New Lens! 6th Grade VolleyBall Tourney C&C welcome

[CMfromIL]

No one's saying that you need to crop images so that there's only ONE player in the frame. I think you've got that all wrong. But what you need to do is understand where the strong elements are and why the weak elements need to be cropped. Images 4, 6, and 7 could all benefit from crops. YES the crops will involve cropping out people but it will actually improve the images. I'm not going to download the images to show you, as I think it would be a good learning experience for you to take your images and make crops of them to see what works and what doesn't.

Your images have a lot of color balance issues. This could be easily fixed if you shot in RAW, not as easily since you shot in JPEG. If you're aim is to get images to other parents without regard for white balance, straight horizons or crops, then by all means continue what you're doing. Especially if the parents like them... But if you want to get the most out of your images, you'dshoot RAW+Jpeg if not just straight RAW all the way, and take the time to process the keepers.

If you want some general C&C as I was driving by: They're all pretty much underexposed, in addition to the WB, and composition issues as stated above.

Thanks for your comments. I agree they are a bit underexposed, but that's life with Jr High Gyms...the lighting is terrible. I hesitate raising the ISO, as I prefer less grain than what I get when I had my settings to 6400.

I'll try the Raw + Jpeg route next time, as I can simply upload the jpeg images, then mess around with the others.

As for straight horizons, I'll ask the players to go much slower so I'll have time to properly compose the shot. Maybe I can have them stop motion when I see something good, put the camera on tripod, and use box lights as well.

 

[imagemaker46]

Here are a few crops and colour corrections and straightened up the backgrounds.

Frames 4-5 not much can be done to fix these images. Personally I wouldn't have kept these. Angles for shooting volleyball is all over the place, I prefer to shoot from the end and under the net for some of it, it's tough unless you have a longer lens, 300mm, it also allows the shooting of blocks at the net. An even higher angle from behind or the side can get you some good angles. Like I said, it's all about practice.

 

[CMfromIL]

Here are a few crops and colour corrections and straightened up the backgrounds.
Frames 4-5 not much can be done to fix these images. Personally I wouldn't have kept these. Angles for shooting volleyball is all over the place, I prefer to shoot from the end and under the net for some of it, it's tough unless you have a longer lens, 300mm, it also allows the shooting of blocks at the net. An even higher angle from behind or the side can get you some good angles. Like I said, it's all about practice.

Thanks for your suggestions. Just curious do you have a website with examples of your VBall shooting? Your technique sounds cool. Thanks.

Nevermind on the website, looked at your profile and found your stuff. Some impressive beach volleyball shots. The 6th grade girls league isn't quite as dramatic as those!

And honestly, I'd be more of a distraction lurking under the net to get some of those shots. Not to mention there isn't a whole lot of diving going on the hardwood. And I'd kill to have some of that natural light, sure would help with the whole underexposure issue. Thanks again. I like the edits.

As far as ditching shots, I suppose 5 could go. It was more amusing to see the coach 'giving instruction'. If the hitter had been in focus, it would have been better. I'll chalk that up to the new lens.

 

[imagemaker46]

I've been shooting sports for over 35 years at all levels, indoor volleyball is a difficult one, especially in most gyms. Beach volleyball is pretty easy to shoot, only having to deal with two athletes at a time, I always shoot far court. All the other sports, well like I said, if you shoot them enough you can get pretty good at it. I'm looking forward to shooting more beach volleyball at the Olympics this summer in london.

 

[o hey tyler]

You WILL get better photos with less noise by using ISO6400 to properly expose your shots. You get more noise from underexposing at a high iso than you do from exposing properly at a higher one.

There's always noise reduction as well which can work wonders.

 

[Destin]

This debate goes both ways: "Some" sports photo editors like photos that show a LOT OF background and a LOT OF the setting where the event took place. A good example of that???? Sports Illustrated magazine.

