2nd Track Meet - Running and Pole Vault C&C Welcome and requested

[AceCo55]

Completely understand your viewpoint on #4 and #6. Totally respect that people have different opinions to me.

 

[molested_cow]

I think you can go higher with your aperture setting for less dof because you are showing too much background, especially the one with the wire fence in the background. This can help you with a shorter shutter speed for better still captures.

 

[Mach0]

.

One of the first thing I teach my students in my DSLR course, is not to trust the image on the LCD (in terms of brightness/exposure). A much better tool to judge exposure is to look at the histogram. Usually when you look at the histogram, you want to be wary of clipping/blowing the highlights, but in a situation like this, the sky may have to be a little blown to get exposure on the subject.

x2. I had the same issue. I adjusted the brightness of my LCD to get closer to what the real image is like but I still check the histogram.

 

[CMfromIL]

I may try that. I was at f/7.1. I didn't want DOF too shallow though because I wasn't sure about capturing the whole athlete in the frame. I was trying to avoid the face being in focus, but the legs not, etc.

I'll try that another time, thanks for the suggestion.

 

[jfrabat]

I think so... Do you have photoshop or similar? If so, you can multiply layers and mask the foreground to get a bit darker background...

 

[imagemaker46]

I think so... Do you have photoshop or similar? If so, you can multiply layers and mask the foreground to get a bit darker background...

Yes, use photoshop to create something. Spoken by a true camera owner.

 

[Ryan L]

I think so... Do you have photoshop or similar? If so, you can multiply layers and mask the foreground to get a bit darker background...

Yes, use photoshop to create something. Spoken by a true camera owner.

It's not like he is telling him to swap heads. Without fill he's not going to get both exposures of the subject, and the sky. For the safety of the pole vaulter, flash isnt allowed. If the shot was worthy of photoshopping to bring them both together (which I don't think any of these are) I would say to do it.

 

[jfrabat]

Yes, use photoshop to create something. Spoken by a true camera owner.

Not create; bring up whats already there. Would you critique Ansel Adams (not that I would even dare compare yo him!) for his techniques of exposing different parts of his shots differently? And that was done in film days... How is my recommendation different?

 

[tirediron]

Yes, use photoshop to create something. Spoken by a true camera owner.

Not create; bring up whats already there. Would you critique Ansel Adams (not that I would even dare compare yo him!) for his techniques of exposing different parts of his shots differently? And that was done in film days... How is my recommendation different?

I have to agree with you; this is a case where post-processing is going to enhance an image that wasn't ideal in-camera due to reasons beyond the photographer's control. This is, to me, exactly what PP is intended for. Adams and many others are known for taking far, far long to get a print out of the darkroom than they ever did capturing the image in the camera.

 

[imagemaker46]

There is nothing wrong with blowing out a background in order to end up with a good image. It starts in the camera, a correct exposure on the subject. What I am saying is that too many people skip the correct exposure step with the plans on just using photoshop to fix the image. In this case the op's images,exposures on the subject are off, having a clean background is more important than having a pefectly exposed background and and incorrect exposure on the subject. There have been lots of great photographers that spent alot of time dodging and burning prints in the darkroom just to get it right, there is an art to that, and it is rapidly being replaced by one click fixes.

Get it right in the camera first, and it takes alot of time to understand that, and it also takes experience.