Little League - closing down worked....

Well, before the big rain here in the northeast, my son's game went to 4 innings this a.m. Last night, he had his very first home run, and of course I wasn't there . I got home very late and had to run to get dinner for the other kids and missed the thrilling first home run. However, this morning, he continued his hot streak with tripling, doubling, and a hit. Pitching today went very well, and at the point when the raindrops started, they were winning 8-1.

The shot below was taken closed down to 3.2. I must say Dennis, you're right on the nose, subject isolation was not affected all that much, and I believe I got a much sharper image as a result. I did no editing except an over-all screen lighting method in CS2. The face was untouched, and no USM sharping applied. This was taken with my 70-200. The sigma 120-300 is on its way to me from its second trip to sigma. I will have it next for next weekend's games. I am just LOVING my new focusing screen (procrop), because I am getting such wonderful results with getting all image content inside an 8 x 10 ratio. Having those crop lines in the viewfinder is helping me tremendously. Thanks to all here who mentioned that possibility.

I also got an interesting BOB shot, but it wasn't of my son, and I await permission of the mom to post.

Thanks for any comment or feedback on this shot.

Pat

Great shot!

Pat, Looking good. I got my sigma 120-300mm f2.8. Will be trying it today on soccer.

Can you please give more info about the procrop screen? Does it affect metering?

bobbyz wrote in post #5632117
Pat, Looking good. I got my sigma 120-300mm f2.8. Will be trying it today on soccer.

Can you please give more info about the procrop screen? Does it affect metering?

The procrop focusing screen IS NOT a prism, so it has no effect whatsoever on metering. Rob Lewis sells these. All it is, it is the same exact focusing screen that canon puts in the camera (same part), except with crop lines etched on either side of the screen. I was lucky, I was so nervous about doing the installation myself, that I asked for help from Mack Camera (where the camera is under extended warranty), and they graciously assisted me. I live very, very close to where Mack Camera is, and the original owner of Mack Camera is a well-respected member of my town's little league organization (I think he was a founding member). So, I felt comfortable about asking them for help (even though they get very mixed reviews on the internet).

Bobby, but don't you have a IIN or something? They have interchangeable screens or no?? The 40d came out literally like 6 weeks after I bought my 30d last year, so this was a big deal about being able to swap out the screen for me. I'm so glad I did it.

If you need more information, don't hesitate to PM me.

Pat

Pat,

This is probably one of the best shots you have posted, but It's still just a tad under exposed. Opening up just a little bit more would have helped with the cap bill shadow. Enjoy the new lens when you get it back!

Sledhed wrote in post #5632793
Pat,

This is probably one of the best shots you have posted, but It's still just a tad under exposed. Opening up just a little bit more would have helped with the cap bill shadow. Enjoy the new lens when you get it back!

Chris -

Thank you! wow - I'm so glad that I'm finally getting somewhere.

I already had EC 1/3+, i wanted to control my experiment with closing down aperture, so I didnl't want to raise EC in this instance, so I could see from experience what happens. With the very overcast sky (It started pouring rain shortly after this shot), I probably should have.

Pat

pigtailpat wrote in post #5632878
Chris -

Thank you! wow - I'm so glad that I'm finally getting somewhere.

I already had EC 1/3+, i wanted to control my experiment with closing down aperture, so I didnl't want to raise EC in this instance, so I could see from experience what happens. With the very overcast sky (It started pouring rain shortly after this shot), I probably should have.

Pat

Let me re-interpret what Chris said to include raising your ISO a tad, rather than opening up your aperture. Today I shot soccer all day with my 400 f/2.8L at f/4.0, and still believe that stopping down is a good idea when you can get away with it (good enough light, sufficient separation between subject and background, etc).

I agree this is a much improved image. I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with once you get your 120-300.

Dennis

Sorry I didn't explain it enough but I was talking about adjusting your SS to overexpose a little. Adjust your ISO to get desired SS.

dmwierz wrote in post #5632979
Let me re-interpret what Chris said to include raising your ISO a tad, rather than opening up your aperture. Today I shot soccer all day with my 400 f/2.8L at f/4.0, and still believe that stopping down is a good idea when you can get away with it (good enough light, sufficient separation between subject and background, etc).

I agree this is a much improved image. I'm looking forward to seeing what you come up with once you get your 120-300.

Dennis

Oh - OK, you guys were referring to the ISO, not EC. That shot was taken with an 160 ISO, giving me a 1/1600 shutter speed. I did have a higher ISO at one point, but I was getting a faster shutter speed, and I lowered the ISO with the intent of slowing down the shutter. I guess I lowered it a bit too much, which resulted in the underexposure.

The 120-300 is coming home on Weds., next week. That same night at 6 PM is the last LL game for the regular season for my son. So if the weather and light hold out, I guess I'll give it another go after round 2 with sigma service. I'm not sure of the status of his team in the playoffs, but I he's playing on the all-star thing, which gives me more time. I'm just very thankful that if I had to lose the lens twice, that it was this year rather than next, which is his very last LL year. After 4 sons, I don't know what to feel - whether glad or sad.

Pat

OK I just Opanda installed on my new laptop so I can see the EXIF, try shooting in manual too. I think you'll like it once you get used to it. About the only time i switch from manual is when home plate is in the shadows and the infield is in full sun.

Sledhed wrote in post #5633084
OK I just Opanda installed on my new laptop so I can see the EXIF, try shooting in manual too. I think you'll like it once you get used to it. About the only time i switch from manual is when home plate is in the shadows and the infield is in full sun.

Chris -

I tried manual in a game situation I think once last year. I felt like not 2, but like 5 left thumbs. I was wayyyy too slow in adjusting to get the shot. I use manual exposure mostly when I am indoors (in non-game) situations with regular people shots.

This almost like the classic catch-22 situation, I fully realize that for me to get any better with manual exposure in game situations, I have to practice, practice, practice at games, but then, I am so afraid I'll miss so many shots due to my slowness, I don't do it. When I do nail exposure in manual, it is much better than what the camera does in aperture priority, there's no question about it. It's just about the ability to do it on a more regular basis that makes it so difficult for me. From my limited experience with manual exposure when I do use it indoors, it taught me ALOT about the interplay between ISO, shutter and aperture that was invaluable.

Pat

Pat - Using Av or Manual is sometimes a matter of personal preferrence, but in general, you should learn to shoot in Manual, as this is the best way to improve the quality of your images.

FWIW, in opposition to Chris, I frequently shoot outdoors in Av, and use the EC to adjust my exposure based on looking at the LCD and more importantly, the histogram of the shots as I take them.

I personally don't think the shot is that under-exposed: I posted a couple of histograms of your shot below. The first one is of the entire image. The second is what is called a facemask histogram, which is often used by portrait photographers, and is accomplished by using the elliptical marquee (or the magnetic lasso to be more accurate) tool in Photoshop to select just the face and then hitting Command-L (I'm a Mac guy, so use whatever the Windoze equivalent of this is if you're using GatesOS). The facemask histogram is helpful when you want to ensure the subject's face is properly exposed, but when the rest of the image might be throwing off the overall histogram.

They both show a shot that is not bad, from an exposure standpoint. I'd like to see higher peaks in the entire shot's histogram, which you can accomplish by adjusting the curves, or you can simply adjust the curves within the facial area selecting it with a magnetic lasso (what I would do) and adjust the curves while you have it selected to bring the detail out of the shadows and more accurately depict what you were seeing at the time you took the shot.

I'm not a big fan of fixing exposure in post when it should have been nailed when the image was taken, so I would suggest adding a little more EC when you take the shots, but sometimes you can only get so close when shooting, and have to resort to fine-tuning in post processing on the shots that are worth the extra effort.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Pat - I played around a little with your image, adjusting the curves and bringing out some of the detail in the face. Here's what I got with a very little amount of work.

The shot is kinda tough (especially for using Av, and for adjusting in post) because of the large area of dark trees behind the pitcher coupled with the large white sign in the middle. Av would have a lot of trouble deciding exactly how to expose the shot with such a wide range of brightness and darkness in the image (dynamic range). So, even in post, some parts of the image look a little blown out, but the facial detail is a bit better IMO.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Dennis -

Thanks. I appreciate it. Before I posted this shot, I did an overall screen lighting method in CS2, and I don't know whether or not this has hampered your efforts in postprocessing of the shot. I did nothing else to the shot before posting. I tried many times with curve adjustment in CS2, it's still an area where I have weakness in post. I am definitely printing this one as I believe it is a real keeper. Before printing I will apply USM etc.

Today there's a game with the other son - the southpaw - and I'll see if I can duplicate something with him. But he may not be pitching - I'll see.

Pat

Hope I'm not interfering and if I am I'm sorry. I just wanted to post another pp job of this shot. I cropped it a little tighter. I took the original, adjusted the levels, a hair Brightness/Contrast, Auto Color, Shadow/Highlight.

Then I selected the face with magnetic lasso and adjusted the levels on just the face. Added a hair dodging on the whites of the eyes. And then Smart Sharpened just a little at settings:
Amount 100%
Radius 0.3 pixels
Remove Lens Blur

That's it. Again sorry if I am interfering I know this post wasn't about pp'ing the shot. Thanx

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO