How to make photos look professional in PS

[KmH]

I understand what you guys mean about GSGary's photo, but a 300 2.8 isn't in my budget right now......

But, you can still crop.

Except if you had read through the rest of that, you would have seen that I'm only shooting a 6mp camera, and selling prints. Can't crop much.

How big are the prints you're selling? I used to have a 5MP Nikon D1X that I sold prints from that were 4 feet by 6 feet.

 

[Destin]

But, you can still crop.

Except if you had read through the rest of that, you would have seen that I'm only shooting a 6mp camera, and selling prints. Can't crop much.

How big are the prints you're selling? I used to have a 5MP Nikon D1X that I sold prints from that were 4 feet by 6 feet.

Yeah, you can do that. But, according to 95% of the people I talk to on here, and other forums, with 6mp you should only print up to 11x14 for optimal results.

 

[KmH]

It really depends on the image, and of course crops will be less than 6 MP making getting closer even more critical.

Most of the sports prints sold are 4x6's, 6x9, with an ocassional 8x10.

Even then there are ways to up-rez photos so they can be printed larger, if needed.

The point is...Don't shoot yourself down so quickly.

 

[Destin]

It really depends on the image, and of course crops will be less than 6 MP making getting closer even more critical.

Most of the sports prints sold are 4x6's, 6x9, with an ocassional 8x10.

Even then there are ways to up-rez photos so they can be printed larger, if needed.

The point is...Don't shoot yourself down so quickly.

Well, it's a non-issue now. Just sold my d40, I'll be getting a d90 in the coming weeks. And I'll only be keeping that for 3-4 months until I can afford a D7000.

 

[clbd39]

You seem to have quite a bit of understanding left to gain. (which there is ALWAYS learning for us ALL to do)

Start with the basics...
-Rule of Thirds
-Elevation
-Lighting (angle as well)
-Background (DoF and if there's something "growing" out of your subject)


What do you use for post process? I would always recommend shooting in RAW, that way if your white balance isn't right or you are slightly over/under exposed it can be salvaged

I edit all of my photos in Lightroom2 (RAW) and export to photoshop (cs4) still in raw (use ctrl+e) and edit and then convert to 8bit jpeg after all my editing is done

sometimes i'll even do a few edits to expose certain parts in light room and export 5 different versions to layer together is photoshop

 

[Destin]

You seem to have quite a bit of understanding left to gain. (which there is ALWAYS learning for us ALL to do)

Start with the basics...
-Rule of Thirds
-Elevation
-Lighting (angle as well)
-Background (DoF and if there's something "growing" out of your subject)


What do you use for post process? I would always recommend shooting in RAW, that way if your white balance isn't right or you are slightly over/under exposed it can be salvaged

I edit all of my photos in Lightroom2 (RAW) and export to photoshop (cs4) still in raw (use ctrl+e) and edit and then convert to 8bit jpeg after all my editing is done

sometimes i'll even do a few edits to expose certain parts in light room and export 5 different versions to layer together is photoshop

I know the rule of thirds. But most of the time it doesn't apply to sports photography because you want the subject to fill the frame. The main reason my subject in the example photo doesn't fill th frame is that I was trying to show how high off the ground he was.

What do you mean by elevation?

Lighting- Worked with what I could do. I couldn't set a stand up as it was in a crowded area. So I got the flash off camera to the only place I could. Ideally, I would have have 2 flashes on stands lighting at 45 degreee angles on either side of the ramp. Just wasn't possible.

Background- Yeah, I could have been shooting at a better angle, I admit that. There wasn't really a good way for me to get up higher and get the rafters out of the shot. Here is a little better example from the same shoot:

As far as post goes, I have lightroom 2 and Photoshop CS5. I'm not great with either one, but I know the basics. I usually shoot raw, but in this case I opted not to, because I needed my camera's buffer to be as big as possible... riders were coming over the jump one after another, non stop. Maybe 2 seconds apart. I may have been able to do it in RAW, looking back on it. Lesson learned.

Thanks for the advice man.

 

[KmH]

I know the rule of thirds. But most of the time it doesn't apply to sports photography because you want the subject to fill the frame.

Then your understanding of how to effectively use the ROT is lacking, because the ROT applies just as much to sports photography as to any other genre. So does filling the frame.

 

[Destin]

I know the rule of thirds. But most of the time it doesn't apply to sports photography because you want the subject to fill the frame.

Then your understanding of how to effectively use the ROT is lacking, because the ROT applies just as much to sports photography as to any other genre. So does filling the frame.

