Playing w/ the bigger boys

[mk04447]

So, I've been promoted to 'Team Photographer' for my local high school football team... problem is there is a professional photographer hired by the boosters. His LR edits beat mine (kinda they're contrasted out), but my images are better IMO.

I've been working really hard to refine what I'm capturing. I have a D750 and a Sigma 70-200 2.8; I'm thinking of getting the new Sigma 120-300 2.8, but that hasn't happened yet.

My question. I've been reading a lot about ISO invariance and I'm tempted to try a game at ISO 1600 only with the intention of fixing the exposure in post. It's pretty dark and the lights aren't good. I'm shooting manual at 1/800, EC -1, max ISO 12800, at F 2.8. Anyone tried this, I may need to post 3 or 4 stops?

To complicate matters, I'm thinking about going to F 4 exclusively. The slice of the world I'm getting is causing me to miss great shots. Plus the AF is much faster on the 9 point at F 4; I'm sick of missing shots because I can't acquire fast enough.

I'd really love some insight, new ideas, anything others have tried, etc?

 

[TreeofLifeStairs]

So, I've been promoted to 'Team Photographer' for my local high school football team... problem is there is a professional photographer hired by the boosters. His LR edits beat mine (kinda they're contrasted out), but my images are better IMO.

I've been working really hard to refine what I'm capturing. I have a D750 and a Sigma 70-200 2.8; I'm thinking of getting the new Sigma 120-300 2.8, but that hasn't happened yet.

My question. I've been reading a lot about ISO invariance and I'm tempted to try a game at ISO 1600 only with the intention of fixing the exposure in post. It's pretty dark and the lights aren't good. I'm shooting manual at 1/800, EC -1, max ISO 12800, at F 2.8. Anyone tried this, I may need to post 3 or 4 stops?

To complicate matters, I'm thinking about going to F 4 exclusively. The slice of the world I'm getting is causing me to miss great shots. Plus the AF is much faster on the 9 point at F 4; I'm sick of missing shots because I can't acquire fast enough.

I'd really love some insight, new ideas, anything others have tried, etc?

Do they practice at the same time as the games? Could you get some practice time in at practice time?


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[mk04447]

Yes and no. The lights aren't on. I think I'm going to risk getting nothing at the next freshman game and I'll know what to do for JV? Everything I've read says my camera can handle it, but I'm skeptical. If isoinvariance is a real thing, then I'll join the world of ISO is irrelevant going forward. I'm scared to do it though, I always salvage 200-300 out of 1000 and now that I've gotten a small following and a little street credit I'd hate to let them down.

 

[ac12]

STOP trying to compare yourself to a pro.
Look at him and his images to learn, but don't do the self comparison, that is not productive.
How is he shooting; his setup and shooting method?
Go talk to the pro (before or after the game, when he isn't busy). He won't bite you. You might learn a thing or two from him.

You do not become a good football photographer overnight. It takes practice, practice, practice.
Doing a "lessons learned" evaluation after each shoot is IMPORTANT in improving.
- If you don't learn to fix the mistakes, you will just keep repeating the same mistakes over and over.
- Find what works and build on it.
- Take notes, or you will forget what you learned.

I shot with/for my local HS yearbook, almost every sport in the yearbook.

Your 70-200 is just fine. Chasing gear as the solution is the wrong approach.
Look at the specs for the 120-300. It is a HEAVY lens. Your arms are goina HURT by the end of the game, and that ain't fun. And if you are shooting sequential games, JV then Varsity, it is really goina hurt after the 2nd game. Or you have to shoot off a monopod, and that will seriously reduce your ability to track action well. I tried the schools 80-200/2.8, and it was just too heavy, for me and my style of shooting.
It is NOT the lens, it is your technique that you need to work on.

I do not really understand your statement:

To complicate matters, I'm thinking about going to F 4 exclusively. The slice of the world I'm getting is causing me to miss great shots. Plus the AF is much faster on the 9 point at F 4; I'm sick of missing shots because I can't acquire fast enough.​

Do you have your camera down, then lift to shoot, then lower again?
To me, this sounds like a technique issue, not a gear issue.

I normally keep my camera up to my face when the play starts, and track the QB or whoever has the ball.
The only time that I shift from the QB to someone else is on a pass, where I shift to the receiver. Otherwise I am not shifting subjects.
The camera does not go down until the play ends.

On the other hand, in soccer, I am constantly shifting subjects.

I use a DX format D7200 + 18-140 and 70-200/4. I would LOVE your D750
For afternoon games (JV)
- 18-140 is my lens of choice.
For night games under lights (varsity)
- With the 18-140, I shot at ISO 12800 at night.
- With the 70-200/4, wide open, I shot at ISO 6400.
I shoot AF = Dynamic 9 points. Shutter =continuous High

As for metering.
If you are on the field, you are shooting ACROSS the field, and metering the background, NOT the field.
I set the AF point to center + 1 high, and use center weight metering, to force the camera to meter the field.
Or I shoot in full manual. But the ends of the field are less illuminated than the center, so I have to adjust when the play is inside the 15 yard line.

