Concert Photography

[CallibCarver]

Howdy everyone,

I have shot a fair share of photos, but I wanted to try my hand at shooting a band during their show. I have a few bands that will be preforming in the next week or so, and wanted to shoot their show.

What techniques, equipment, camera settings, etc. would you suggest I use.

Just for reference I have a Nikon D40 & a 18-55mm lens.

Thanks for any help.

 

[GrantH]

Google search...or search this forum.

 

[gsgary]

With that camera and len there is not much chance of getting good shots, your lens is nowhere near fast enough

 

[bentcountershaft]

You'll need to use the highest ISO setting you feel comfortable using, shutter speeds of at least 1/125 - 1/200 and a lens that opens up to at least 1.8-2.0. Unless these shows are in daylight or the most unbelievably well lit small venues on earth I'm afraid Gary's right. Your kit lens won't allow enough light in to make a good exposure.

 

[CallibCarver]

I figured as much. I've been looking to upgrade my entire camera & lens. But as you all know it's a bit more than pocket change you have to spend on the equipment. But always worth. I do however have a lens that I can borrow from a friend that I can use with my camera. I'll play with it, and try the settings gsgary suggested.

 

[fjrabon]

yeah, the D40 isn't particularly good at high ISO, so just jacking the ISO to the ceiling isn't much of an option. and the 18-55mm will have you shooting at 35-55 mm most of the time, meaning your fastest aperture will be around f/4.5 to f/5.6 or so. Which really won't get it done for low light concert photography.

I've always said that concert photography is the perfect storm for a money pit:

A) everybody wants to do it, many for free, so there is very little demand for paid images any more
B) to produce images that actually stand above the crowd requires incredibly expensive gear: a newer body that will handle very high ISO well and fast glass, plus multiple lenses to allow you to get both the standard shots, plus cool shots that nobody else is getting
C) with the proliferation of hobbyists with lots of disposable income, you have a glut of people taking average photos, but with really good gear. Unfortunately concert photography is one of the few genres where an average photo shot with great gear will beat a good photographer with gear that isn't up to par. Most genres this isn't the case. But in concert photography, the rich, untalented bastard with a D4 and a 35mm 1.4, 50mm 1.4 and 70-200 f/2.8 VRII is going to beat the pants off of even the best photographer using a D40 and kit lens. He'll get mediocre, but usable images. You'll get unusable images. and unusable images are unusable, no matter how much thought and talent go into them.

 

[CallibCarver]

fjrabon I agree with the whole good gear, bad photographers part. I've been to a handful of conferences for journalism, and I write and do photos. I see a ton of people their with high end gear, but have no clue how to use it or what everything does. Everyone starts somewhere, but it makes die hard photographers jobs/lives harder. But I like to think it isn't your gear it's the photo you take.

I personally don't plan to do concerts as part of my studio work, I just haven't done them before. So I wanted to give it a try and see what I get.
But I wasn't sure what would work best as far as settings, and I'm always hesitant with certain events, due to my gear. But I'm always willing to try.
Ex: sports, I always get sent to do sports photos for my college paper. I've gotten lucky enough to get "the shot" damn near perfect, short of a little grainy.
Which I know is my camera/lens not being the idea sports photo equipment. But make do with what you got, so.

 

[fjrabon]

fjrabon I agree with the whole good gear, bad photographers part. I've been to a handful of conferences for journalism, and I write and do photos. I see a ton of people their with high end gear, but have no clue how to use it or what everything does. Everyone starts somewhere, but it makes die hard photographers jobs/lives harder. But I like to think it isn't your gear it's the photo you take.

I personally don't plan to do concerts as part of my studio work, I just haven't done them before. So I wanted to give it a try and see what I get.
But I wasn't sure what would work best as far as settings, and I'm always hesitant with certain events, due to my gear. But I'm always willing to try.
Ex: sports, I always get sent to do sports photos for my college paper. I've gotten lucky enough to get "the shot" damn near perfect, short of a little grainy.
Which I know is my camera/lens not being the idea sports photo equipment. But make do with what you got, so.

Yeah, most aspects of photojournalism, talent is the be all and end all, and gear is nearly irrelevant. I know some photojournalists that shoot with things like a Lumix LX5 and are perfectly find with their results. Portrait and magazine is similar, even though oddly they pay well. Landscape as well. I've seen people take landscape shots that sold for hundreds of dollars with a D3100 and the kit lens. I've seen people do portrait shoots with a t2i, a couple speedlights and cheap wireless triggers and get great results and get PAID doing it.

Concert, sadly, this isn't the case. You can grab a couple of shots here and there if you're really talented, but have subpar gear, but chances are that you'll miss a lot of killer shots, simply because your gear couldn't take that shot at the required shutter speed, with the light that was available.

