Equine and High Speed Photography

[glittertherapy]

Hi everyone! I am new to the forum, and I was hoping you would be able to help me out.

This year will be the first full season that my small company will be operating, and I have just purchased a new Canon EOS 70D. It came with two lenses: the 3.5-5.6f 18-55 mm IS STM and the 55-250mm 4-5.6 IS STM.

Mostly I will be shooting equine sports photos and pet portraits.

I have SO much more to learn as far as settings and post-processing - so any tips or tricks that you have would be greatly appreciated.

I am going to attach a few photos that I have taken recently, and a couple examples that show my editing capabilities.

Some of my photos are turning out grainy and blurry, and some are clear, but I'm not sure what makes the difference. Do I just need a "faster" lens? I've heard that for equine sports in particular, a 2.8f 70-200mm lens is the ideal, but those lenses are more than a bit outside of my price range at the moment. I would really like for my photos to be crisp and clean. I also would like to be able to capture photos with a high bokeh (I can't seem to do this at all right now).

I'm also having trouble keeping both the horse and fence in focus as they are jumping over it, any idea how I might improve on that?

Our FB page: TwoShoes Photography

ANY advice is appreciated!!!

[/URL][/IMG]

[/URL][/IMG]

 

[glittertherapy]

More photos:

Edited version of photo #1:

This one seems so much more blurry :| and not as sharp

Whereas this photo was taken on the first day and is MUCH more crisp. I still struggled getting the jump in focus as well as the horse, but at least the horse is clear.

 

[tirediron]

I'm not sure what you mean by "high bokeh"; shallow depth of field perhaps? The 70-200 f2.8 is probably the single most useful lens you could have in your kit for this sort of work, and if you don't have one now, you should make the acquisition of one your first choice. You can probably save a bit of coin by buying a used version of the previous generation, or even a third-party Tamron/Sigma/Tokina version.

 

[glittertherapy]

Sorry, I probably don't know what I mean by high bokeh either haha - I just mean I would love the backgrounds in my photos to be that blurred and soft look, even when shooting action shots!

Have you used the Tamron version of that type of lens? Buying that lens was going to be my top priority! Hoping I can sell enough photos in order to purchase it.

Thank you for the response!

 

[tirediron]

What you're describing is shallow depth of field achieved by using a longer focal length and larger aperture. I've not used any version other than the Nikon, but it is considered a "professional" lens, so it will be a good lens.

 

[Overread]

A few thoughts:

A) I'm concerned that you'd start a company whilst at the same time asking what are some very basic and elementary questions. Concerned because it might mean that you're unable to deliver the product you advertise to them which might well result in disagreements or conflicts. The last thing you want is to start a company and earn a bad reputation. A good reputation is hard to get but so easily lost.

B) You appear to have some solid editing skills; composition and general photography - although part of that might also be helped by shooting in good light. You have what I would consider a very solid foundation to build from.

I would thus advise possibly holding back on being a company and working and instead consider a few months of strict structured learning. With your current level I would guess you could pick up much of what you need pretty quickly - you can then start afresh from a stronger and more confident position.


1) Grainy - this is generally the result of two factors.
a) High ISO - a higher ISO value will increase the noise/grainyness of the photo*. This is unavoidable, but likewise there will be many times where you have to raise the ISO to get the shot you want in the light you're working in
b) Underexposure - if you underexpose a photo and then brighten it up in editing you will get more noise. Importantly if you underexpose and brighten you will get more noise than if you'd have raised the ISO at the time of shooting and exposed correctly and thus not had to brighten in editing.

As such whilst raising the ISO increase noise; if you need to raise it then do so.
Note noise is the opposite of sharpness when it comes to editing. You will want to invest time into learning effective noise removal/reduction coupled with sharpening methods. There's a lot of material out there on this so take some shots at high ISO and make some noisey shots to work with and practice on. Note much of the noise will vanish in web display or printing; but effective editing can make a vast difference**

2) Blurry - part of this is experience; although from mine I can say that 1/640sec is the slowest shutterspeed you can have for something like showjumping. At that speed you should get a sharp shot with most areas of detail and motion being sharp. 1/500sec and you'll start to see hooves and hair (mane/tail) blurring and any slower and you really will see blurring a lot more.
Any faster than 1/640sec is ideal; though of course you need the light for that.