GET THE EXPOSURE RIGHT, IN THE CAMERA !!!
Don't make it a practice to salvage in the computer. Images in the deep shadows are noisy when salvaged.
You can shoot in RAW to give you more salvage room. But that will be a LOT of RAW to JPG conversion that you have to do. I don't bother with RAW for sports for that reason, too much extra work and time.

Practice practice practice.
The MORE you shoot, the more you get comfortable and can get good shots.
Practice is for training your muscles to move and track, your eye to see what is going on and the action, and learning to work your gear.

Finally, #1 important rule.
DO NOT GET RUN OVER BY THE PLAYERS.
This means be very careful when they approach you, and GET OUT OF THE WAY. And the sooner you get out of the way the better.
Better safe and uninjured, than sorry and hurt and injured with a broken camera

 

[ac12]

Do they practice at the same time as the games? Could you get some practice time in at practice time?

Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

GO SHOOT THE PRACTICE.

You NEED to get used to movement and shots, and the more you shoot the better.
Just like the players practicing, you need to practice.

 

[tirediron]

STOP trying to compare yourself to a pro...

^^ This! ^^

 

[Designer]

I'd really love some insight, new ideas, anything others have tried, etc?

Why not set the ISO setting to "auto"?

Since ISO is APPLIED GAIN, it is inferred that the ISO setting is applied to the data AFTER capture, and therefore has nothing to do directly with exposure. The ISO setting is mainly to enable your camera's display to produce a viewable image on the LCD.

 

[waday]

See if you can contact @ronlane for some advice.

 

[Derrel]

F/4 at 1/800 under bad stadium lights at ISO 1600???? That sounds like a serious under exposure to me, especially at such a fast shutter speed. I think 1/800 is a little bit too fast. I'd be tempted to slow the shutter down to 1/500 second.Or perhaps 1/640.

I understand the desire to go to f/4 for that slightly better depth of field and focus safety zone that it brings, but I think F3.2 or F3 .5 would be better as far as keeping the speed up and getting a decent exposure.

You could gain 1/3 or 2/3 of a EV value with the shutter and 1/3 or 2/3 of an EV value above F4 by using F3.5 or 3.2. These small things add up. I also think you should go to a higher ISO level 1600 is pretty low.

One thing to keep in mind is that you can expose for just the brightly lighted parts of the uniforms and helmets and let the eyes in the helmet holes go dark. Something to think about.

 

[ronlane]

So, I've been promoted to 'Team Photographer' for my local high school football team... problem is there is a professional photographer hired by the boosters. His LR edits beat mine (kinda they're contrasted out), but my images are better IMO.

I've been working really hard to refine what I'm capturing. I have a D750 and a Sigma 70-200 2.8; I'm thinking of getting the new Sigma 120-300 2.8, but that hasn't happened yet.

My question. I've been reading a lot about ISO invariance and I'm tempted to try a game at ISO 1600 only with the intention of fixing the exposure in post. It's pretty dark and the lights aren't good. I'm shooting manual at 1/800, EC -1, max ISO 12800, at F 2.8. Anyone tried this, I may need to post 3 or 4 stops?

To complicate matters, I'm thinking about going to F 4 exclusively. The slice of the world I'm getting is causing me to miss great shots. Plus the AF is much faster on the 9 point at F 4; I'm sick of missing shots because I can't acquire fast enough.

I'd really love some insight, new ideas, anything others have tried, etc?

Agreed, don't compare yourself to "the Pro's". This will make you want to quit, been there done that. Concentrate on getting better each game.

You have the equipment to shoot with, as I would love to have a full frame camera.

You are under exposing currently with the EC at -1. Most sports photog's that I know (including me) use EC at + 1/3 to +1. If you shoot in dark conditions at ISO 1600, you are going to be WAY underexposed. I would say continue to shoot at f/2.8 and auto ISO but limit it to 6400. If you need more than that go manual to no more than 10,000.

I don't know what you are using for focusing points and if you are using back button focusing but those could help as well.

I know that it was mentioned to get exposure right in camera and I agree. However, in some highschool stadiums, this is just not possible.

Continue to shoot and work on it. Practice in LR and try different settings for post processing. (Hint: In the basic panel try auto and then tweak the exposure) Learn how to use the detail panel to help with any noise that you may get because of the darkness.

It's a process and you have to find out what works for you with the equipment that you have. (Equipment will only make a difference IF you know how to use it and after you learn and are comfortable with it.)

