sonny_c wrote in post #5240862
danaitch,
Thank you for taking the time to look and comment on my photos. I appreciate the feedback.
I find it curious that you mention my oversaturated colors and over-sharpening. When in fact neither has occurred. In camera all settings are set to default and in post processing I do not tweak color saturation. In addition, I use a normal setting for Unsharp Mask (amount: 100%, radius: .9 pixels, threshold: 0). Is this some standard critique you give to most members? I only ask cause you say
"At the risk of repeating myself...". No disrespect intended, just curious.
For the most part distracting backgrounds are part of shooting youth sports. Some or most of the fields I shoot at are near or around street traffic. Others are located at middle or high schools. These pose the same type of distractions (parents, parking lots full of vehicles, stray kids palying...). I try to make the best of the situation by shooting wide open at f/2.8. If that's not enough then so be it.
Cropping ...this topic is very subjective. For two years I tried really tight crops. I did this because it's what the "professionals" suggested. In those same two years I found my photos to be very boring and cookie cutter. I could find the same type shots everywhere I looked. Does that stuff sell? Yes. Do you see it in sports mags? Yes. My sales on the other hand were decent. Until last year. Not only did I change my cropping style, I also changed my shooting angle. Lower to the ground. Changing my eye level to match that of the youth athletes. This gives the illusion that a little 3 and a half foot kid is much larger. Combine that with my cropping style, changed everything for me. Not only are we sports photographers, but I try to tell a story with my photos. This is the reason for my wide crops. When I look at other photog's work I always ask myself questions like, "How did that RB break free?", or "What kind of pressure was the QB under as he delivered the winning TD pass?", or "What kind of coverage did the WR have to deal with to make the sensational catch?".
My style is not for everyone nor is it the right or wrong way. It's what works for me. Last year and this year sales have been wonderful. I'll let that dictate where I go next. Again, this was by no means any disrespect. I thought you'd appreciate a little insight to my way of thinking.
-Sonny
Sonny,
Please don't misunderstand, there was no disrespect intended.
As for the saturation, perhaps I've just been shooting for too long under grey, drizzly skies in the UK and the colours you displayed showed weather I'm just not used to!
As for the backgrounds and cropping, hey, I'm just critique-ing the shots as I would my own. As you say, the mags and newspapers tend to go for the 'obvious' and so my comments would have to fall into the 'obvious' bracket, being as they're consistent with the run-of-the-mill 'pro' reactions. For my own backgrounds, I also shoot nothing but amateur sports and suffer the same impact that you do from distracting backgrounds. It's not ideal, but in my opinion, nine times out of ten it distracts from an image rather than enhancing it.
I'm not a pro and I'm never likely to be, I'm just trying to give comments similar to those I've received from photographers with more ability than I'll EVER have, and whose comments have really helped me raise my game a bit. I needed to, too! 
The 'risk of repeating myself' was a misjudged comment, in isolation. It's just that I'd just responded to three threads, and in each one I'd mentioned similar things. I'm not used to such an active forum so I'll keep my witicisms to myself in the future. 
I'm wasn't trying to second guess your crops; the 'pursuit' one is especially well left and tells a great story.
Thanks for your time in responding to my response! 
