. Review the images ... you know about the histogram, right? ... and this is another place where bracketing in 2/3 stops is very useful.

Here's another dirty little secret of mine: I don't shoot these types of events using RAW. I rarely use RAW. I shoot way too many images and spend way too much time on culling and other post processing. I frequently have 300-600 images to deal with (and a day job) and I shoot one to three events a week ... I need to spend time with my family and get exercise ... so while I truly believe that RAW is optimal, I don't do it.

Ask me again if I didn't cover what you actually asked ... I realize I went off on a tangent.

CyberPet

26th of June 2005 (Sun), 12:47

I'm happy with your reply. You did answer exactly the follow-up questions I might have had! :D Thank you!!

DwightMcCann

26th of June 2005 (Sun), 12:53

If you look at any of my images and want to know any detail question about particular ones or particular venues or questions about how that opportunity came about or what my plans are or anything else, please ask. About the only thing I won't share publicly is what I am paid ... not because it is so secret but because people have a lot of energy on that and it should be in its own controlled environment. I will share that I have a day job ... I have been a computer programmer at the University of California at Santa Barbara for about 30 years and that pays the mortgage ... and my wife, the educated one in the house, has a good job, too. I do not do this because I need the money. Oh, and I still have my first digital camera, a CoolPix 950! And I still use it from time to time.

I just added some Tom Jones images in the Urban forum, http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=81809

Edit: I have now given the CoolPix 950 to my son.

LazyPhotographer

29th of June 2005 (Wed), 23:18

Wow, so you're the other person who uses PhotoImpact? And doesn't shoot RAW.

Your shots are great, and the Q&A was very interesting. Thanks!

tim

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 00:31

Thanks for all the pics and the great answers! It's great that you left the EXIF information embedded in the jpgs so we can see what settings you used with each image.

Do you ever use more than one camera? Or do you just change lenses when you need to? Also do you ever use a monopod, or are IS lenses enough?

EricKonieczny

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 07:21

Great Job Dwight and very informative. It is great to see another photgrapher with as much passion about concert photgraphy as myself. It is an exciting subject, with a vast array lighting composition. I know its no easy task of capturing a very crisp image without tons of light or a flash, but you do a superb job at it.

Your openess and insight is what helps make POTN a great place.

If you ever have a really bug event andneed a second photgrapher, I am on the next plane there. ;)

DwightMcCann

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 09:29

Lazy ... Yes, PhotoImpact 10, BUT I have PS CS and have read four or five huge books and am just waiting for some project that will require me to use PS and I'll convert. But everything I read about or hear about in PS turns out to be easier in PI, sigh. Please feel free to ask about balcony shooting. :-)

Tim, I have to leave the EXIF in or I won't have a clue what I did! As of today I only use one camera body at an event. Tomorrow I should receive my "backup" 20D body and expect to use it so that I don't have to do quite so much lens swapping. I shoot mostly with my 70-200mm f2.8 (now in the shop, sigh) and some with 24-70mm f2.8 and once in a while with 16-35mm f2.8. And now with the 300mm f2.8 I shoot some handheld and some from a tripod at the back of the room, sometimes with a 1.4 or 2.0 TC. I try very hard to find new and different techniques, perspectives, angles, etc. at every shoot while repeating the things that work well, too. I am putting every penny from my business back into equipment (I have a day job to pay the mortgage) and have a 1Ds in my two year plan. That plan also includes a top end tripod [Gitzo G-1548GT Studex MK2; Gitzo Leveling Base G1321; and a Wimberly Head] and a 500mm or 600mm (or both) that I will setup in the back of the Samala Room as I have found that I get some good shots from back there but my current pan/tilt tripod and shorter lenses are not optimal. However, when I am up near the stage I don't use a tripod or monopod, although I keep threatening to try it ... I have both.

Eric, the pay wouldn't cover the airfare ... but I'd love to have you come out! :-) You could stay with us. BottomBracket is thinking of coming out, too! Lordy, what a group, eh?

Tomorrow night is Lyle Lovett ... sure hope that 100-400mm I ordered arrives on time!

DwightMcCann

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 09:38

OH, I meant to mention that I put some new images yesterday in Urban Life (where I put my Live Performance images) of Starship: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=82569

Rob612

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 10:46

What can I say. Dwight, you're just amazing. Keep on going.

aam1234

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 10:53

Hi Dwaight,

Few questions if I may.

- You use high ISO when shooting, yet your photos look so crisp and clean. Do you use NR software with your photos after you take them

Side questions:

- Are you the only photographer in those events.
- Do you normally meet the performers.

Thanks

DwightMcCann

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 11:34

Rob, thank you.

Amm, that 1D Mark II seems to have very low noise, but not none! However, I don't use any NR (noise reduction) software and strangely enough, the noise cushion material that often shows in my images looks oddly like noise sometimes. Truth is that I consider the artifacts that may occur due to the limitations of the venue to be part of "the art." If there is noise because of high ISO required by level of light, that's part of the image and belongs. It is like those who object to performers being orange even when they are lighted by orange incandescent lights ... that's the way they look. I sometimes wonder what would happen if I did a custom white balance at the Maverick ... I may have to try that ... they tend to set the lights and leave them alone and it is always very orange/hot!

I am normally the only person at any performance with a still camera. The casino is technically in a sovereign nation that can enforce its own rules and sometimes cell phones, cameras, video cameras, etc., get confiscated when there are blatant (or repeated) offenses. I want to interject here that I am constantly amazed by the quality and professionalism displayed by all the staff, from David, the General Manager down to the last cigarette butt sweeper, but most particularly by the security people. They are ever polite and avoid confrontation like the plague ... but they will get the job done! I am accosted frequently by new guards for having a camera (even though I have a picture ID worn so that it can be seen at all times and usually an All Access badge), but they are always polite, soft spoken and reasonable ... and apologetic when they realize I am an employee. There have been times when security has been so tight that I have been stopped for other reasons ... I have a special parking gizmo to allow me to park near the elevator because of my equipment and on "code yellow" (I'm making that up!) they don't want anyone to use the elevator ... but so many of the executive managers know me, as well as the senior security people, that I usually manage to "tailgate" to where I need to go. There have been a few occasions when "the band" has had a photographer of their own but none with the level of equipment that I bring. I don't see their pictures and I don't imagine that they see mine.

And to your last question, no, I don't meet any of the high end talent ... I have no idea if I could, but the poor interactions that I have witnessed with the high end management leaves me disinterested in meeting these people. Let me confess here that I am not a huge music fan and what I do like is classical and jazz. I don't even know who a lot of these people are before I shoot them. My wife is always incredulous when she discovers I don't know who Steve Winwood or Starship/Mickey Thomas or Michael McDonald is. So, if one of the artists wants to meet me I sure hope someone will tell me who they are during the introductions! :-)

jfrancho

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 12:01

Dwight, I can't think of any questions off hand, but just wanted to drop a big thanks for your contributions.

DwightMcCann

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 12:09

Thanks, JF! If you think of anything, just ask. I am surprised no one has asked why I do those collages (but then, maybe nobody has gone out to my website. :-) )

aam1234

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 12:10

Thanks Dwight for the detailed and insightful reply.

In your last paragraph you answered a question I was embarrassed to ask. Wanted to know whether sometimes you enjoyed the music so much that you forgot to take photos. I guess it's an advantage that your taste in music is different than what you photograph.

aam1234

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 12:12

Thanks, JF! If you think of anything, just ask. I am surprised no one has asked why I do those collages (but then, maybe nobody has gone out to my website. :-) )

I know the answer that's why I didn't ask. It's because of copywrite reasons, right.

jfrancho

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 12:15

OK, I'll get the ball rollin'!
I 've seen you collage work, and I like them a lot. They all seem to have a conssistant look, basically similar sized ovals with feathering overlaid on a strong landscape full stage shot. Is this a customer requirement, or just a style you've developed?

DwightMcCann

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 14:33

There are no stupid questions and any question worth asking is worth asking twice.

Nope, the collages have nothing to do with copyright that I am aware of.

I thought I had written about the collages at http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=63580 ... where I explained how I got where I am today, whatever that means. But it looks like not!

When my friend, Rick Barker, Program Director of country radio station KRAZ-FM in Solvang, California and creator of Nashville to You Acoustic Radio Tour (http://nashvilletoyou.com/) started working at the Chumash Casino Resort he noticed they had no still photographer and suggested they hire me. Apparently without knowing what they would do with the images, they agreed and had me come shoot a couple of events to see how it would work. My first event was Randy Travis. The casino gave me no advice, requirements, suggestions, requests, needs, hopes, wishes, dreams and didn't tell me what they wanted. :-) I shot Randy as best I could, took the pictures home, downloaded, culled, found a dozen that I liked, post processed them a bit, burned a couple sizes of each to CD and took a breath. Then I realized that it might be very helpful for them if they had something to look at and pass around that would give an idea of what images were on the CD without having to have a computer. I took the images into PhotoImpact and made a collage that was simply the images on the CD arranged as though they had been thrown down on a table to look at. No feedback.