You say that you were promoted to Team Photographer so someone felt you could do a good job for them. I shoot in a kind of small market with two other photogs at the game, one is the school photographer, one is the person that won the big for the media photos and myself. I continue to shoot and sell my images to parents and kids alike. Booster club likes my action work even though I wasn't the photog selected for the media stuff.

 

[ronlane]

One more thing. If you think gear is the solution, start with something manageable. Get you a $100 CF monopod and get used to using it.

 

[mk04447]

A lot of good advice here, thank you.

The lighting is bad, it would be possible to get +1 exposure for about half of the first quarter; I am under exposed without ISO 12800 by the second underexposing the camera to keep ISO down. Third quarter is the worst, it is pitch black and the lights aren't warmed up, they project a weird color temp that produces difficult to edit shadows/highlights. Fourth quarter is best, the lights are warmed up and I can usually drop to ISO 9000 for proper exposure. I brought up the concept of ISO invariance, because as I understand it, there isn't a quality loss bumping exposure in LR by 3 or 4 stops? At least that's my understanding. Good article ISO Invariance with a Nikon D750. I think I'm going to try F 4 and 6400 on auto for an entire game.

Am I understanding that +1 exposure is better for the first part of the game? It is very bright, lots of refection and glare; the uniforms are almost yellow with sunlight, I live in the desert.

The pro's shots aren't better than mine, but his edits are. Having said that, he doesn't take the time to crop his horizon so my pictures are more natural IMO. I have finally come up with what I think are decent presets that are helping me stay more consistent; before, I was editing each one individually, which takes a ton of time, and while the pictures were good, they were different from one to another. I'm trying to put out a unified collection with each game, same tones and coloring now.

As for the gear, 300mm is 300mm the 70-200 is good, but at 24MP I have to crop too much, at least I think so. I guess a D850 wouldn't have that problem. I will say, night football makes you chase gear to an extent; plus it's my hobby and buying stuff is like crack to me, too bad my wallet can't satisfy the addiction. The D500 may have been a better choice than the D750 for the added reach.

I talk to the pro's all the time. They don't admit to doing anything different than I am. I really just think they use LR better than I do. They do get lower than I do, but I'm just being lazy.

Thanks again for the ideas.

 

[ac12]

Your problem with a 300 is what lens?
Your only options (that I know of) are a 70-300 and a 300/2.8.

• The zoom is a SLOW lens. Usable for day games, but NOT for night games in poor lighting.
  
• I would NOT use a fixed 300 with only ONE camera, as it will be too long for any of the closer shots.

So we are back to the 70-200/2.8.

Are you REALLY WATCHING the pro?
You should be able to learn a LOT by seriously watching and studying what he is doing. And having an open mind to learn.

You adjust your exposure based on the changing light conditions, and the results on your camera.
There is no formula that anyone can give you that will work in YOUR situation.
Try different things, and KEEP NOTES.

+1 EC in the camera, when you have lots of glare and reflection, makes no sense to me. You will just get more blown out highlights.

Reading the link, you have to shoot in RAW to use the ability to dig details out of shadow.
In my limited experience, RAW processing, then RAW to JPG conversion, adds a lot more time and work to the process. And if you are shooting a few hundred shots per game, that could add a significant amount of additional work.

 

[mk04447]

Your problem with a 300 is what lens?
Your only options (that I know of) are a 70-300 and a 300/2.8.

• The zoom is a SLOW lens. Usable for day games, but NOT for night games in poor lighting.
  
• I would NOT use a fixed 300 with only ONE camera, as it will be too long for any of the closer shots.

So we are back to the 70-200/2.8.

Are you REALLY WATCHING the pro?
You should be able to learn a LOT by seriously watching and studying what he is doing. And having an open mind to learn.

You adjust your exposure based on the changing light conditions, and the results on your camera.
There is no formula that anyone can give you that will work in YOUR situation.
Try different things, and KEEP NOTES.

+1 EC in the camera, when you have lots of glare and reflection, makes no sense to me. You will just get more blown out highlights.

Reading the link, you have to shoot in RAW to use the ability to dig details out of shadow.
In my limited experience, RAW processing, then RAW to JPG conversion, adds a lot more time and work to the process. And if you are shooting a few hundred shots per game, that could add a significant amount of additional work.

Sigma makes a 120-300 2.8 sport lens.

I always shoot in RAW. This does add time, but you lose way too much in JPG and this is a hobby so I don't mind. As I get better with LR, this is getting faster and faster also.

 

[ac12]

Sigma makes a 120-300 2.8 sport lens.

Did you look at the specs for that lens? It is 7-1/2 pounds !!!

Good luck with your arm after just one game.
Or you are tethered to a monopod.

And it is $3,400.
Your pocket is much deeper than mine.
Especially for a hobby gig that you are not being paid for.

BTW, the Nikon 300/2.8 is a bit over 6 pounds.
And it is $5,500.