3) Shallow depth of field is certainly the result of the aperture; but also distances come into play as well. In general though many horse events are hard to shoot because the background is often very close to the horse and rider. This means careful choosing of your shooting location - editing as you've done in shot 1 - and sometimes you just have to accept it.

4) Depth of field of horse and rider - in practical terms f2 is the widest I'd ever go with horse and rider in terms of aperture. Anywider and the thin depth of field will be very challenging to work with; especially with two focal points of interest (horse and rider). f2.8 to f5.6 is a practical working range for horses and riders. Often f2.8 when in low or challenging light conditions; you can sometimes find that the shoulder of the horse is better to aim for - easier to keep the focus tracking and somewhat in the middle between horse head and rider head - but depends a little on the angle you're shooting at and on the horse.

5) Ideally you want 100mm or longer for most equine photography; otherwise if you get too close for a portrait with a shorter focal length you can run the risk of perspective distortion where the closer parts are enlarged over those further away (you can see these in the extreme on those post/birthday cards with animals looking at the viewer with VAST noses all blown up compared to the rest of their head). Of course this assumes a portrait where the horse fills most of the frame; the further back you are the more you can get away with short focal length lenses - but in general 100mm or longer (and for most showjumping or similar you want to give them distance ot move anyway and not be crowding them).

6) A 70-200mm f2.8 can be a major workhorse [pun intended ] of this genre of photography. Able to work in portraits and posed shots as well as in the showring. Expensive, but honestly very well worth saving up for and purchasing. Canon has their own version in the MII which is very highly priced; whilst if you look second hand you might find older versions a bit cheaper.

7) If you plan to shoot showjumping in an indoor arena - or dressage or anything for that matter get ready for a big challenge. To prepare yourself
a) Shoot in an arena (obviously)
b) Set your camera to its high ISO setting (check the manual for how to enable "high" ISO setting that unlocks another stops worth of ISO) and get some shots
c) Practice with those shots with regard to noise removal.

I have been in cases where I've been at 1/500sec - f2.8 - ISO 125000 and still been underexposing. slowest sharp(ish) shutterspeed; widest aperture; highest ISO.

Remember most events won't let you use flash with horses and flash for such a large close-up animal and rider is not a simple matter of one on-camera flash anyway. So you've got to work with the light that the day gives you


Finally with regard to your second photo try to avoid bum-shots. When the horse and rider move away from you at a jump generally avoid it - most people dislike that angle and it would only serve purpose in showing someone their method whilst riding. Otherwise its generally not something people want to see [and yes I've seen loads of bum-jump shots on peoples online portfolios - doens't mean they sell any of them)

*technically digital has "noise" whilst film has "grain" the appearance of both is different enough that they are different things and thus different terms. Although most today will know what you mean with grainy in a digital shot.

 

[Overread]

As an additional thought - having had a quick glance through your facebook - you've got some pretty good understanding of the timing of shots to get the feet off the ground. Ideally try to aim for getting the back legs off the ground; if they are planted on the ground during a jump it looks odd; mostly because a horse puts a huge amount of energy into their back legs for a jump, but when that moment is frozen in a camera shot it lacks any sense of motion - the horse almost looking like they are leaning on a desk with their front body rather than projecting themselves up into the air. Sand on the ground bieng kicked up can sometimes mask this though (as the sand kicks up and thus gives a sense of motion).


Landing shots are also tricky; I must admit I do like some in general; but its one of those cases where right angle nad right pose and timing are critical. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't its not as sure as the early part of the jump where horse and rider are on the up

 

[tirediron]

On my first reading, I totally missed the "small company line" - that really does make your post a horse of an entirely different colour (pun also fully intended! ). I spent a little time looking through your facebook page, and to be honest, while you do have a couple of really, really nice shots (at least on screen), the vast majority of your work seems to lack refinement. Many images have exposure issues, off-level horizons, awkward crops, etc. I agree with Overread that you definitely have an eye for the moment, but your execution isn't quite there yet.