Next I shot Dierks Bentley doing a benefit for Toys for Tots. Burned CD and gave it to them. Then I had a quadruple coronary bypass (last December). Around six weeks after having surgery I was going nuts to do something so I dragged my butt to the casino to shoot Clay Walker. They asked that I provide a collage as part of the "package" since I hadn't with Dierks. You can see the first and second collages (and most of the rest) on my webpage at http://www.dwightmccann.com/ChumashCasinoResort/ChumashIndex.htm ... and you will not see Dierks! Shortly after the Clay Walker delivery I got a call from the casino ... I thought they were going to say that I was too old and sickly with a heart condition and they didn't want to risk it ... instead they said, yes, we want you to shoot EVERYTHING WE DO [in the entertainment area] and we want to pay you for what you've already done ... let's talk money! I get twice what Rick thought I should ask for but about 1/4 of what the work is worth. On the other hand, if I charged them "full price" they would only have me shooting an occasional event and perhaps not even that. I am quite content with what they pay. The ONE thing they did ask for is a collage for each event. Those with access get to put them up on their office walls. For the more interesting events they get requests from tribal members (who are the actual owners of the casino) either for a souveneir or they see my collage and ask for a copy. Sometimes I suggest to the few I know that they ask for one. I print a couple on 11x17 that go with the CDs. They have started printing them on 24x36. I have upscaled the file that I provide as large as I can manage with my current computer, which is about 20x30 at 200 dpi, due to apparent memory constraints. I am looking into upgrading from 2G to 4G on my dual Xeon 2.6GHz Windows XP Pro machine to see if that will help.

So, the real answer is that the collages were a happenstance that worked out for me. Yes, in general I start off with wide angle shot of the stage and work from there, either blending in images or plonking them down as rectangles. I am still trying to get some feedback on what they like best but all I keep getting is, "Whatever you do is great ... we're really happy with your work and expect we will have a long and mutually fruitful relationship." And whenever I ask them at a different sort of function (poker tournament, boxing match, VIP dinner) what they want, they say, "You'll figure something out." And when I say, "This is going to take a little more time than usual so I'm going to want to charge more" they say, "Send an invoice."

Did that answer any questions that you guys asked? I really launched off into outer space on that one! :-)

Oh, I need to point out that I had my surgery six months ago and I am really in pretty good shape although I am fighting a weight problem. I play tennis three days a week, swim two days with my wife (I went today) and ride my bicycles on the weekends. All I need to do is cut back on eating!

aam1234

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 15:10

WAW, this is movie material stuff. Didn't know you had so much history and lessons when I asked you for the session Mr.McCann.

DwightMcCann

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 15:28

Geez, call me Dwight!

DwightMcCann

30th of June 2005 (Thu), 15:39

I have a few ideas of additional things I am going to try and equipment I plan to acquire that I could share. Of course, everyone is more than welcome to use any idea they get from me in their own endeavors as well as asking for feedback on whatever they are doing ... I am not Amazon.com and am not trying to Patent what I am doing! Also, I'm really open to suggestions, either specific observations on my images or ideas on how I could improve, or ideas of things I might want to try or explore. I am doing all that I do on the braille system, just feeling my way along.

Rob612

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 00:31

Dwight, have you ever tought of some remote controlled/timer operated (i.e. one shot every 30 sec) cameras placed in "strategic" places on the stage or in the hall ? That would give you some interesting point of view, maybe ?

DwightMcCann

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 11:20

Rob, yes, as a matter of fact and I am planning on doing more. What I have already done, in TEST mode, is time lapse of setting the room up for a boxing match. I learned a lot even though the laptop locked up and I only got about 24 hours of the 72 hours I wanted. I think the laptop got hot. I have purchased an underneath platform with fans and will shoot smallest images and use aperature priority and manual focus next time.

I am also thinking of trying to get a camera mounted on the lighting braces (they bolt up a big square of bracing and attach lights to it and then use electric pullies to raise it to the ceiling) and a remote to shoot down on top of a boxing match. Since the boxing matches belong to ShowTime I'm not sure if I can manage this, but the promoter's onsite manager is very approachable and friendly so I won't have any trouble asking him it I can try it. I might get something interesting for them ... it is Gary Shaw Productions. They do a really great job of putting the matches together and they are top flight professional. I have a collage of my first fight and a collage with some extra pictures at http://www.dwightmccann.com/ChumashCasinoResort/ShoBox04222005.htm of my second fight.

I am also thinking about a slideshow DVD of all the shows for a year to be given to tribal members and high rollers, etc. They might also play it on the Samala Room LCD screens that are spread around the room when warming up the crowd. I'd probably put my logo and the resort logon on each image. I'm looking at some software to do a DVD slide show. I might also do it for Nashville to You.

I don't think most of the major talent would allow me to place a camera in any interesting places. As I've said before, they usually aren't very friendly ... after all, if they aren't making a buck on it they have no time for it ... purely business.

Any other thoughts? Ideas? Maybe a collage with images from all the various shows for the year?

aam1234

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 11:38

Ok Dwight, gonna take you up on the suggestions department :D

I'm sure you've done it a zillion times but maybe you haven't shown us here (or maybe I missed it).

What about wide angel shots. Either the performers only, or sitting in the back to include the audience.

If you have some ready I'd love to see an example here.

Edit: I have another question related to the above. Are you allowed to hide behind the curtains to take side or back photos.

DwightMcCann

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 11:44

http://www.dwightmccann.com/Images/ChumashCollages/ClayWalkerCollagePrototype-1000-2.jpgYour wish is my command ... here's my very favorite full stage shot, from my third shoot, as part of this collage ... I don't have just the original shot online or I would show that instead. What I like about it is the number of faces, the number of cowboy hats and the total number of people that can be clearly seen. I think it was on a tripod and the clarity of the image is quite excellent even though shot with my Fuji S2.

As for true wide angle shots, they aren't usually particularly interesting ... It's hard to get close enough to anything to make wide angle (under 20mm) interesting, but I'm open to suggestions! :-)

aam1234

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 11:52

What a great WA shot. It's full of energy!

Btw, I've added another question to my previous one, but you replied before I made the changes. Care to look at it, it's at the bottom under "edit"

DwightMcCann

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 12:23

Well, I'm subscribed so I get an email when you post but not when you edit ... I don't think.

Can I hide behind the curtains? Depends! :-) My All Access pass will let me go through the door (to the right of the stage) where there are stairs up to the stage. For the "free" entertainment and some of the acts that seem very relaxed, I may wander up there where I can't been seen and sometimes I shoot a few frames. For the major talent I tend to stay away unless asked. Remember, I am still new at this in a lot of ways. But I will be talking with Lori, the major talent buyer, and seeing if I can get more of a handle on procedures: is it OK to go backstage before shows, it is OK to shoot backstage before/during shows, etc. Lori is very nice, easy and makes herself available to me but I don't usually think of these things when we chat.

Have I mentioned that everyone at the Chumash Casino Resort treats me well? :-) I know I keep saying it over and over again, but I have worked at a lot of places in a lot of capacities and have never worked in a place with such high standards of excellence in the treatment of people and professional standards. Sometimes I don't know how to measure up ... they do things by nature that I need to go back to kindergarten to relearn.

Oh, at the Maverick Saloons there are no curtains and essentially no backstage ... but I could/would go there. I do sometimes get around near the backside of the stage and shoot toward the crowd, but it's not exactly "from behind the curtains". Here's an example:

http://www.dwightmccann.com/Images/Sugarland2/Sugarland500/Sugarland7738-500.JPG

This is Sugarland, a group that is rising on the charts very quickly right now.

aam1234

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 12:42

Yes! that's what I was referring to. Thanks.

Now imagine the same angel in the big stage of the casino.

Or the same setting as the above but the lights are on the audience and the performers appear as a silhouette. That would be something special.

DwightMcCann

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 13:29

Ah, I understand ... as it turns out, such a shot in the casino is generally much more difficult and not so appealing ... I have shot a couple but had forgotten. The big problem is the amount of equipment and way they lay it out. There is often, as can be seen in the Clay Walker collage, some sort of structure in the middle that may extend to the edges. Cheap Trick had tons of stuff lined up across the stage as can be seen at http://www.dwightmccann.com/ChumashCasinoResort/CheapTrick.htm including keyboards, mixers, monitors, etc. There is generally so much equipment, much in the center, that the artist almost blocked out, since he usually stands in the center of the stage. Also, at the Maverick Saloons, everyone is used to having me stomp around, sit in empty seats, sit in laps, sit on the front of the (very low) stage, and generally be visible. At the casino the artistes prefer that I be totally unobtrusive, although one or two have had their own photographer walking around on the stage taking pictures, although generally with a digicam or P&S type of camera. If I come upon one of the images I shot I will post it so that you can see what I am talking about more clearly.

aam1234

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 14:29

I understand what you are saying, especially with the set up as you described. But we can dream a little, no :D

I'm imagining my favorite artist, Van Morrison, my man! ending his performance saluting the crowd with the lights dim on him and a big white lights shining on the audience. You at the back take that shot! That's a dream photo right there.

Ok, I went off topic a little :o

Rob612

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 14:29

DwightMcCann

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 14:36

Aam, I am a great proponent of dreams!