The rule of thirds states that the subject should be at or near one of the four intersections of the grid. If you are filling the frame with a subject that's impossible, because your subject is taking up the entire frame. I'm not claiming to be an expert on the rule of thirds, but this is just common sense.

There is a difference between the rule of thirds and proper composition. The rule of thirds is only one element to proper composition. Once again, I'm not claiming to be an expert. Just stating facts that I know to be true.

EDIT: I know I have alot to learn, as does every one of us. I'm not trying to sound like a dick. I do appreciate the criticism!!

 

[NikWilliamson]

Take a look at this. I blurred the background a little bit, adjusted the levels, and desaturated it a tad. The mask is pretty rough, but it should give you an idea.

 

[Shane Anderson]

I'm no expert but I've been working on photographing motocross. Some observations about your motocross rider photo and things I have learnt:

a) your shutter speed appears too high. 1/250 will freeze the rider but not the wheels and give more impression of motion.

b) the bike is too close to the tree/sky horizon and doesn't stand out enough.

c) the angle is un-interesting. Try to get more of the rider and less of the bike.

d) If you are wanting to give the impression of the height the rider is jumping, a less tight crop can work better as the background can give a measure of scale of the height to the viewer. In the first photo below, the rider is not that far off the ground, but from the camera viewpoint his head is aligned with the third tier of the stadium so it gives the impression of more height.

e) assuming you've got your composition close to right, it's easy to make a mild crop to get the subject right with regards to the ROT.

Also another technique with motorsports to isolate the subject is to try panning. This will get a nicely blurred background regardless of the actual depth of field.

Here are a couple of taken with my D5000 and 70-200 lens:

 

[catrinahampton]

I think it would help to get some DOF, but there are improvements you can make in PP. Here, I just brightened with curves, added a warming filter, and sharpened.

 

[Destin]

I'm no expert but I've been working on photographing motocross. Some observations about your motocross rider photo and things I have learnt:

a) your shutter speed appears too high. 1/250 will freeze the rider but not the wheels and give more impression of motion.

b) the bike is too close to the tree/sky horizon and doesn't stand out enough.

c) the angle is un-interesting. Try to get more of the rider and less of the bike.

d) If you are wanting to give the impression of the height the rider is jumping, a less tight crop can work better as the background can give a measure of scale of the height to the viewer. In the first photo below, the rider is not that far off the ground, but from the camera viewpoint his head is aligned with the third tier of the stadium so it gives the impression of more height.

e) assuming you've got your composition close to right, it's easy to make a mild crop to get the subject right with regards to the ROT.

Also another technique with motorsports to isolate the subject is to try panning. This will get a nicely blurred background regardless of the actual depth of field.

Here are a couple of taken with my D5000 and 70-200 lens:

Honestly, I disagree about the shutter speed. Blur on the wheels is annoying to my eye, I don't like it on motocross photos. I like it in car racing, but on motocross with knobby tires it makes the photo look out of focus. It's all personal preference though. Also, it take alot of sharpness away from the rest of the rider and the bike. It doesn't show up as blur, but you lose ALOT of sharpness. May as well be shooting with a $200 55-200 instead of your 70-200 if you arent going to take advantage of the extra sharpness, or the higher shutter speed that the faster lens gets you. Just sayin..

I'd also disagree about the height. The tree line gives a clear representation of height in my photo. In yours the stadium also shows height, but it's a busy background that distracts from the rider. In mine, the rider pops out of it, because there is nothing going on in the background.

As far as the angle, I would say the same about yours on the first photo. It's simply not interesting. It's a flat shot of the side of the bike. It almost looks 2d, there is no depth to it.

In your second photo the rider is very underexposed. It definitely needs fill light, in the form of flash, or the sun, or whatever. A quick mask in PS could help it alot though.

 

[catrinahampton]

Here is another play (excuse the horrible masking...it was quick). In this one I also used a warming filter, brightened with curves, sharpened, and also did a color pop to the background to deepen the color. The photoshopped blurs always look....well, photoshopped to me!

 

[Mike_E]

Motion blur. If you don't feel that the picture is moving it's not likely to move you, at least as far as sports photography goes. Obviously you don't want too much but look at gsgary's. There are things flying around away from the main subject that define motion. Even the rugby shots show muscles bulging that wouldn't be except for extreme effort.

All this is to say, or show, that the subject isn't static but is flesh and blood and pulsing with adrenaline which is what you want if you care to have a sympathetic reaction in your viewers.

Anyway, you're not off much just be a little more organic.

 

[gsgary]

Motorcross, now were talking here 2 that have been published