PDA

View Full Version : Splish, Splash, Splosh - Diving Pics (56k warning)

gmen
3rd of July 2005 (Sun), 18:38
A brief opportunity to shoot diving this weekend while covering the London Youth Games... Here are a few of the results...

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/cq002.jpg

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/cq003.jpg

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/cq009.jpg

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/cq005.jpg
Dave_G
4th of July 2005 (Mon), 09:44
boiing!

2nd one - that poor lad's eyes are about to pop out by the looks of it!

water looks very tempting on a muggy day like today.
powerplay
12th of July 2005 (Tue), 12:37
Nice shots. I think a polarizer would have helped with the water reflections. its a bit distracting and takes away from the diver, but otherwise nice images
Cadwell
12th of July 2005 (Tue), 12:47
Nice shots. I think a polarizer would have helped with the water reflections. its a bit distracting and takes away from the diver, but otherwise nice images

A polarizer would have cost him 2 to 3 stops of light... pretty hard to maintain shutter speed indoors under those circumstances. By the EXIF he was already at ISO 1200 f/2.8...

Great shots Gavin, I like them! :)
Alan B
12th of July 2005 (Tue), 13:43
Cool shots :cool:

Have you got anymore shots of them just entering the water ?.They look really cool.
Noni
12th of July 2005 (Tue), 13:50
KNow what? I kinda like the water reflections...The last one is pretty neat - to see the body 1/2 in and 1/2 out is really a great catch.

best-
Noni
Curtis N
12th of July 2005 (Tue), 17:28
A polarizer would have cost him 2 to 3 stops of light... I've seen this claim before and it confuses me some. I just pointed my camera at a gray sky to see what it would meter, with and without my Tiffen Circular Polarizer.
Without CP - 1/320 shutter @ f/8
With CP - 1/100 shutter @ f/8

This is a difference of about 1 1/2 stops, and seems consistent with my recollection from using the CP on other occasions.

Could it be that, if used in a situation with a lot of glare in the scene (such as a diving pool), it would stop MORE light, thereby causing the camera to meter 2-3 stops differently, even though the reduction in the brightness of a non-glaring subject (such as a diver) would be much less?
gmen
13th of July 2005 (Wed), 05:02
Cheers for your comments folks!

Dave - Wish I'd shot with a longer lens as the bulging eyes would have made an excellent image all on their own!

Powerplay - A polariser would have stolen a bit too much light to allow me to freeze the motion. I also quite liked the effect of the rippling water at the time...

Glen - Yep, it was pretty gloomy in there and I was trying to avoid going all the way to ISO1600 or 3200 on this occasion as I was shooting with the 1D not the MkII

Noni - These guys didn't jump too high, so the timing wasn't too tricky... might be harder from the higher boards!

Alan - Here are a few more for good measure...

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/cq001.jpg

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/cq006.jpg

http://www.tgsphoto.co.uk/forum_images/cp010.jpg
tuggnet
14th of July 2005 (Thu), 14:50
For a natatorium, it looks like you have tons of light. My daughter does 1 meter spring board diving and I have the worst time getting good pics. Half the time I wonder why they bother to turn the lights on ;)

Here's one (teammate of my daughter and posted before) from last winter:
http://www.etbits.com/Angie%20web.jpg