Rob, yes. My time lapse stuff will likely be laptop driven but you are correct. I have the radio remote on my list of future equipment. The problem with the TC80 is that I would need to run for about 24-36 hours doing a time lapse type thing from overhead at boxing, but if I had a radio shutter release I might even be able to hook it to shoot when I shot my handheld. Certainly things to think about and investigate.

Rob612

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 14:52

I love to think that at least I've said something useful :)

DwightMcCann

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 14:59

Eh? Everything is useful if we open our minds. Especially the Italians, eh? Say, are you a shooter?

jfrancho

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 16:43

To get back to shooting wide/tele...
As you know I shoot wide, mostly out of necessity, and this has a tendency to distort the subject, making them appear "larger than life." While this seems to appeal to the average garage band, weekend rock star type, this look is not as prevelent in a lot music photography I see. From what I gather the only way to achieve a "truer" look is to turn to the tele lenses, and back up. Using long lenses can sometimes "compress" the depth of the image. Your pictures seem to have quite a bit of depth, even though you are working with fast, long lenses. I'm not necessarily speaking of DOF, either - maybe it's that sweet casino light system? Do you have any tricks or tips you can share on how to get that "depth"?

aam1234

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 16:55

DwightMcCann

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 17:29

tim

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 17:46

For DVD software take a look at proshow gold, it's not too expensive and it's easy to use.

DwightMcCann

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 17:52

Thanks, Tim, I'll check it out.

jfrancho

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 18:30

Hi jfrancho,

Care to elaborate on the underlined part. Thanks.Sure. Consider this a broad, generalization. Most of the musicians I photograph have day jobs. Many actually have careers, with music being a hobby. While I have toured, been on national radio, even top 100 lists, I have now realized greater enjoyment with my music realizing that it is a hobby, art form, and means to express myself. Years ago, I considered the various bands I was a part a vehicle to showcase my talen, perhaps landing a better gig. Well, it doesn't work that way. This is the case for many musicians in my area. Rochester, NY has an ever evolving music scene, and with Eastman School, Hochstein, School of the Arts, and several area nationally recognized high school bands. With that comes no shortage of musicians willing to put the time and energy into original music. I've played in other cities, and they all have their share of great local bands, but the concentration of talent in Rochester is notable. Consequently, there are a ton of guys like me, satisfied to have the opportunity create and share their art. As long as it's on a Friday or Saturday night, since most of us have to be up early for work during the week. The term "garage band" is a term for bands that proliferated during the late 1960's, rock's most influential era, emulating the sounds of the Beatles, Rolling Stones, The Who, The Velvet Underground, etc. - in their parents' garage. It has kind of evolved into it's own, raw style, check out VanZandt's satellite radio station dedicated to it. But we still use the term to describe ourselves, regardless of the type of music we play.

The reason I think that wide angle look appeals to them is because most of them have never been photographed live before, outside of friends and family's pint and shoot snapshots. Then you show them a picture of themselves made using a wide angle lens and slow sync flash - there figures appearing larger than life, like Charles Peterson's many SubPop Records cover shots - and it reminds them of why they picked up a guitar in the first place: To look cool, and impress the ladies. But, seriously, it was quite an eye opener or me the first time someone took some quality pictures of me. "Whoa, I look like that? Cool."

jfrancho

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 18:42

JF, I think you are correct that the better the lights the better the sense of depth ... I think this is the most significant factor. I also try to get some shots in which the musician and his instrument fill the frame and some that are essentially head shots. Every image does not have to be a full body plus instrument plus some extra space. But, when you are working in a confined space or with very poor lighting it is necessary to make compromises. I always have my wide angle with me as well as the 24-70mm. Looking at your most recent set on smugmug I think you are doing super and I would like to see some 'heat shots' too. When I look over several 'music' sets the one thing that sticks out is the softness. Can you remind us of what lenses you are using? In your situation I think the fastest lens you can get is the way to go to sharpen them up ... softness is not a style but a technical failing unless you can produce razor sharp images at will. I'm also anxious to see some montage/collage constructions from your stuff.You're right, I haven't done many head shots. To tell you the truth, that is the first time someone mentioned it to me. I have the lenses for it. I guess I just prefer to see the context of the emotion portrayed. Yet many of your pictures clearly demonstrate that it isn't always necessary. In fact, I suspect that the variety of views you offer in the collage is the hallmark of their appeal.

I have the lenses to take both sharp and fuzzy pics (50mm f/1.4, 28mm f/2.8, kit), and this last outing showed that I can take them. I just don't want all my images to turn out super sharp. But I should be able to do it anyway someone asks me to. As far as new lenses go, I am looking to add a 28mm f/1.8 USM, Sigma 20mm f/1.8, and Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8. There a couple of wide primes with red stripes I may be interested in later this year....Plus I'd like to upgrade to 70-200mm f/2.8 from the f/4, but I don't use that one ever at shows.

Thanks for the head shot tip!!!!!!!

aam1234

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 18:43

jfrancho

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 18:47

Waw, for a moment when you made the first comment about the garage bands I thought you are a retarded person, sorry :o

But still, what's wrong with WA shots. Makes them appear larger than they really are? maybe. What's wrong with that?Well, it was a tiny bit of a self-depricating remark at myself....

Sorry, I didn't mean to sound negative about WA. much to the contrary (have you seen my site?) I love them. If they tasted good with milk, I'd eat them for breakfast. I really love wide angle, that much. I am not being facetious , either.

aam1234

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 18:58

I'll check out your site very soon. But I'd like to know what does "J" in your name means.

Have you seen my comment about your kid's photo in the parking lot. That's an awesome photograph. And your son's smile is like the icing on the cake. Innocent and wonderful smile.

DwightMcCann

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 19:16

Aam, what is your name?

DwightMcCann

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 19:17

Tim, I've downloaded the trial and will give it a spin.

jfrancho

1st of July 2005 (Fri), 19:53

When I look over several 'music' sets the one thing that sticks out is the softness ... softness is not a style but a technical failing unless you can produce razor sharp images at will.I know that Dwight is off to shoot Lyle Lovitt right now, but I did not want to let this remark remain buried in a post. I completely agree! I have resisted this goal, after achieving sharpness early off. I felt that there was nothing seperating my pictures from others'. This is really a pattern of self centered bravado that I've concocted in several aspects of my life. I didn't just skateboard, I pushed my body beyond it's limits to prove how good I was to myself. I wasn't just a loud drummer, but I was THE loudest, with the most bombastic, technical chops in the city. I didn't just collect things, my collections were completely comprised of rare, centerpiece items (Legos, slot cars, tropical fish, reef aquaria, matchbox cars, books, etc.) Even when I drank (thankfully, not anymore) I outdrank and out-jacka$$ed everyone else. Thankfully, I have mellowed since fatherhood, and this usually just manifests itself in the form consistently soft event pics....

I've come around, and realize that the best way to set myself apart from the crowd is to apply the same flexibility that I strive for in my music, to my photography. That means demonstrating not just a "can do" attitude, but an "I will do" confidence.

Sorry for the sermon, but I had to get it out.

Steve Parr

2nd of July 2005 (Sat), 01:07

As someone who shoots primarily live music shows (usually in small clubs), I can think of no less than a million questions to ask about how you do what you do, both from a technical, as well as the "getting the gig", aspect.

Great shots of Charlie Daniels. I've seen him 22 times in concert, and he never fails to put on a frightengly good show...

Steve

Rob612

2nd of July 2005 (Sat), 02:15

Say, are you a shooter?

If you are talking guns, yes. I am a shooter and CCW holder. :)

DwightMcCann

2nd of July 2005 (Sat), 10:08

Rob, yes, guns! What is CCW? I have enjoyed shooting in the past although the thing I enjoyed the most was skeet ... never any good, but one heck of a good time. I have handguns, rifles and shotguns but they mostly sit in the gun safe ... I got away from it when my son was a teenager as he had some issues with anger management.

Steve, glad to have you here.

JF, confession is good for the soul! I'm happy to hear it anytime. There is nothing wrong with excellence although I find it is the process, not the product, that is enlivening.

Now for the BAD NEWS® ... I have not a single frame of Lyle Lovett and his Big Band although I attended the entire concert, enjoyed it immensely, had all my equipment and necessary badges ... the tour manager would not discuss shooting with casino management and when the event started he said to me, "No pictures! Put that camera away now or you will have to leave!" Quite amazing, eh? It caused a bit of a stir, strangely, with most of the senior staff telling me how difficult the guy had been all day during setup and sound check, etc. ... the tour manager, not Lyle! At the end, my guy (who I had informed immediately and had said to comply) came over with the talent buyer and his assistant to assure me that they would deal more effectively with this issue in the future. I was, once again, surprised that they were concerned with my "feelings" (or more like the asian concept of 'face' I think) and had apparently had a little meeting while Lyle was crooning and came up with a process to minimize this as a possibility in the future. The more I said it was all OK with me and I was not upset, the more insistent they were that it was an issue for them. They were, as always, very concerned on my behalf!

So, I'm going to offer a little description of the event over in Urban Life. I did get a few shots of some of the sidemen but haven't downloaded them yet.

Oh, I talked with my guy and his floor manager about shooting time lapse of the next boxing match (July 22) as well as the idea of putting a camera on the overhead structure to shoot down on top of the ring at some future match and they are very enthusiastic, so I'll be reporting on that here, too.