Same for sports. I'm sure you've missed more than a few great plays. So while there were probably a few shots here and there you could grab, especially during day games, if you were shooting at night or in a gym, I'm sure you missed a lot of shots that were either blurry or killed by noise. When you have subpar gear in sports you constantly have to think "what can I get with what I've got", when you have the right gear, ALL you have to think about is "what is the KILLER shot that will floor everybody who sees it?"

 

[CallibCarver]

Yeah, with sports half my shots are instant trash.

 

[gsxturbo]

Kelby Training has an AWESOME series on concert photography. I may still have them on my computer if you send me a message.

 

[StandingBear1983]

First of all get yourself a 35\50mm 1.8G lens (200$) before you go 'all out' and invest a lot of cash, see if that's enough, if it isn't, THEN go all out and upgrade all your gear.

 

[Village Idiot]

Band portraiture is so much better than concert photography. Concert photography is fun, but what fjrabon said.

 

[Steve5D]

I've done a fair share of "music photography", both concert stuff and studio/portrait stuff.

I shoot with two bodies: a Canon 5D and a Canon 40D. I use the 24-70 f/2.8L on the 5D and the 70-200mm f/2.8L on the 40D.

I'm going to guess that you're probably going to be shooting in a "club" as opposed to a "concert venue".

Shooting in clubs has some unique challenges. Generally speaking, the lighting sucks. For whatever reason, many bands these days seem to think the red lighting is cool. Well, it may be, and it may look cool to the naked eye, but it presents an absolutely horrible condition in which to shoot. The only color that's worse is magenta. If a band is using only (or primarily) red lighting, I usually won't shoot.

In such instances, you can try talking to whoever's running the lights. Oftentimes, this guy is hired by the house and not the band and, as such, has a lot more leeway in how he chooses to light a band. I've made requests for more greens, whites and blues and, sometimes, they oblige. Often, however, they don't. It's hit or miss. I've also had lighting guys who agree to do it, and then seemingly suffer a stroke and completely forget they ever even had the conversation.

Assuming the lighting guy grants your wishes, well, now you've got another challenge to deal with, that being the proximity of the lights to the stage. The ceiling (where the light bar usually is) isn't that far from the stage, so the lights easily blow out the performers.

When I first started doing this, I would shoot a few frames in "P" mode, just to see what settings the camera wanted to see. I would then switch to Manual, set my camera to the settings in the "P" mode shot, and adjust from there. Nowadays, for a shoot at an actual concert venue, I can pretty much nail my settings from the get-go. In a bar or club, though, all bets are off.

Generally speaking, I shoot at an ISO of 1600 on the 40D and either 1000 or 1250 on the 5D. I'll set my white balance to tungsten. For a club shoot, my aperture will be at f/2.8. For a well lit concert venue, I've shot as high as f/8. Shutter speed is where you'll live or die. For clubs, it's sometimes difficult to get much higher than 1/60 of a second. Well, that's just not fast enough, and that's where the frustration sets in. You can freeze the action, but it'll be dark.

I've shot concerts in both raw and jpeg. Raw is the go-to in those dimply lit clubs. A well lit concert venue? I normally shoot jpeg for those.

I will take exception to something fjrabon said about gear. You don't need the latest and greatest equipment. Yes, an f/2.8 lens is almost a "must have", and a body that works well ay high ISO's is nice, but I shot concerts with a Canon 20D for a long time, and photos taken with that body have made me a lot of money. Okay, it may not have worked as well as my current bodies in low-light, but it still worked, and it worked well. A little tweaking in a noise-reduction program did the trick.

Here's a shot taken with the 5D:

John Rzeznik - Goo Goo Dolls

And the 40D:

Taylor Swift

And the 20D:

Tommy Shaw - Styx

Obviously, those were all taken under pretty damn good lighting conditions, but I wanted to show shots from three different bodies. Just because a camera is old doesn't mean it won't get the job done. I wouldn't hesitate to shoot a show with a 20D. Sure, it's several years old, but it's still a capable camera.

I also have to disagree with the idea that a great camera in the hands of a hack will garner better results than a "lesser" camera in the hands of a pro. Put Mario Andretti behind the wheel of an 88' Honda Civic, and he'll drive the wheels off it. Put my neighbor behind the wheel of a Ferrari 458, and he'll trash it before he gets out of his driveway. Knowledge and proficiency, I believe, are more important and, as a result, have more of an impact on the final image...

 

[DiskoJoe]

You could get some okay shots with your set up if you time things right and they have decent lighting. Try shooting at f4 for about 1/100 at iso 1600. Wait for the good lighting!