Candid Style pics at large events

When attending events where I know I shall be taking lots of images,
my normal set up would be to shoot on... Medium jpg (M1 )
using a 1D Mk2 and various lenses.
I know lots on here like Raw and fine jpg but if you get the results your happy with why bother ?

take a look and lets have your thoughts on image shot on Saturday at the Goodwood Revival, lots of people in period costumes, this is just 1 example.
I really do not think raw shooting would improve it in any way.

"Do not believe the 1D Mk2 gives you soft images"
Note..the image is a large file

http://www.pbase.com …back_photo/imag​e/49514139

Martin (Huckaback Photo)

Nice capture. Sharp enough to cut yourself I would clone out the thingy in the neck (jacket loop?) though

Martin - I always shoot RAW + JPG/large. Sometimes I have a so so pictures in JPG but in RAW I can get it better if needed.
The biggist advantage of RAW for me is to be able to adjust whitebalance and exposure in postprocessing.
Especially at events it's a big advantage because you don't have the time to adjust everything. So in RAW afeterwarth I can adjust more
things than with a JPG file. I love to shoot snapshots from people at events who are doing things and enjoying themselves.
It has given me many plesant and good pictures of people who mostly don't even know they been photografed.

Good luck.

Ren'e
Thanks for comments.
its an earing. I agree it might be better cloned out.
The quallity off this 300mm f 2.8 L is....from about 30 ft is just amazing.

Salleke
thanks for comment.
Often I shoot for audio visual shows and really don't want all the extra processing time associated with converting from Raw files.

Martin (Huckaback Photo)

My Gallery
http://www.pbase.com/h​uckaback_photo

That is an amazingly sharp image Martin, post a few more that you took at the Goodwood Revival, and I agree with you that shooting RAW is unlikely to improve this image, if you have a reasonable understanding of Photoshop a JPEG image will produce a stunning image.

Salleke.
One other thing to consider, this is typical of the results I'm getting straight out of camera, without any post processing, although I did down size for web slightly.
why should I need to fill up my cards and USB portable drive faster,
the image above would easilly print to 30" x 20", how many on here need anything larger.

Martin (Huckaback Photo)

Martin , That is superb . I have a 1dmk2 but no way it has produced any thing any where near that quality. However I tested out s , m1 , m2 & L all at max 10 compression and as you are finding they come out a lot sharper at the lower pixels . My camera even on L @ sharpen 4 or 5 is not sharp , photoshop sharpening is not enough either . I have now reluctantly sent it in for a check over . I hoping to purchase a 300 2.8 soon,....I hope . I love the camera but I have not had any stunning images, just saleable images from it since I move from my D1H 2.7mp .Looking at your image I just think I have a duffer .

Roy

Otta
I strugled for a long time trying to get sharp pictures with 1D mk2 , my D60 was really putting out images so much better.
now I'm happy the quallity is there. and can not be faulted,
by the wy contrast in camera is set +1 and sharpen on +4.
don't be frightened to use high Iso settings with mk2 320 I use as my lower end.
set up camera to use focus on the back button ..its custom function 4 ( CF4) once set use it for at least 2 weeks dont give up on this. it transformed the way I work and sudenly up came the sharpness With more shots in than out.
do not judge sharpness / softness on screen at 100% because you really are looking at a huge image (very close up) that image size would have a more normal viewing distance of 8 ft approx.

do some tests with and without a filter fitted and both tripod mounted, use self timer. sometimes the filter loses a bit of sharpness.
don't know which lenses you use but if its a L series f2.8 it really should deliver the goods.
I'm sure you don't need me to tell you which is your sharpest lens.
when you test do not shoot on an overcast dull day. also put the camera on just the 1 centre spot focus point.
forgot to say do the test with auto focus and then with manual focus..

finally down load an action for sharpening the images and try .
Luminosity sharpening.

hope all this info is helpfull.
Best of luck
Martin (Huckaback Photo)

PS. my image was jpg. just make sure you save as and set to jpg not some other format on your machine.
also with high sharpening in camera do not over do it with Un Sharp Mask in photoshop,
say max of 75 - 85 %...1.5...0

the lenses really do need to be the best to get the best out of camera. IMO.
my mk2 was awfully soft until sorted, by myself and has not been adjusted by Canon or any other.

Martin (Huckaback Photo)

Wow, that's superbly shot, and crisp!
I too find that when using an amazing L prime lens, like the 135/2L, that I need to do very little post processing. Almost everything comes out just right.
However, I still always shoot Raw as I can't be bothered with worrying about whether or not my white balance is correct at the time of shooting. Also, I shoot alot in difficult lighting where the dynamic range recovery abilities of Raw really comes in handy.

Morning Drisley
The most important thing here...If you the photographer have your own way of shooting and it works for you and the quallity is there ...then DO NOT CHANGE your technique .
once you reach that stage stick with it.
Drisley I've praised your work in the past and its tremendous. a sort of target for others to set there sights on and attain that same quallity.

Any camera club always has a few photographers producing top quallity professional standard work & often better than local pro's. the beginner or novice should set his sights at that level.
I did that 35 years ago, the first time my work went in an international salon & won some competitions ,I knew I was there.

as we all know the top quallity equipment and top notch technique is only a very small part of photography.
Seeing a PICTURE and putting that together in the frame.
The quallity of light and use of the light.
The subject and knowing your subject well. etc. etc.

Cheers and thanks for the kind comments.

Martin (Huckaback Photo)

Martin ,

Thanks very much.

Martin,

WOW! Thanks for the compliment! That made my day, especially considering the source. Again, THANKS!
I totally agree with your first statement. If I was good enough to judge wb on the fly, or if auto wb was a bit better, I might consider jpg most of the time. For those who already can do this, as it looks like you can, then I agree by all means keep shooting jpg.
And Martin, if you have any more shots with that beaufiful 300mm lens, please post them!

Great shot, Martin!

Though I'm a card-carrying member of the church of RAW, having been converted after many sermons from some of the duly ordained RAW preachers here (you know who you are), in fairness I would point out that POTN's own Maureen Souza has only recently "seen the light."

And she has posted so many outstanding images here before her conversion, to prove that you CAN, in fact, shoot JPEG and make great pictures.

This image is further proof. Thanks for sharing.

super shot ,i also shoot jpeg on my 1dmk2 i keep giveing raw a go but see no diffrence at all ,as for wb you can warm up cool down jpegs anyway .i dont see how your shot could be better if shot in raw .
i have never done a test but are you saying a lower size jpeg is sharper the largest setting ?
Rob.