Rob612

2nd of July 2005 (Sat), 13:21

Rob612

2nd of July 2005 (Sat), 13:23

Oh, I talked with my guy and his floor manager about shooting time lapse of the next boxing match (July 22) as well as the idea of putting a camera on the overhead structure to shoot down on top of the ring at some future match and they are very enthusiastic, so I'll be reporting on that here, too.

That is going to be interesting. A lot TV-like shoots if you have the camera over the ring but Canon quality. Very curious to see the results.

DwightMcCann

2nd of July 2005 (Sat), 20:24

The most visually interesting of Lyle Lovett's sidemen.

Steve Parr

2nd of July 2005 (Sat), 20:39

The most visually interesting of Lyle Lovett's sidemen.

That's Leland Sklar, one of the most sought after bass players in the music business. He's also spent a good deal of time playing with Jackson Browne.

Oh, and that's a ridiculously good picture. Give me some time; I'm gonna' be blasting questions at you...

Steve

DwightMcCann

3rd of July 2005 (Sun), 09:48

Steve, thanks, yes, I remember him being introduced ... he's from LA I think. I've got a few more ... Sklar and those following were all shot with my new 100-400mm f4.5-4.6 L so I guess it's a keeper. Anyway, this is the cellist who was so amazing. I just like the shot of the drummer ... unusual to be wearing a hat of this style. Sorry about the lighting, this was them mostly tuning up and doing a couple of numbers in the dark prior to anything actually happening so the light was very low.

DwightMcCann

4th of July 2005 (Mon), 10:08

Things have gotten a litte quiet here since young Lyle wouldn't let me shoot so I thought I'd work on another topic: the timelapse shots of the boxing! The idea is to get in the room before much setup is done and to get images every few minutes of the assembling of the lighting rig, setting up the ring, setting up the chairs, people filling the seats, the eight matches and then the strike. My first attempt lasted about 23 hours before the laptop froze. I need about 72 hours. I think it was heat and I have since gotten an underneath fan assisted cooler and done a four day test shoot. At the time I tried resetting the camera twice and each time it ran about 30 minutes.

The attached images show the first professional match of the night in the ring (from the first reset of the camera). The exposure was still at fullscreen, making the ring rather bright. The second is of the camera and location next to a spotlight. Other problems with the first shoot were the lens kept searching for focus (I will use manual focus next time as well as using aperature priority) and I wasn't shooting often enough ... five minutes per frame, so next time I will use one minute per frame.

You can see the lighting structure above the ring which is where I'd like to place a camera with wireless release. We are also thinking of shooting from the platform with a longer lens during the matches themselves and shooting once every fifteen seconds or so. Lots of things to try.

DwightMcCann

4th of July 2005 (Mon), 10:29

Steve Parr

4th of July 2005 (Mon), 11:19

Steve asked me to look at his images and comment. Steve's images are located in the galleries at http://www.onstagephotography.com/photos.html and I think they are excellent so I'm not sure what to say. The only thing I notice about the bunch I looked at is that they are all very similar ... full body and upper body standing shots taken at stage level. No wide angle. No head shots. No high or low point-of-view. Nothing from from the side, if there is a side. I saw a couple using flash, but none of the tried and proven slow sync rear curtain motion blur style. So, I guess that my critique would be that I would like to see a little more variation.

And now that someone else has put their work on the meat hanger here, let me acknowledge once again that I recognize that the quality of my images is the result of a fabulous lighting system run by professionals and for professionals. I am simply fortunate, not particularly talented.

Dwight, thanks so much for the comments and critiques.

The few you saw using the flash were taken back when all I had was a kit lens (I know I'd mentioned all were taken with 1.8's; forgot about the flash pics), which isn't the fastest lens in the world!

Let me say that the idea behind my photography is to shoot bar bands in a manner which does not make them look like bar bands.

I've taken particular note of the comment concerning variation, and I'll definitely pay closer attention to this.

I would be interested in any and all comments from anyone compelled to do so.

Thanks!

Steve

DwightMcCann

4th of July 2005 (Mon), 12:19

Thanks, Steve ... I'd be interested in anyone posting images or links for discussion of Live Performance shooting.

Somewhat off topic ... OK, very off topic, I just this minute replaced my ViewSonic 19" LCD with an Apple Cinema Display 23" and can see quite a difference ... angle of view does not affect luninescence and the contrast range/colors are noticably clearer/brighter. I will also take Pekka's recommendation and get a Spyder 2 Pro calibration kit in the next few months. About $1500 from B&H. Then I shuffle-bumped my old 19" to replace my wife's 17" and used her 17" to replace my 3 year old daughter's 15" CRT!

Steve Parr

4th of July 2005 (Mon), 12:26

OK, very off topic, I just this minute replaced my ViewSonic 19" LCD with an Apple Cinema Display 23" and can see quite a difference ... angle of view does not affect luninescence and the contrast range/colors are noticably clearer/brighter.

Dwight, is this to say the shots on my site look a bit better than on the other monitor?

Steve

DwightMcCann

4th of July 2005 (Mon), 13:08

Steve, Yes! :-)

tim

4th of July 2005 (Mon), 14:32

Dwight, look at this profiling system review page on smartshooter. You need to register but it's free and worthwhile.

http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/wc026a.htm

DwightMcCann

4th of July 2005 (Mon), 15:27

Tim, Thanks! BTW, I pulled down the ProShow Gold trial. I also pulled down the Sony Vegas Movie Studio trial. Wish I had a combo of the two. :-)

tim

4th of July 2005 (Mon), 15:39

How is the Sony product vs proshow gold? Never tried the Sony one.

DwightMcCann

4th of July 2005 (Mon), 16:17

Tim,

Movie Studio uses a timeline presentation with several layers for both video/slide/text and music. It has a vider variety of effects, although no so many transitions. And it will also do video clips. I haven't, of course, read both manuals cover to cover or tried all the iterations of all the options at the moment so I'm not recommending anything, but I do like the way you can drag a bunch of images onto ProShow, then select them and apply timing/transitions to all of them. I need to see if there is equivalent processing available in Movie Factory.

tim

4th of July 2005 (Mon), 16:23

Thanks Dwight, i'm prob going to buy Proshow Gold soon, good to hear about the Sony one though.

Steve Parr

5th of July 2005 (Tue), 07:25

Steve, Yes! :-)

WHEW! Good to know!

Steve

garnerfoto

6th of July 2005 (Wed), 19:03

Dwight, you mention using a 70-200 L IS. Do you find that you really need the IS or is it more of a convenience?
I ask as I have recently been invited to shoot a very large festival concert. The majority of the show will be during the day, with plenty of light, albeit not flattering light. The final two or three acts will be after dusk, under top tier pro stage lighting.
I will be needing a new lens, but I am having a tough time pulling together the necessary funds for the IS model. I can probably swing the cash for the non-IS model. I am hoping to be able to use this lens in my club shooting as well.

DwightMcCann

6th of July 2005 (Wed), 19:35

MetalTom, here's what I think, noting that my 70-200mm is f2.8 rather than f4: IS is very effective; if you are rock solid there is less need for IS; the 70-200mm f4 with IS will likely do a better job for you than the f2.8 without IS (I don't even know if both models come without IS); a monopod is a good idea; a tripod is a good idea. I would urge you to buy the best lens you can afford and not to buy a lesser lens because of a single shoot in the near future, unless the client wants to pay for it. If you are shooting for fun/free/a friend/the experience then I would urge you not to make your selection based on any number of shoots, but wait until you can afford what you really want. Your club friends will understand if you wait. The festival people can understand if your equipment is lacking unless they want to pay for an upgrade.

So, the bottom line: you need to do what's best for you and it sounds to me like that is to wait until you can afford to buy the lens you really want, but I hear that the 70-200mm f4 L IS USM is quite excellent! Sorry I couldn't be more helpful! And I would suggest you post in the lens forum, too.

tim

6th of July 2005 (Wed), 19:38

No such thing as the 70-200 F4 IS, the only 70-200 lens with IS is the F2.8 version.

jfrancho

6th of July 2005 (Wed), 19:42

I think only the 70-200 F/2.8 comes in a an IS flavor. There are, however 70-300 models that have IS, but they're not L's. I bet you're thinking of the 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 DO IS. This is the one with the green stripe that gets frequent good reviews.

DwightMcCann

6th of July 2005 (Wed), 21:47

I knew you guys would help me out! :-) So, Metal, I think if you are still undecided then the lens forum might provide even more, correct, information. Oh, man, and now I've got to worry about Green stripes, too, sigh.

Noni

6th of July 2005 (Wed), 22:01

Hi, Dwight

This is a wonderful thread chock full of information. Thanks a whole lot. If I could get you to look at the following link (to a post I made here) that contains my first opportunity to shoot a live performance (20D with the Nifty Fifty lens), and critique them, I'd very much appreciate it. I had a tough time, but I thought these images were pretty good for a newbie, first time, outside, live performance, lights and white tent sort of set up. I'd be very interested in your opinion.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=83718 Face~Cover Band: Bruce In The USA

Best-
Noni

GoneFission

6th of July 2005 (Wed), 22:41

First off, Dwight - you are a fantastic photographer... I've found myself looking forward to your posts, and I just wanted to say that you, and the many other great photographers on this forum, have been an inspiration to me.

I am by no stretch of the imagination an expert - I've only been shooting seriously for a couple months now, and I certainly still have a lot to learn. However, I love to learn, so that means that this is an exciting time for me.

I got the opportunity to try live event photography during the San Jose America Festival on the 4th. I went for the fireworks, but I had some CF space left, so I decided to fill it up instead of rushing home. The band performing was Double Funk Crunch, a mostly local dance hits cover band.

I posted a couple of my favorite shots here: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=83715
More shots are here: http://www.gonefission.us/photos/thumbnails.php?album=37

These are by no means spectacular shots - in fact I wouldn't be offended if someone didn't even consider them good. However, I learned a lot from this, and maybe someone else will too. They were all taken with my 300D with 70-200 f/4L, wide open, ISO1600, hand-held.

Here's a few of my lessons learned (nothing earth-shattering here, but probably worth repeating):

f/4 just isn't enough for nighttime outdoor, and I imagine, most indoor venues. Even with -2/3 exposure compensation, shutter times were ranging from 1/10s to 1/100s.
DON'T BE LAZY! Even though I had my tripod in my bag over my shoulder, I decided to hand-hold. I'm sure many of my shots would have come out better if I had pulled the tripod out and actually used it.
If you do decide to hand-hold, especially with a longer lens, IS would be a great thing to have.
Keep on your toes - you never know when the lighting is going to change, when the performer is going to get into a fantastic pose, or when something else you'd be sorry not to capture is going to happen.
I think you touched on this Dwight - structure your shooting. When doing close-ups, focus on one performer at a time (but don't forget #4!). The main reason I dialed down the exposure compensation was because the bright white suit jacket of the lead singer was getting blown out. However, I was shifting from one performer to the next pretty much willy-nilly, so I left it there. As a result some of the others were getting underexposed.
Don't be shy - get close! I was staying mainly on the fringe of the crowd (75-100 feet or so from the stage), so I was working mainly towards the 200mm end of the lens, and I still had to generously crop many of the photos to get the desired composition. I wish I had worked my way towards the front so I could have gone wider, maybe even with the 18-55mm. Camera shake would have been less of an issue, and I could have gotten some more creative angles.
That's all I can think of for now. Hopefully this can help someone. I'd be curious to hear what others think of these suggestions.

I do have a question:
Dwight, you mentioned you like classical and jazz (alright!). When you're shooting a great jazz band, for instance, do you find yourself taking better shots, worse shots, or do you notice no difference compared to when you're shooting a country or rock group? While DCF played a couple songs that weren't particularly to my taste, I found that when I did get more into the music I felt like I was taking better shots. I certainly had more fun, in any case!

I never thought event photography would be something for me, but now that I've gotten a taste I'm definitely going to do more! :)

(sorry for the long post)

garnerfoto

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 01:35

Well, I guess I was just seeking your experience. Maybe I should pose the question differently.

Are there times when you feel you would have missed some shots if you hadn't had IS?

My thinking is the IS would be good if the lighting were to drop to the point where I would need to be shooting at 1/125 or slower using the longer end of the lens. Good for camera shake, but no help for subject motion. Do you often find yourself in situations such as this?

Maybe I'll just rent for this event while continuing to save. If the client is pleased with my work in this type of venue and more work of this caliber heads my direction, then I will look at a decision based on what I experience this time around.

Thank you for your time trying to help this scatterbrain.

Steve Parr

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 07:59

I try to pay attention to my exposure time more than anything else. I usually shoot at either 1/30 or 1/60, and find that I like the results...

Steve

garnerfoto

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 08:38

I try to pay attention to my exposure time more than anything else. I usually shoot at either 1/30 or 1/60, and find that I like the results...

Steve

Exactly. As do I, although I prefer 1/60 or faster, 1/30 can have too much blur for my taste. And this is fine with a 50 or 85 mm lens, but with a 200 mm lens I can't see handholding under 1/125, tough enough at 1/250.

DwightMcCann

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 11:02

Kevin, I left comments at one of your other posts noted above in this post. I think you need an IS lens, monopod or tripod ... or improve your handholding technique ... as I think your problem is camera motion.

Tom, I think IS is significant but I don't pay much attention anymore. I agree with Steve that you must attend to shutterspeed, BUT what I have found is that when I am using good technique at slow shutterspeeds the critical factor is the timing of the shot to coincide with that instant that the performer isn't moving. I think I noted above somewhere that I put my 1D Mark II in 3 fps mode, pick a performer, and shoot for 3 to 5 seconds. This is not some arbitrary 3 to 5 seconds, but a segment when I think there will be good light and they may "come to rest". I may get ten blurry shots, two or three soft and one or two fairly sharp from this exercise ... or none at all ... or that surprise super-crisp, great lighting, perfect pose image. I guess what I am saying is that it takes a combination of good technique, planning, watching closely, fast lenses, monopod/tripod, anticipation, and a lot of frames ... I have dozens of examples of where this "machine gun" technique has yielded one or two good images. Another thing that I often finding myself doing is holding the camera up to my eye and following the performer, waiting for that good segment, for four or five minutes at a stretch. In a two hour concert with the 1D Mark II and 70-200mm f2.8 I have found I have a sore wrist at the end of the night.

And let me once again say: SHOOT UNTIL YOUR CF IS FULL. If you aren't shooting because you don't want to have too many images to process, the ones you do get will almost always be the worst of what you could have gotten. I spend hours and hours just culling out the soft images ... often over half my images on the first pass. Get a bigger or more CF cards. Put that puppy in the highest frame rate you've got (unless it is 8.5 fps in which case 3 fps is better). I expect to drive my 20D at 5 fps. Become One with the Tau. :)

Finally, I am attaching an image of Brian McComas (country singer/song writer) taken over a year ago (I have a very limited selection from here at work) at the Maverick Saloon at 129mm (don't know which lens) and 1/30th, handheld. While not ultra crisp, I think it demonstrates two of my principals: note the microphone is pretty crisp so there isn't too much camera shake, and it was an instant when Brian was "still" although a tad blurry ... I've got ten where he was real blurry!

Well, I rambled again, so bring me back to the actual question ... I've forgotten it from up here on my high horse! :confused:

aam1234

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 11:07

... softness is not a style but a technical failing unless you can produce razor sharp images at will.

Spoken like a true experienced photographer. Words of wisdom in my book (photographically speaking).

DwightMcCann

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 11:18

Aam, I like, "Any question worth asking is worth asking twice!" And, "The people who make mistakes make everything else!"

jfrancho

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 11:25

Happy Birthday!!!!

DwightMcCann

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 11:26

Geez, JF, I was just going to edit my last two posts into one but you caught me, so here's the post I deleted, again: OH, I'm 60 today and I think my wife may have sold our house last night!

For those anxiously awaiting my next event contribution in Urban Life, it will probably be of a poker tournament I will be shooting Saturday. The following week I will be shooting Smokey Robinson.

aam1234

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 11:36

Steve Parr brought up a good point (slow shutter speed). And your answer to him made me think about something. Disclaimer: I haven't seen Steve's photos yet.

Dwight, you told Steve that his photos are similar. I'm afraid that your photos have, somewhat, a repetitive style to them. Sharp, focused, well exposed. They look perfect! they really do.
But have you tried different styles. Panning maybe, or something different.

Just wondering.

aam1234

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 11:48

Happy Birthday!!!!

Yeah!

aam1234

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 11:50

And to our big guy...

DwightMcCann

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 11:50

Aam, well, that's a fair question! Yes, I regularly try to shoot a few frames with a bit of a different look to them, although I can't do the panning-with-flash thing since I can't use flash at the casino. I'm attaching a two second exposure of Clay Walker (country singer/songwrite) who is the guy at the middle microphone. It was between numbers and you can see him turning around to speak into a microphone that only his sidemen can hear to coordinate with them. I have a few other things, but I don't generally find the usual soft, blur, pan in low light sort of thing technically challenging or sophisticated which is what I enjoy. And, of course, I think my collage works are a bit different ... I'm still waiting to see some of you other guys assemble some band images into a collage ... Ben, are you here yet? Ben has some awesome work in that area! Some of Ben's very impressive stuff is at http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=83828

bennywager

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 11:57

Just got directed to this thread by dwight, he posted on my thread of a couple of recent gigs i photographed http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=83821
Just to give my two cents,
I use a fujifilm finepix s7000,
The first, third and last shots were all taken using the inbuilt flash and a fairly quick shutter speed, i don't know what the exact settings were or what arpiture i used (i believe it was around f5.6-f8) as i kind of trial and error my shots as i go.
the others were taken without the flash and with a slow shutter speed so i could capture the natural lighting, which on the drummer one imho was amazing and i was very lucky to get that shot.

anyway, thoughts are appreciated and i'm keen on reading all of your views on getting decent live shots

DwightMcCann

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 11:59

Ben, you are too modest! BTW, where do you live? Where do you shoot? Your signature doesn't have much information yet. Oh, and Welcome to POTN! :-)

DwightMcCann

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 12:19

Here's another one that isn't my usual style, Deana Carter's shoes! Just 'cause I'm old doesn't mean I'm not flexible.:p

aam1234

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 14:46

Dwight, I really hope you don't hate me for asking this. But I have to ask.

