Two thing you DON'T need for HS football ...

namasste wrote in post #10899253
Nice stuff Dave. I also think it depends on what you are shooting. If its for parent sales, I can tell you that way out here in Bay, I sell more candid/sideline stuff than I ever sell action. Might make one think parents don't care but that's not true, they just don't buy. The way I am sure its not true is that I recently offered a game shoot (focus on a single athlete all game) as an auction package for a charity event and there was a bidding war amongst the very parents who never buy action from me. The package went for more than I'd typically make in a season shooting action for this team. Its all good since the money is going to a great purpose but it was interesting all the same.

Back on topic, try a custom WB using a $5 gray card. You'll probably have to do a couple during the game as ambient fades but it'll correct a good deal of the WB problems and is dirt cheap. I'd also shoot RAW if doing ambient football as it does offer a little latitude in post. Nice work again man. See ya.

Scott, thanks for the info. Always shooting raw files and trying to correct best I can. Must invest in a WhiBal or something like that ... certainly would help.

I posted last week about showing up at 6pm to catch all the warmup action and the kids with helmets off. Probably 2/3 of what I shoot now is concentrated on sideline shots, pregame stuff, fan shots of the kids, (who paint themselves red, white and black!) and cheerleader shots.

The close-up of the kid with his helmet up is a good example. Catching kids on the bench with coaches coaching ... you know the drill!

Thanks for your comments. Appreciate the input.

dave

ChrisK10 wrote in post #10909575
Dave

That is incredible. I am shooting with the same set up as you are using. In our home stadium I have to shoot at iso 5000 to get 1/800 to get rid of motion blur. That stadium you are shooting in must have great lighting. I am considering buying a bracket and sync cable to use with my 580EXII and try my hand at flash. I'm a little nervous though because the flash and I so far have not been very compatible.

Very nice shots.

Thanks Chris. And yeah, the kids' home stadium has GREAT lighting. When I show up at the other facilities, the first thing I do is count the number of lights in each light standard surrounding the field. For comparison, the home field has 32 lights on 4 standards. Many fields have half that number or fewer! This week's game is at a field where parking pickup trucks at the corners with their brights on would be better than what they currently have! They overspent on a new turf field and underspent on lighting!

I tried the flash last year. With batteries in the flash itself, you get one crack at each shot. Exposure is dependent on distance of players to camera, always fighting the massive demon-eye thing going on (even with flash mounted below on a monopod) and the obvious flash falloff and motion blur around the shots.

Some are REALLY good at flash. Me, not so much!!! Good luck if you decide to use flash and post some shots. I'm sure those who have it mastered would provide help if needed.

dave

John Hayes wrote in post #10905172
Nice job..too bad I can't do as well. This is a sample from last Friday night HS game. Straight out of the camera.

Shot with a 7D and 70-200 2.8 IS

2.8 @3200

100% crop

Wow John, I'm truly grateful for the light at our home stadium more than every, now! However, the boys are playing at the worst lit stadium we'll see next week. Spent all their money on a new turf field and forgot to budget money for lights! Two years ago, a couple of dads and I were wondering how the kids could pick up the ball on pass plays since they were playing in the DARK!!!

dave

Grom wrote in post #10909208
Just curious, since you have a 7d if you ever went movie mode and capture a still from the clip? Is it better?

I don't use the video on the camera. However, one of the dads who shoots at the games has a daughter in the band. He went to the top of the stadium and shot the kids spelling out W - H - S in script on the field and said it looked like a movie in HD after processing.

Guess the 7D has pretty good video capability!

dave

snyderman wrote in post #10912992
Wow John, I'm truly grateful for the light at our home stadium more than every, now! However, the boys are playing at the worst lit stadium we'll see next week. Spent all their money on a new turf field and forgot to budget money for lights! Two years ago, a couple of dads and I were wondering how the kids could pick up the ball on pass plays since they were playing in the DARK!!!

dave

Yeah, it is pretty pathetic. Friday I am going to try using flash. I only have a 430exII so hopefully it will be enough. I would think it's got to be better than nothing.

John Hayes wrote in post #10905172
Nice job..too bad I can't do as well. This is a sample from last Friday night HS game. Straight out of the camera.

Shot with a 7D and 70-200 2.8 IS

2.8 @3200

100% crop

What is the ss? This looks quite bad, IMHO, like there are no lights at all. I am thinking of 7d as my 1dmk2 is not good at high ISO settings.

Edited: - Just read your comments.

Nice work. I would watch the cutting off of limbs a bit.

These do prove that you don't need a 300 2.8 to get great football shots.

bobbyz wrote in post #10918066
What is the ss? This looks quite bad, IMHO, like there are no lights at all. I am thinking of 7d as my 1dmk2 is not good at high ISO settings.

Edited: - Just read your comments.

The problem is the image is grossly underexposed, which increases noise, especially at high ISOs. At high ISOs, overexpose a stop or two and noise becomes less noticeable and more manageable.

The idmk2 can produce decent images at high ISOs provided exposure is handled accordingly. Crank up the ISO on your 7d, overexpose by a stop or two, and I am sure the images produced will clean up nicely.

so.... how much did you actually crop to get these shots?

snyderman wrote in post #10894558
1. A 300 f/2.8 or longer; 2. Flash.

you will say that until you shoot with a 300 f/2.8 or longer... this is high shool football at 400mm...

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

or shoot on a field, like I did last night, where ambient was F2.8/6400/200s

c2thew wrote in post #10929910
so.... how much did you actually crop to get these shots?

Not too much at all. I usually wait for the action to come to me so most shots were on 'my side of the field' if you know what I mean. When the action goes to the other side of the field, I put the camera down.

The only real cropping I do is taking stuff out of the pic that doesn't support the main action. Probably 25% crops are the most I ever lose.

dave

Dan-o wrote in post #10931587
or shoot on a field, like I did last night, where ambient was F2.8/6400/200s

Dan-o,

I didn't go to last night's game because of that. We're losing light really fast this time of year. The boys away game was on a turf field where they ran out of money for lights. Better just to stay home than be in the f/2.8/6400/200s situation ... and shooting in the cold to boot!

dave

sch_photo wrote in post #10931395
you will say that until you shoot with a 300 f/2.8 or longer... this is high shool football at 400mm...

No question ... I'd LOVE to have a 300 f/2.8. That was the plan for this year but came up woefully short on cash to purchase. I'm trying to subsidise my camera purchases with band gig money. Didn't earn 300 f/2.8 money this summer, sad to say!

dave

I agree Dave. I shot F2.8/1000/250s shutter but just don't like the look over all. I like to get ambient and flash a little closer to avoid shadows. I'll post some pics up later this weekend.