A Few From the Local Ski Hill

[hankejp]

Here are some snowboard shots from our local ski hill taken last Wednesday.
Thanks for looking and any C&C you can provide.


1.)

2.)

3.)

4.)

 

[Gaerek]

I like these shots. Snow is difficult for most people to shoot, and it seems you got your exposure spot on. The only thing I might comment on is to get closer to your subject. Now, I understand that might not be possible. But for something like this, you probably want your subject to fill as much of the frame as possible. Ask yourself, how does the the extraneous trees in the background help the shot? Context maybe? But seeing a snowboarder already gives all the context you need.

#3 does the best job of this, but even with that one, I'd almost like to see him filling more of the frame. Maybe I'm wrong here, but in sports/action shots like this, the subject is what's really important. And unless the background has some specific reason for needing to be in the frame, it would likely help most shots if you cut out as much as possible.

 

[hankejp]

I like these shots. Snow is difficult for most people to shoot, and it seems you got your exposure spot on. The only thing I might comment on is to get closer to your subject. Now, I understand that might not be possible. But for something like this, you probably want your subject to fill as much of the frame as possible. Ask yourself, how does the the extraneous trees in the background help the shot? Context maybe? But seeing a snowboarder already gives all the context you need.

#3 does the best job of this, but even with that one, I'd almost like to see him filling more of the frame. Maybe I'm wrong here, but in sports/action shots like this, the subject is what's really important. And unless the background has some specific reason for needing to be in the frame, it would likely help most shots if you cut out as much as possible.

Thank you Garek. I agree on filling the shot more with the subject.

Thanks again

 

[KKJUN]

IMO both of you are wrong. For example, look at this shot:

(Actually, I wanted to show a tighter crop of that one, I later lost some of the sky and the snow at the very bottom, but I didn't upload that version. But this still illustrates my point)

I think it's a lot better than #3, which is actually the weakest of your photos. Your photos shows a guy on a snowboard, stuck mid-air in a strange position. I can't see how high up he is, I can't see where he started his jump and I can't see where he's going to land. In my photo, you can. It shows a snowboarding trick, not just a snowboarder. You can feel where he left the ramp and where he's going to land. I'm not saying that this is the only possible perspective, and you probably need a fish eye lens to really pull it off. So for an alternative, look at this shot:

This one doesn't show the starting point of the trick, but it does show the ground which gives you a feel of how high he actually was. Again, it shows a trick, provides a lot of context. It's not just a dude on a snowboard stuck mid-air.

What you really need to do when shooting snowboarding, especially when shooting people which aren't extremely good is use a VERY low angle. I took the first shoot laying flat on the ground, the second one in a kneeling position (mostly because the snow was very soft and I didn't want to get sunk), but still further down the hill, fully zoomed in on my 40-150mm.

I'm sorry I had to go to such extreme lengths to make my point, but I'm ill and a bit bored...

 

[rehab]

yes, its true the subject is the main part of sports photography but that is not a general rule to all sports. Things like car racing and snowboarding, you need to have enough room in the frame to show where the action is going to go. Have some space in front of where you subject is moving towards, because we naturally want to see the next part of the sequence. So being very tight on the subject in snowboarding is not always a good thing. However those trees are very annoying in the picture and I can see why cropping them out would seem like a good reason.

 

[imagemaker46]

Your action is there but there is so much background that is sharp you lose the subject. Backgrounds ruin more photos than people can imagine, shooting at f5.6-6.3 makes a huge difference, in this case you'd still end up with a busy background. In KKJUN's photos, shooting against the sky cleans the background up, and when you have just sky to shoot against you can work at f8-11 and it doesn't matter. I shot this snowboard photo last month. It was shot at iso 500- 1000th 6.3 on an overcast day

http://i108.photobucket.com/albums/n11/fmanphoto/AlexThorp-BC.jpg

 

[hankejp]

Thank you all for your insights. This give me some thinking to do for next years shots. I appreciate all the feedback.