Your photos are first class, no denying that. But they appear "documentary" if you ask me. You record that event faithfully, that's for sure. But is that enough. Is that what you want. If the answer is "yes" then you have succeeded marvelously.

DwightMcCann

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 15:41

Aam, yes, for these events "documentary" is what I am after to a large extent. It would seem rather strange to me for me to try lay my "artistry" on top of all the effort the entertainers go to in order to convey their "artistry". It makes very little sense to me to have photographs with blurs and other "effects" on top of their lighting and fog machines that are producing what they wish to present, at least as my main product.

Also, if I can't "record that event faithfully" can I succeed anyway by blurring it up purposely? In some sense it goes back to my statement about softness being a technical failing. So, yes, I can produce razor sharp images ... but that doesn't mean that now I should blur it up, eh? And again, I don't think the collages are quite so documentary in nature although they are not so artistic as Ben's work. Also, I am now experiementing with DVD slideshows, although I will be using crisp clear images.

OTOH, I think your observation does explain why I am never happy with my nudes ... they are too documentary and not artistic ... so I don't do them. Same with glamour ... I'm not clever enough.

So, if your observation is a "criticism", can you show me some examples of what you consider effective alternatives? I am certainly open to most anything other than "I can't do it right so I'll pretend that doing it poorly is better art." :-) I'd love to add more "style" or styles to my bag of tricks. Anybody got suggestions or criticism ... my images are as good as they are because I listen intently to constructive criticism.

BTW, my 70-200mm f2.8 L IS USM just arrived at my office, repaired under warranty. I am stoked.

bennywager

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 15:51

Thanks dwight, much appreciated. I live in Nottingham and thats where I do most of my shooting although i may be lucky enough to go on a european tour photographing a couple of bands i work with. i also have a studio setup in my house, i've just done a shoot there tonight actually, i'll post a couple of pics from that soon as there are a couple of stunners. I got her in front of marshall stack an it was amazing. anyway, thanks again

DwightMcCann

7th of July 2005 (Thu), 16:03

I think we have quite a large contingent from Nottingham! Some famous enough to have been interviewed by BBC radio! :-) Again, welcome.

bennywager

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 10:14

I can only hope to be famous enough to be interviewed by the bbc some day.

I know these aren't from an event but I've posted some of the pics from last night as well if you're interested

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=643937#post643937

DwightMcCann

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 10:27

I am envious, Benny ... glamour is an area where I have no talent. I always feel like I am fumbling. I shot some glamour of my niece that you can see here (http://www.dwightmccann.com/TaylorMcCann/TaylorMcCann.htm) but they didn't have much punch. Maybe we should start a new Q&A: Glamour Photography for Documentary Types. :-)

bennywager

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 11:44

What kind of lighting are you using? I'd also suggest trying to get a bit more creative with the poses, look through magazines if you feel to be lacking in inspiration. I'd also try solid colour backdrops.
The q&a sounds like a good idea, we could all no doubt learn alot.
I'm intregreud as to how you got the last shot, looks like it could have ended painfully :)

O yea, I've also just noticed your comments on my band images, thanks alot, I really appreciate the praise you've given me

DwightMcCann

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 12:02

Yes, "lacking in inspiration" is a central problem. I'll work on the magazine reviews! Right now is very bad as I am incredibly busy with day job, side job and my wife is selling our house and moving us to a bigger (and nightmarishly expensive) house [please note that I am allowed to participate in all decisions but she is the brains of the outfit] ... we will probably be in escrow on our house Monday and will make an offer on a target house immediately thereafter. This is major trauma for a 60 year old ... ME!

Yes, the picture of Taylor "leaping" was an interesting surprise. My Bowens QUADX flash are really fast ... that image was only lighted for about 1/5500 sec. All she did was jump up, move into that position and then immediately back down ... she did NOT fly through the air and was only a few inches above the floor. It looks much more dramatic than it actually was ... I liked it and so did she. We shots hundreds and hundreds of frames that day and the ones on my website were the ones she chose for her "book". The little girl with her is my 3-1/2 year old daughter who is a really super model.

http://www.palsgaard-mccann.net/FamilyPictures/Anna/Anna29Months/Anna0046.JPG http://www.palsgaard-mccann.net/FamilyPictures/Anna/Anna30Months/Anna0164-400.jpg http://www.palsgaard-mccann.net/FamilyPictures/Anna/Anna30Months/AnnaMarna0081-400.jpg

Please pardon my need to post a few images of them here, sigh. These were in my "garage studio" which I will lose when we move, although I may get a bedroom as a replacement.

aam1234

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 12:02

The idea of a Q&A: Glamour Photography sounds good. Want to start one Dwight.

Edit: Forget the above idea, since you will be busy with the new house.

DwightMcCann

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 12:08

Aam, think we could get Charles to moderate? He's more nudes so maybe someone else? Personally, I feel that if I can't do glamour then nudes are just a pipedream as I see them as an order of magnitude more difficult. It would be hard for me to do it as I don't have any material to even start ... my few attempts have been so poor that I didn't keep any files.

bennywager

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 12:11

Good luck with your move, sounds like you're a very busy man.
Those other three photos are ace,
pity about the loss of that studio

aam1234

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 12:15

I remember your niece's photos and they look very nice. Do you have other photos/sessions we can look at.

Btw, your daughter look a lot like the photo in your avatar. Wishing her all the best.

DwightMcCann

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 12:30

Yes, my daughter and I look a fair bit alike, have the same blood type (different than my wife's) and I am sure she is mine even at my age! :) I expect that I will have some sort of studio in the new house but fear it will be too small ... life is an adventure.

Most of what I have done are a couple of shoots with my daughter that you can see on my personal website (see link in signature: Palsgaard-McCann.net), under Family Album and then my daughter's section. I have also done a few "band" portraits such as this:

http://mesacreek.info/Images/DonnySchreck450-0074.jpg

but generally don't have much on the web to link to. But hey, this should be in the Glamour Q&A rather than here.

aam1234

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 12:35

But hey, this should be in the Glamour Q&A rather than here.

Ha ha, you are right. We diverged a little :D

Steve Parr

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 13:26

http://mesacreek.info/Images/DonnySchreck450-0074.jpg

That man is to be commended on his choice of guitar.

Refer to the "What do you do for a living" thread if need be...

:D

Steve

DwightMcCann

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 13:28

Steve, you can see his band at www.mesacreek.info.

aam1234

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 15:24

So, if your observation is a "criticism", can you show me some examples of what you consider effective alternatives?

It's not criticism at all. I was thinking that since you have access to events and the casino appear to treat you well, I wondered if you've tried a different approach. Just for fun and experimentation at least.

As for examples. I was just checking jfranco's site and thought to link some of the things he's done. Things like:

This (http://plan-b.smugmug.com/gallery/456189/1/18406759/Large)

Or this (http://plan-b.smugmug.com/gallery/456189/1/18406763/Large)

Or even this (http://plan-b.smugmug.com/gallery/451697/1/15115928/Large). The guy looks funny though :D

Note to jfranco: if you mind linking to your photos please let me know and I'll delete the links.

DwightMcCann

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 15:58

To be clear, I have no negative associations with the term 'criticism' and no negative feelings about suggestions that I should, at least try, something different. OTOH, I think some of my images (perhaps not the ones I linked directly from Urban Life but available on my website) such as

http://www.dwightmccann.com/Images/ChakaKhan-1000/CK4254-1000.jpg

and this

http://www.dwightmccann.com/Images/ChakaKhan-1000/CK4262-1000.jpg

are a bit more like JF's stuff, but without the blurring, per se. And I thought that this one wasn't quite documentary:

http://www.dwightmccann.com/Images/ChakaKhan-1000/CK4542-1000.jpg

And certainly this one (Can you see the drummer? You can tell which cymbals he hit, and the general path of both drumsticks ... I thought it was really way cool! ) isn't documentary:

http://www.dwightmccann.com/Images/CharlieDanielsBand/CDB8347-1000.jpg

And this young woman:

http://www.dwightmccann.com/Images/LatinRBDance06112005/LRB8043-1000.jpg

Or this one:

http://www.dwightmccann.com/Images/LatinRBDance06112005/LRB7949-1000.JPG

Maybe I have tended to link in mostly "documentary style" images in Urban Life and should perhaps present some of my less 'mainline' images, too. Note that the first two were handheld but the last four were from a tripod. These are all available from my business website. Are these closer, or am I still missing the point somehow?

aam1234

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 16:12

Yes! that's exactly what I was referring to!

These are great photos Dwight! I really like them a lot.

DwightMcCann

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 16:19

[With a big smile on his face, he says] Good! But I now realize that with all the frames I always shoot that perhaps I should do a bit larger percentage experimental shots. I do really love the one of the drummer ... when I did it I had no idea that the drumstick paths would show up like that or that the cymbals that were hit would be different from the ones not. You can even see that his head bobbed around a bit. And maybe I will try some of those "long exposure on a tripod which you jiggle around a bit during the last 1/4 of the exposure time." Yup, this was a good piece of the thread for me ... it will expand my style(s) ... if I can remember to do it! :-)

aam1234

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 16:30

Personally I would love to see some of your experimentation.