Many photographers shoot a LOT with 300/3.8 and 400/2.8 lenses, and have become so accustomed to ultra-tight,blown-background shots that they cannot understand why photos shot any other way could possibly be any good.

Gary Winogrand shot a somewhat famous NFL football photo right from the sidelines, using I believe a 28mm wide-angle on his Leica. All 22 players are in the photo...all of them. http://www.atgetphotography.com/Images/Photos/GarryWinogrand/winogrand_23.jpg

What would that photo be like if one were to crop that down to just the running back and the tackler???

Honestly that's a terrible photo in my opinion Derrel. You MUST be joking. I could take that shot with a $6 disposable kodak.

 

[imagemaker46]

This debate goes both ways: "Some" sports photo editors like photos that show a LOT OF background and a LOT OF the setting where the event took place. A good example of that???? Sports Illustrated magazine.

Many photographers shoot a LOT with 300/3.8 and 400/2.8 lenses, and have become so accustomed to ultra-tight,blown-background shots that they cannot understand why photos shot any other way could possibly be any good.

Gary Winogrand shot a somewhat famous NFL football photo right from the sidelines, using I believe a 28mm wide-angle on his Leica. All 22 players are in the photo...all of them. http://www.atgetphotography.com/Images/Photos/GarryWinogrand/winogrand_23.jpg

What would that photo be like if one were to crop that down to just the running back and the tackler???

Honestly that's a terrible photo in my opinion Derrel. You MUST be joking. I could take that shot with a $6 disposable kodak.

Going off topic here a bit. You can use the term "somewhat famous" photo but it was shot during a different era of photography, most of Winogrand's SI images were shot in the mid to late 50's, and most of his images were shot using just a wide angle lens. By today's standards that crooked(which was his style) NFL photo would never be seen. He freelanced for SI, but was better known as a street photographer.

I use a long lens for most everything I shoot, that's just the way I shoot. I have shot using a wide on many occations, but that was back in the film days. When I talked about cropping these basketball shots I wasn't suggesting that everyone but one player be cropped out, it was more about all the empty space around the players.

Personally I don't like the shot, it looks more like some kid was on the sidelines and happened to be loading his camera, this would have been the first frame on the roll as the film advanced, before looking through the camera.

 

[MSnowy]

This debate goes both ways: "Some" sports photo editors like photos that show a LOT OF background and a LOT OF the setting where the event took place. A good example of that???? Sports Illustrated magazine.

Many photographers shoot a LOT with 300/3.8 and 400/2.8 lenses, and have become so accustomed to ultra-tight,blown-background shots that they cannot understand why photos shot any other way could possibly be any good.

Gary Winogrand shot a somewhat famous NFL football photo right from the sidelines, using I believe a 28mm wide-angle on his Leica. All 22 players are in the photo...all of them. http://www.atgetphotography.com/Images/Photos/GarryWinogrand/winogrand_23.jpg

What would that photo be like if one were to crop that down to just the running back and the tackler???

Honestly that's a terrible photo in my opinion Derrel. You MUST be joking. I could take that shot with a $6 disposable kodak.

Oh that would be cool. get in your way back machine and take a disposable Kodak back to the 50'S. I've always liked SI pictures that had a deep DOF. Once you leave the main focus point I find it interesting to see fans reactions in the background.

 

[imagemaker46]

Here is a wide angle football shot that does work, it was shot around the same time as the "somewhat famous" shot that really doesn't. There is one thing about this shot that makes it a little more interesting than the average field goal photo, and something that wouldn't be allowed these days. It was shot in 1960.

 

[CMfromIL]

Was the camera man on the field?

 

[imagemaker46]

Yes he was, my Dad shot this.

 

[Kombipete]

Love the face on the coach (?) in 6!!

Coach is on #5 in the red. On #6 is just some random person walking behind the server.

Yeah, sorry.. #5 ..when I say #6 I mean #5 The one with the open mouth that's saying "Good on you girls!"