 

[Kyna]

Makes me want to get on my board!

 

[Gaerek]

IMO both of you are wrong.

In your shots, the background adds something to the shot. In the shots the OP posted, the background did nothing but distract from the action. In those shots, he needed to either move closer, zoom in, or crop in order to get a good shot. He could have also changed the angle he shot from, as in your lower angle shots. I didn't mention that in my previous post because I was commenting specifically on the shots he posted. Simply put, a tighter shot on any of the 4 would have improved them all.

I think it's a lot better than #3, which is actually the weakest of your photos. Your photos shows a guy on a snowboard, stuck mid-air in a strange position. I can't see how high up he is, I can't see where he started his jump and I can't see where he's going to land. In my photo, you can. It shows a snowboarding trick, not just a snowboarder. You can feel where he left the ramp and where he's going to land. I'm not saying that this is the only possible perspective, and you probably need a fish eye lens to really pull it off.

Although I really do like your shots, and you do a great job illustrating a different way of shooting this type of thing, one thing is missing. Passion. Sure, it's cool to see a snow boarder 20 feet in the air doing a trick, but I can't see his face. I can't see any intensity from the boarder. I know from experience as a snowboarder how hard he's working, but someone who has never hit the slopes in their lives has no idea the difficulty of what they are seeing. They're likely thinking, I've seen hundreds of snow boarders do that on TV, it's easy! The only way you can show that intensity is through the expression on the boarder's face. Think back to some of the most memorable sports photos you've ever seen. There's an element that is in most of them. It's the intensity in the athlete's face. There's drive, determination, passion, and a complete sense of being in that moment.

Let me give you an example of one that really sticks in my mind. My wife used to race bicycles, and she had this photo in her room. Actually, it was a motivational poster with this photo, with the word intensity on the bottom. This is Greg LeMond about to win a World Championship. If the photo were zoomed out to give some context to what was happening, it would have been a few guys riding bikes on a road with some spectators. You remove the surroundings, and you have a memorable sports photo, and probably one of (if not the) most famous photo in cycling history.

This one doesn't show the starting point of the trick, but it does show the ground which gives you a feel of how high he actually was. Again, it shows a trick, provides a lot of context. It's not just a dude on a snowboard stuck mid-air.

Context is important, but if it doesn't add to the shot, get rid of it! Your shots: Context helps. OP's shots: Context hurts. Now, with all that said, I do not thing you are wrong in your technique, or your photos. I love photos like the ones you've posted. They demonstrate technique and skill in the athlete. Unfortunately there's little emotion (besides a sense of, "Wow, that's an impressive trick.") The point here though, is that there is a time and place for both. What I had said was something to improve the photos that were posted. What you said was giving a different technique. Neither is wrong, and both have a place. I will also admit that with snowboarding, your technique is a bit more successful in most cases than the one I've described. For the same reason that it would be in car racing, or some other sport where the athlete's face is covered up. But if you can see the face, it really can help to make a more emotional and inspirational photograph.

I'm sorry I had to go to such extreme lengths to make my point, but I'm ill and a bit bored...

No problem, I'm a glutton for argument, lol.

 

[12sndsgood]

yeah i think the background is the most distracting point of the photo. but being a snowboarder myself, i have to agree with kkjun more on a better approach. close up shots show the person but if you dont see the ramp they shot off of or how far they are in the air it just loses everything to me. the emotion comes from seeing the guy launching 30' in the air and knowing the consequences if he doesnt make it. when you can't see the ramp or the landing as in shot 3 it just looks like its a guy jumping who maybe a whole foot above the ground. there is no real gauge to tell how intense the trick is. to me there wont be much emotion for me if you can't tell how high up he is or how far he's launching. if you want an upclose emotional face shot save that for when the guy is sliding a rail and you can get in tight and still have a good sence of what is going on.