First Attempt at shooting show - Advice Needed

Well, after planning all week I got down to the club and waited for the band to start.

I said to myself that the opening acts seemed to be really mismatched with the band I was supposed to shoot.

Naturally, I found out that I was a day early and his band plays SATURDAY night not Friday night....

I was able to take some shots of this band Pompeii, a local band out of Oakland CA.

I was shooting with my new 50 1.4 at 1600. Since I didn't realize it at the time, I was thinking the band I was to see was on next so I didn't want to muscle my way directly in front of the stage for this band.

I am mixed about the results so any suggestions, comments and/or tips would be great since i am going AGAIN back into the City to try again!

What could I have done better or different (other than double checking the calendar)?

Thanks....
#1

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

I think they look pretty good. I really like the 4th one,except for the oof object in the foreground on the right side of the picture. One thing I've read about here is try and not chop off the ends of the guitar. On your last pic, I wonder if you could have shot it wide instead of tall from the guitar up and got the whole guitar and the top of his head? But they all look reasonably sharp & well exposed. Nice job.

I like 3. (1 is decent but in 3 the girl in the back has a better pose). I'd shoot big continuous bursts to get a range of facial expressions and motions, and then you can figure out which one looks best later.

Also, if you're shooting with the 50, and don't have anything else, i'd either move back or forward. I think most of these shots could have benefited from being wider. Be sure to get the whole guitar in the shot. Might be tough with a prime, you might have to move back more. You can always crop in but you can't get more of a shot...

It might also be nice to get some medium or closeup shots of each person. Like just the head and shoulders of each person when they're singing or something.

And I'm no pro at doing thse kinds of events, but if you used a flash you could probably get much better image quality. (ISO800 maybe) Don't want to be a nuisance though so I might be wrong...

And a last idea, but I might be totally wrong - if there's complex lighting you could perhaps talk to the person and tell them to turn it up a bit.

I like #1 and 4 best. I think I'd crop #2 a lot tighter (thru the mic stand.
Last one is the only one where I mind the cropped guitar neck.
There is a bit of a pinkish cast on them all, and I think you've blown the red channel on quite a few.
Apart from that: Nice.

It's allways good to shop up early

[QUOTE=oni0n56;2498902​]Be sure to get the whole guitar in the shot.

I've got to say it ... I don't get this rule ... I mean, of course, I anything it's ideal to get the full guitar head in the pic. I don't understand the implication when it's put this way that the pic would be crap or a reject because of it. I know there are plenty of pics of mine where the full guitar head is not in yet I and others. I don't think a pic is a wash if the full guitar head isn't in. There are definitely pics of mine that I regret and can see how the pic would be better but others how the pic would actually be worse - the proportion of the composition ruin, stands or other people introduced into the shot, etc.

It's a little thing but it would be nice if you put numbers by your images. I like #1 ... it just feels good. You have cut off a guitar head in all the rest ... doesn't ruin them but they feel less complete. The light is pretty harsh but I think they are a tad overexposed. And you shot some of these at ISO 800.

I have to agree with Dwight. The 50 1.4 is an extremely capably performer. These pics seem harsh and over-exposed. Looks like club lighting conditions, so you should be shooting at iso 1600.

I don't know if this is the photog's reason for being at 800 - a howard hughes like fear about noise. For such people, I wonder how the hell did you find a review on your canon dslr that did not much how great and usable iso1600 is on a canon. It's one of the prime selling pts. in every review I read that was any kind of thorough. Do some of you guys know what kind of camera you're using HE HE

Thanks for all the input. I'll give it another go tonight. Some I shot at 1600, some at 800. Just experimenting and seeing what I can do and how far I could push.

I didn't crop or PP just resized for posting. I also added the number for easier identification, thanks for the suggestion.

#5 is shot at 1600

Too say the club had a 'lighting system' would be VERY generous. A few spots and a boat load of bulb christmas lights hence the redish/pinkish hue.

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

I've shot a lot of pics from the front right side too... why?...cause all the spaces were taken on the front left side... Try getting over to the opposite side of the stage and you'll get the face of the guitar and possibly the neck and head in too...If the 20D has the same sensor as the 30D, there should be no noise problem at all, shooting ISO 1250 or 1600... Since they look soft it might not be just the speed and focus as much as camera shake too....

Otherwise, I see the compositions you're after...and they look pretty good... I also use the 50mm 1.4 often...and it is great for stepping back to encompass the subject...Later you can trim to size and be selective regarding framing...And therefore...it looks like I agree with the others on the above suggestions.

OK, last one from the 'better ones'. I did a little PP on this one. -- full gutiar shot although another 'right side'

MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

Now that one needed to be from the right side...good shot... you get the general idea...we're all subject to the same limitations of accessibility for the best shot possible.

I'm not a guitarist, but a piano player. If you ever shoot a pianist, don't cut out the hands and the keyboard - in fact you can miss the head and shoulders, but the arms, hands and keyboard are a must.

Just my personal take. I was playing at my daughter's wedding and the "very pro" photog made sure my head, shoulders, arms, hands and most of the keyboard were in the shots he took.

So I can understand the head of the guitar thing - it's the most interesting part.

Glenn NK wrote in post #2500186
So I can understand the head of the guitar thing - it's the most interesting part.

Yikkes ... the guitar head more interesting than the guitarist him/her-self! for me, the expression on the guitarists face and/or motion can make up for not have the guitar head in the pic, though definitely having the full head is a plus. also, we seem to be talking as if people deliberately choose to not include the guitar head, when then can. I've never heard of any photog that deliberate ignores the head ... if they can otherwise get it in the frame. it's just the nature of a concert and a moving guitarist plus various equipment and people that usually result in missing the head. I always try to get the head, if I can get it, but after the fact, I can be happy with many photos without the head and even can see how trying to get the head in would have cut something else interesting out.

I saw this thread last night at girlfriends house, but i wasnt signed in. The B/W shot is awsome,I think Jonstoy is right about right side, and also if it were me i think id take the Mic out of the shot, or blur it or something? as its a lil distracting, but i think its still an awsome shot iMHO.
James....

yeah, black and white really takes the pic up two levels. I would take the mic out of the pic, just blacken that area in with the clone or healing tool in ps.