The majority of the issues are easily solved simply by shooting a little more loosely and paying closer attention in post. The stand-out area however is your lack of exposure control, due, I'm assuming to shooting only with ambient light. While I understand that the event work is a 'take what you're given' scenario, exposure-wise, almost all of your portraits would be improved by the addition of some supplemental lighting. Even a simple single reflector can be an invaluable tool.

I too recommend a little more time in practice before hanging your shingle out there.

 

[Designer]

Some of my photos are turning out grainy and blurry, and some are clear, but I'm not sure what makes the difference. Do I just need a "faster" lens? I've heard that for equine sports in particular, a 2.8f 70-200mm lens is the ideal, but those lenses are more than a bit outside of my price range at the moment. I would really like for my photos to be crisp and clean. I also would like to be able to capture photos with a high bokeh (I can't seem to do this at all right now).

I'm also having trouble keeping both the horse and fence in focus as they are jumping over it, any idea how I might improve on that?

Please do us a favor and post smaller files. The large version will come in handy if someone asks for it, but meanwhile, the huge files make loading the page and scrolling awkwardly slow.

Now to your questions:

I recommend that you do some independent study of exposure. You can get a lot online for free, so I will link one preferred site:

camrbridge in color

Next, the answer is; yes, as tirediron has written, get a better lens and then learn how to use it.

If your depth of field (DOF) is thin, your camera cannot get everything sharp all at once because the front of the horse is closer to the camera than the rear of the horse. Study DOF.

So now; if you want the horse and rider to be all sharp, you need a somewhat deeper DOF, but to get the background blurry, your DOF will pretty much have to stop at the rear of the horse leaving distant objects outside of the DOF. This is going to require some learning what all affects the DOF, how to manipulate it, and some "in the field" calculations before taking the photo. BTW: I have downloaded an application on my mobile that will do the calculations for me providing I enter the variables fairly closely.

 

[gsgary]

To get horse and rider in focus you have to use minimum F5.6 for amateurs shooting pro riders you can get away with F4 because their heads are much nearer the horses head

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

 

[dennybeall]

Some good advice so far. Also keep in mind that it's easier to get the horse in focus if they are coming directly towards or away from you. The closer to that the easier to stop the action.
Also there are times in the movement when the speed of the animals extremities, be it horse or dog, is slightly less such as at the very apex of a jump

 

[Overread]

Some good advice so far. Also keep in mind that it's easier to get the horse in focus if they are coming directly towards or away from you.

I'd disagree and say the opposite. A subject coming toward or away from the camera is making significant chances in distance from camera to subject the whole time. This means that the camera has to constantly resample the scene to focus. It puts the most strain on the AF.

In contrast a subject moving sideways to the camera is moving back/forward much less in comparison and thus is easier to focus upon.

 

[tirediron]

Some good advice so far. Also keep in mind that it's easier to get the horse in focus if they are coming directly towards or away from you.

I'd disagree and say the opposite. A subject coming toward or away from the camera is making significant chances in distance from camera to subject the whole time. This means that the camera has to constantly resample the scene to focus. It puts the most strain on the AF.

In contrast a subject moving sideways to the camera is moving back/forward much less in comparison and thus is easier to focus upon.

I'd say it depends on what focus mode you're using and how fast the horse is moving. If you're using continuous-servo AF then the camera should track the horse coming straight at you very easily since the apparent movement is zero. On the other hand a horse crossing will be more easily focused on with single-servo AF, but, at higher speeds may add the complexity of panning.

 

[chuasam]

If you're just selling to the riders they have generally lower expectations. Don't worry about post processing for now. Work more on your timing with the strides. Also slightly tilted horizons look odd.
The 70-200 f2.8 is generally considered the bare minimum lens.
Having to retouch the fences for all your images will get tiresome quickly. If you want to eliminate the fences, crawl on your belly and shoot from lower.
Don't worry so much about grain and don't be afraid to push to iso 1600 and up.

 

[gsgary]

Some good advice so far. Also keep in mind that it's easier to get the horse in focus if they are coming directly towards or away from you.

I'd disagree and say the opposite. A subject coming toward or away from the camera is making significant chances in distance from camera to subject the whole time. This means that the camera has to constantly resample the scene to focus. It puts the most strain on the AF.

In contrast a subject moving sideways to the camera is moving back/forward much less in comparison and thus is easier to focus upon.

I never used auto focus on horse jumping

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk