Horse Jumping

baturn · Mar 30, 2015

As this is my first time shooting this type of event (second time shooting any sport) I would really like some critique/comments and pointers. Please.

1.

2.

3.

baturn · Mar 31, 2015

Was it something I said?

astroNikon · Mar 31, 2015

baturn said:
Was it something I said?

I think ppl are just waking up .. my brain isn't in a C&C type of mood to check focus, etc as of yet ...

DarkShadow · Mar 31, 2015

Looks good to me,Nice action shots.

tirediron · Mar 31, 2015

Nicely done Brian; was this local? I think #2 is just about the perfect moment and composition. A shame about the background, but there's often little one can do at this sort of event. Would you have been able to perhaps use a larger aperture to throw the background a bit out of focus?

Overread · Mar 31, 2015

I've recently gotten into this too and here are my views:

1) The ground is doing really well for you; its kicking up really nicely which adds a lot! I would second that the 2nd shot is the best moment; you've got the rear legs coming off the ground (just) and the horse coming nice over the bars. Generally if hte rear legs are on the ground it makes it look odd because the horse puts all its force into both legs at once (typically) so it gets an almost "squatted" look rather than an action filled leap (at least when using a fast shutter speed without good motion blur to convey speed and motion).

2) Exposure looks a little hot. I tend to find that with a white horse I have to reign the exposure back a little to stop the horse blowing out. If you look in the second shot the rear leg and rump as well as shoulder all look like they've blown out. If you shot in RAW you might be able to recover this in editing (though you'd likely have to process the shot twice - once for highlights and once for the rest and then blend the two together).

3) White balance - I don't know it might be the overexposure and the ground not being a typical "sandy yellow" but it looks like the white-balance is a touch off. It's got a "style" to it but it seems cold/harsh overall. Can't pin my finger on it but might be wort playing with.

4) You caught the moment well; shutter speed is fast enough to stop blur and the frame captures all the horse (including whispy tail). Might have composed with a little more frame on the right side but otherwise a good setup.

5) Backgrounds are a nightmare. No other way to put it; at this kind of even they are. Sometimes its a case of moving around and trying to get an angle that minimises the distracting elements; or at least makes them more "scene" things that fit with the event. Sadly distances are oft such that even at f2.8 you can't really "blur" those things out and doing any wider is a bit of a risk with such a deep primary subject.

All in all I'd say a good first go; few things you might be able to change/improve in this shot and a few ideas for the future; but overall a very good first time!

baturn · Mar 31, 2015

tirediron said:
Nicely done Brian; was this local? I think #2 is just about the perfect moment and composition. A shame about the background, but there's often little one can do at this sort of event. Would you have been able to perhaps use a larger aperture to throw the background a bit out of focus?

Yes. This was at Duncan Exhibition grounds on Saturday. All shots at f5.6. I thought of going to f2.8 but thought it would be just as busy and distracting only out of focus. I will try a few things differently next time as I quite enjoyed this and intend to attend many more of this type of event.

baturn · Mar 31, 2015

Overread said:
I've recently gotten into this too and here are my views:

1) The ground is doing really well for you; its kicking up really nicely which adds a lot! I would second that the 2nd shot is the best moment; you've got the rear legs coming off the ground (just) and the horse coming nice over the bars. Generally if hte rear legs are on the ground it makes it look odd because the horse puts all its force into both legs at once (typically) so it gets an almost "squatted" look rather than an action filled leap (at least when using a fast shutter speed without good motion blur to convey speed and motion).

2) Exposure looks a little hot. I tend to find that with a white horse I have to reign the exposure back a little to stop the horse blowing out. If you look in the second shot the rear leg and rump as well as shoulder all look like they've blown out. If you shot in RAW you might be able to recover this in editing (though you'd likely have to process the shot twice - once for highlights and once for the rest and then blend the two together).

3) White balance - I don't know it might be the overexposure and the ground not being a typical "sandy yellow" but it looks like the white-balance is a touch off. It's got a "style" to it but it seems cold/harsh overall. Can't pin my finger on it but might be wort playing with.

4) You caught the moment well; shutter speed is fast enough to stop blur and the frame captures all the horse (including whispy tail). Might have composed with a little more frame on the right side but otherwise a good setup.

5) Backgrounds are a nightmare. No other way to put it; at this kind of even they are. Sometimes its a case of moving around and trying to get an angle that minimises the distracting elements; or at least makes them more "scene" things that fit with the event. Sadly distances are oft such that even at f2.8 you can't really "blur" those things out and doing any wider is a bit of a risk with such a deep primary subject.

All in all I'd say a good first go; few things you might be able to change/improve in this shot and a few ideas for the future; but overall a very good first time!

Thanks , Overread. This is exactly what I was after.
I did shoot in raw so will try to correct all you mentioned that can be done in post.
Unfortunately the crops in some cases were to get rid of even more distracting or even ugly backgrounds. I had complete freedom to move ( outside the ring) but all angles had some distractions close enough that I dont believe a wider aperture would have helped much. I will be doing this again and will try some things differently.
I shot these in manual with auto ISO and am guessing that has something to do with wide differences in exposure from frame to frame.

Thanks again.

Overread · Mar 31, 2015

Yep backgrounds are a real pain. Sometimes you can move and find a nice angle that gives you a more pleasing one; other times you might be more limited and there just isn't a good spot.

Sometimes if you're confident (and typically if the venue is smaller since bigger ones tend to have more safety restrictions and established pros already) you can ask to go out into the ring itself. That can sometimes let you get a nicer angle; though you've got to know the course and make sure your positioned out of the way (typically I'd suggest talking to whoever is in charge/course designer for a safe spot to stand as they typically know where its best).

baturn · Mar 31, 2015

With some suggested edits and crop.

Overread · Mar 31, 2015

That's looking a lot better on the exposure! I can see more of the dappling on the shoulder now and whilst its still evident that overexposure has taken place its a lot more muted. The surrounding areas (whites on vehicles and jump) are also more muted which makes them far less glaring to the eye.
White balance is warmer too and not so stark cold feeling.

Derrel · Mar 31, 2015

Yes, the shot in #10 is good. Yeah...the background is a bit distracting, in a way--but, 40,50 years down the road, that "antique" SUV and white horse trailer will look very of this era...and...you know, there's not a damned thing you can do about stuff like that at many,many event areas that I have been to: participants are often parked very near the competition areas at many smaller events at fairgrounds and expo centers. To throw the backdrop out takes a close shooting position, and a 300/2.8 or something like that; once you move back far enough to get something as big as a jump, and a horse and rider in all the way in a horizontal frame, even at f/2.8 the background will be recognizable, to a degree. But again--the historical perspective...some day that big gas-guzzling SUV will look like a 1930's Ford truck looks today--really cool, and "of a bygone era".

baturn · Apr 1, 2015

Thanks again for all your thoughts. Here's one more with the question - Are horses and riders more or less distracting than pick-ups and trailers or buildings, fences, power poles etc?

Overread · Apr 1, 2015

I'd say you caught a fantastic moment and the owner might not see the "distractions" as much but I'd say that background is photographically too busy. Artistically it would fail - documentary style it might be ok; though presented from greatness because the main subject has overshadowed the horse in the background with the most interesting leg motions far too much.