Btw, have you tried B&W (on film camera :D no less).
I'm not making these up, I would imagine that this is what I would do if I were in your shoes.

DwightMcCann

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 17:01

OH, geez, I never even thought about film. Although I am likely to wait now until I sell all my Nikon stuff, which includes my only film body, an F100, and get around to picking up a new EOS film body. But I will keep it in mind. Although I would imagine that a few rolls of chromes could be really magnificent with this lighting. GREAT SUGGESTIONS!

bennywager

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 17:19

Personally I would love to see some of your experimentation.
I'd love to see some more of your experimental work aswell dwight, I think that picture of the drummer in particular is awesome.

Perspective shots are always a winner for me, a few examples of my favoured ones, without the excessive watermarking this time:D
1.
http://www.bastudios.com/images/potn/calper.jpg

2.
http://www.bastudios.com/images/potn/spyper.jpg

3.
http://www.bastudios.com/images/potn/spyper2.jpg

DwightMcCann

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 17:34

I understand, Benny, but generally getting heavy perspective is something I can't do ... they do not really want me with my belly against the stage or onstage or on a ladder! BUT, while the high end talent would have a conniption fit, the low end talent might well be amenable to my mounting a camera up in the lights, similar to what I may try with the boxing ... another excellent thought. Looks like my "backup" 20D will find itself used more than I expected. So, what about mounting hardware? If I need to mount my 20D with say my 16-35mm to a 1 inch diameter pipe, what do I use?

aam1234

8th of July 2005 (Fri), 18:11

That's the spirit Dwight!

If I go to a restaurant and look at the menu, I would pick the least dish I know about. If I don't try new things I'll never learn. Otherwise I'll be eating the same dishes over & over again :D

DwightMcCann

9th of July 2005 (Sat), 08:25

I very much appreciate everyone's participation in this thread. I imagine we will be slowing down but I hope that as we shoot more events and hopefully post something in Urban Life that you come back here and put in a note. I am subscribed to this thread (you all do know about that I expect ... so that you get email notices when there are updates!)

As noted several times, I will be shooting a poker tournament all day today, Texas Hold 'Em, at the casino, although I may come home for lunch and a nap.:o I will post something here with a link to whatever I put in Urban Life.

My next "real" concert will be Smokey Robinson on the 15th (I think that's the date) which is a ways away.

See ya' later!

Keiffer

10th of July 2005 (Sun), 00:37

Dwight, I have a question for you. But first let me say I have enjoyed all of your threads, Great shots and nice commentary. Ok now for the question, How often do you change lenses and location during a concert? Location being from front of audience to the back of the room. And one other thing do you shoot more on or off a tripod/monopod? I seen you mention something about this earlier in the thread.And thanks for your patience and thorough explainations through out this thread.

DwightMcCann

10th of July 2005 (Sun), 13:19

On my feet 15 straight hours yesterday shooting a poker tournament ... and didn't get the stunning images I wanted, sigh. As for your question, at the casino much depends on what sort of "rules" the tour stipulates. If it is just two or three songs, I start with my 70-200mm f2.8L IS USM near the front row, make sure I get the principal and then the sidemen if they have decent light. Then I switch to my 24-70mm f2.8 and get some full stage shots. If the songs are long, I switch back to the 70-200mm and work my way back up the center isle, shooting to include audience heads and full stage. When there isn't a restriction, I tend to start the same, but get more images, but may also switch in a wide angle to shoot perpendicular from the side to get stage and audience, and then spend much more time shooting from the back on a tripod. Near the end they often let the audience belly-up-to-the-stage and I move to the front again and shoot. It is nice to get the stage lighting shining on those happy faces, particularly if band members move up to touch hands ... a good example of this is in this Clay Walker collage in the upper right hand image: http://www.dwightmccann.com/Images/ChumashCollages/ClayWalkerCollagePrototype-1000-2.jpg.

At the Maverick Saloons I also change lenses three to six times and wander around ... I have no restrictions there and acts that start talking about restrictions are usually told to forget it ... although I am generally the only person with an SLR, there are usually lots of point-and-shoots and cell phones and it is not worth the effort to deal with it.

Finally, the tripod/monopod question! I have a monopod and should use it, but it always seems just on the far side of too inconvenient. At the casino the light is generally good enough that I don't really need it and at the Maverick there simply isn't room. But, I do use a tripod from the back of the casino a lot. I now have a 20D backup body and am seriously thinking about setting up the tripod with 20D and maybe the 300mm f2.8 with 1.4 TC ahead of time and just being able to move back there and shoot or even have an assistant (my wife) shooting in case of the first three songs rule.

I think you have to be ready to be flexible, have several plans and backup plans. To do a good job requires planning even if it seems like you should be able to walk in and just shoot ... that is one of the biggest differences between hobbyists and professionals ... the professional arrives early, has backup equipment and a plan and a backup plan or two and coordinates with everyone possible. The hobbyist shoots 50-100 frames one at a time and wants to save some space for later on his CF card. The professional shoots 200-600 frames and has a couple of backup CF cards just in case he is asked to shoot a 'Meet & Greet' that wasn't on the plans. FYI, I have never been asked to shoot a Meet & Greet at the casino and I take my 580EX with freshly charged batteries and a spare set. I don't want to be asked if I could fill in and do it and say, "Gosh, I didn't bring my flash with me, doh!"

Hope that helps. I would like to make the observation that to get the very best images often pushes the shoot beyond being a lot of fun and into being a lot of work ... we just have to hope that these are not mutually exclusive ends.

DwightMcCann

16th of July 2005 (Sat), 17:25

For those subscribed to this thread who might be interested, I have just posted on my shoot of Smokey Robinson last night over in Urban Life at http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=659592#post659592

cargo123

17th of July 2005 (Sun), 21:57

Dwight,
You have great talent. Are you able to use any of your shots for Ads, Retail Sales...? I had a project last March that was similar. I am new and don't know the legal end. I didn't sell any of the pictures, but had several requests. Any suggestions on legal side of this type of work?
thanks for sharing,
Mike

DwightMcCann

17th of July 2005 (Sun), 22:12

Well, the casino will allow me to do whatever I wish with the images ... the problem would be with the performers and their ownership ... so I do nothing to make money by selling the images I take at the casino, except build a substantial portfolio and unexcelled experience. Essentially the same thing goes for the Maverick Saloon images, although I am considering putting together a CD of all the performers and selling it at the saloons. We'll have to see where that goes. At the moment, I am devoting my time to learning new skills and technologies in support of my photographic habit.

Selling pictures of people from whom you do not have a model release is legally and ethically tricky so I don't think I'll offer an advice.

DwightMcCann

25th of July 2005 (Mon), 11:48

For those of you who may still be subscribed to this thread I'm posting a link to the thread of boxing images I shot on Friday night: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=676967#post676967

jwilson

25th of July 2005 (Mon), 21:32

Dwight, I've recently started working with a local band, photographing their events for their website. I've attached a few and, if not an imposition, would like your critique....My equipment was D300, D60, Canon EF 50mm f/1.8, and Canon EF 28-80mm f/3.5. No flash.

DwightMcCann

25th of July 2005 (Mon), 21:38

Jwilson, it would be nice if they were bigger ... from what I can see here they are excellent except for the shadow on the face of the first one and it would be nice if the second guitar in the second image wasn't looking away ... if there were several other musicians visible it wouldn't be so significant but there are only the two. Lighting looks superb. So, can you attach bigger versions or provide links if they are in an album somewhere?

jwilson

25th of July 2005 (Mon), 21:46

How's this for size....

jwilson

25th of July 2005 (Mon), 21:54

Here are a couple more....

Jeff

DwightMcCann

25th of July 2005 (Mon), 22:02

Excellent! Love the clarity and a great job given how the light appears! Can't say I'm enamored of the heavy guy's shorts, but maybe it was hot! :-) You might want to switch to a longer lens occasionally and get some head shots to go with these ... but that's a matter of style. I'd also urge you to post these over in Urban Living (where we Live Performer types have been relegated!) and see what some of the other guys think. They will probably want you to some long exposures and slow sync flash and other wild stuff to go with these, but you can just smile and nod knowlingly! No flash is best every time. Where were these taken?

jwilson

25th of July 2005 (Mon), 22:09

Thanks, appreciate the feedback. These were taken back in June over here in Western Michigan (we're going thru a bit of a heatwave right now so it was definitely hot!). The performance was in a dive bar on a stage about 15' x 20'. The guitarist programmed a good light show, though, which did a good job of disguising the small size of the bar. Flash photography is my weakness. Not sure how effectively I could utilize slow sync flash. Any suggestions?

DwightMcCann

26th of July 2005 (Tue), 10:07

Well, I wouldn't do it myself except after I had done everything else! :-) I'm not a flash sorta' guy. But if you take your images over to Urban Life and ask I think you'll get plenty of info on the techniques ... which might be really good for website images.

DwightMcCann

30th of July 2005 (Sat), 12:50

If you would like to see a few images of the Chumash Casino Resort Samala Room being setup and used as a boxing venue, I have a thread in Sports as http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=88861 with a few images from my 2600 frame timelapse series. Also, any questions you might have about what I am doing can be asked here or there.

Boudreaux

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 16:29

Dwight,

First, thanks for the contributions. I have enjoyed learning from your posts.

Q. On your collages, what is you original size that you start with. Your website shows pictures around 1000 x 667 or so. Is this sized down from originals. Is your intent for them to be a printed collage? Or a web based collage?

DwightMcCann

31st of July 2005 (Sun), 17:27

Boudreaux, there are enough collages now that they have a little bit of history. The first ever (Randy Travis) was done just to provide the casino with a way to know what images were on their CD when I was "auditioning" for the job. I printed in on 11x17" because that's the biggest paper I had handy and I was trying to get it back to them in a timely manner. The second one I did, Clay Walker, I did because I had just had a quadruple coronary bypass the month before and had a lot of time to play with the images ... I had had to have someone else carrry my camera case into and out of the casino for that shoot due to doctor's restrictions on weight I could lift. It was also targeted to 11x17". I liked the look of the audience ... in fullsize you could recognize twenty or more people if you knew them ... I liked the cowboy hats, hands in the air and blonde girls!

When the casino called me to negotiate an agreement, one of their stipulations was that I provide a collage, characteristics unspecified, for each event along with the images. So, for the next few months I made them to print on 11x17" paper, probably at 300 dpi. As a side note, our agreement is on a handshake.

Then the casino got an Epson 7600 printer. When I turned in the April 22nd boxing match material they had several requests for the collage and wound up printing it at 24x36". It held together quite well but it was a signal to me to up the data density or resolution. I now target 20x30" at 200 dpi, although I am sure they print very nicely at 24x36". They are slightly compressed jpg's around 9 MB made from the flattened image in PhotoImpact 10. For the more complicated collages I have had several very frustrating experiences in which I have spent several hours building an image only to have the system tell me "insufficient memory" when I tried to flatten or save the image! I am not sure what causes this problem as I have over 20 GB of spare disk space available to paging and that much more available to the application itself. I recently kicked my RAM up from 2 GB to 3 GB (I actually have 4 GB but one of the sticks seems to have a problem that I will get my coworker guru's to work on next week.) I don't yet know if this will make a difference. I also have in a box on my desk 1.2 TB of SATA disk and a controller that will become 900 GB of RAID 5 storage in my workstation ... again, I have no idea if this will help, but I am over running my current 160 GB image storage area due to the amount of shooting that I am doing.

Anyway, back to your question ... I generally provide the casino with their images in two sizes: fullsize (whatever is left after any cropping) and 1000 pixels on the longest side (for newspaper complimentary photos and the like) as jpegs with little compression. The fullsize images are generally about 1.2 to 2.0 MB and the 1000 pixel images are about 350 KB. When I finally got around to putting the casino work on my website I had the 1000 pixel images in hand from the epoch and that made them too easy to use to do anything else. You might notice that all the images from Maverick Saloon Project on my website are 500 pixels on the maximum size ... that was a website bandwidth issue at the earliest time. I would really like to do something nicer/flashier with all these exhibits, but it is a lot of work and not much motivation ... I have more paying work than I have time to do as it is, so I am not looking for work. Of course, I have a lot of ideas, including using Pekka's software to display the images, and a bunch of other website things but time is too precious if there is not financial reward.

Back to your questions ... I don't think the casino has any definitive plans for the pictures beyond having them in hand as a historical record at the moment. Several have been used on their website and two have been sent to the newspaper at their request. More specifically, my relationship with the casino is maturing/changing. I only started working with them at the first of the year. They are an excellent employer and I am open to any requests they might have. One of the things that may evolve is for the casino to refer newspaper writers and other journalists directly to me to provide pictures for their publications in the most timely manner. I have one such request pending right now. My casino "boss" recently decided he wanted to connect me to the tribal spokeswoman so that she could funnel such requests to me without having to go through him as an intermediary. It is possible that she may wish to explore additional areas for photographs beyond just the entertainment events I do now. I really have no idea. I do find it highly unlikely that my collages will ever be used for anything except local art and occasionally being sent to the 'local bands' for their enjoyment. I have sent a few directly to the management of a couple of bands and one collage is currently being used on a promotional website that references the casino as a client. Since this is not my day job I am very flexible.

One last thought: I still do a lot of stuff for free, even for the casino, but only as a learning tool. A good example is the timelapse of the boxing ring setup/fights/takedown. But, once I have that tool in my kit and can provide a demonstrate my facility, I will charge for it in the future. And just to be open about it, the only response I ever get from the casino when I suggest I might want to be paid for something extra is, "Send me an invoice". I do. They pay almost instantly!

Did I cover everything? I know I ramble.

Boudreaux

1st of August 2005 (Mon), 10:58

Yes, Dwight, you answered my question. I am a big reader of the posts here and enjoy learning from other photographers.

Thanks for the reponse. And I don't mind a detailed answer!

DwightMcCann

6th of August 2005 (Sat), 18:00

Eric has just posted shots from a club over in Urban Life at http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=90282 and his website (he provides a link) has a great range of images from the shoot. Not the kind of venue I have been shooting and I am very impressed with the "feel" and colors.

DwightMcCann

7th of August 2005 (Sun), 15:13

I just posted some images from the casino of The Original Lowriders (who would be called War except for some intellectual property rights issues!) at http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=701668#post701668

DwightMcCann

14th of August 2005 (Sun), 12:46

Well, no one has contributed here in a week, so I'll refer to my lastest submission in Urban Life: The Gipsy Kings over at http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=91901

DwightMcCann

26th of August 2005 (Fri), 14:17

Back again to leave a pointer to my last contribution in Urban Life, Al Green ... http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=94464

René Damkot

4th of September 2005 (Sun), 16:14

If I need to mount my 20D with say my 16-35mm to a 1 inch diameter pipe, what do I use?
Somethimng like this with a ball head attached: http://www.manfrotto.com/webdav/site/manfrotto/shared/_images/Lighting/product_images/zoom/6/normal/635.jpg
Manfrotto (Bogen) 635...
And some of my band pictures
here (http://ftp.castel.nl/~damkr01/images/ON_web2.jpg), and here (http://ftp.castel.nl/~damkr01/images/Atak_presentatie_web.jpg) and some portraits (http://ftp.castel.nl/~damkr01/images/Atak_portretten_web.jpg)

DwightMcCann

4th of September 2005 (Sun), 16:23

Rene, thank you ... I'll need to pursue a set of these Super Clamp devices and get definite measurements of the pipe diameters to which I will need to mount. BTW, I could not access any of your links as they all timed out.

tim

4th of September 2005 (Sun), 16:29

I can see the pics - nice Rene, very cool.

gmen

5th of September 2005 (Mon), 17:34

Somethimng like this with a ball head attached: http://www.manfrotto.com/webdav/site/manfrotto/shared/_images/Lighting/product_images/zoom/6/normal/635.jpg
Manfrotto (Bogen) 635...
And some of my band pictures
here (http://ftp.castel.nl/~damkr01/images/ON_web2.jpg), and here (http://ftp.castel.nl/~damkr01/images/Atak_presentatie_web.jpg) and some portraits (http://ftp.castel.nl/~damkr01/images/Atak_portretten_web.jpg)If you're attaching a ball head directly to a superclamp, you'll need a MN208 plate adapter: http://www.manfrotto.co.uk/product/search_result.php3?sku_search=208&bogen_sku_search=&name_search=&description_search=&submit.x=0&submit.y=0

The superclamp can be mounted to any tube from 0.5" to 2.1". It also comes with a wedge to allow it to fit to a square section as well: http://www.manfrotto.co.uk/product/templates/templates.php3?sectionid=221&itemid=344

Safety is key when using superclamps, don't forget to use a couple of steel safety ropes to secure your gear in case the clamp slips or the head fails - always account for the worst case scenario where safety is concerned.

Another item worthy of consideration is a vario-friction arm - MN244 http://www.manfrotto.co.uk/product/templates/templates.php3?sectionid=228&itemid=77 - which connects to the superclamp and is ideal to add some extra flexibility to your camera positioning. Avoid the magic arm - MN143 - as it is more prone to 'flopping'.

www.overxposed.com produces some rather nice platforms which are worthy of consideration as well if you're looking to use remote cameras.

---- Gavin

DwightMcCann

5th of September 2005 (Mon), 17:59

So, it looks like I will need one (or more) ball heads no matter what solution I choose. What ball heads do you recommend for a remote camera use? I have two tripods already: one with Bogen pan-tilt and one with full Wimberley, so I'm not really looking for a $400 top of the line ball head, too (am I?) In general, price is no object versus high quality and ease of use, but I don't want to throw money away.

So, what we're building here is a platform that can be attached to the overhead lighting structure at the boxing matches and hold 20D with lens and some sort of remote trigger. I can probably even get AC power up on the structure. I already have a Pocket Wizard for my studio lights but have no aversion to buying the "correct" solution for this application. Also, after looking at the OverExposed website, I can see that there are numerous other uses for the basic pieces when combined with various arms, pins, platforms, etc. All feedback and suggestions desired and welcome. Spending $1000USD on this project would be acceptable, although it might be delayed a few months. And thanks, again, Gavin. [Say, Gavin, do you ever put a camera behind the goal at football and shoot remote?]