Professional concert photography advice?

[OhInsanity]

These are all pretty grainy. I was shooting with my 17-55mm and its max ap is like f/5.6 which suucccckkkss! So I had to bump up my ISO pretty high (6400) and use a slow shutter speed (1/30) to get the right exposure =/ which Is why I want a faster lens so badly with a wider ap.

there are a few, there are more on my flickr if you want to look Flickr: OhInsanity's Photostream

 

[Mot]

They're interesting photos, it looks like you've got an idea of what you want to achieve from them. I'd like to see their faces more but I think that's as much about less than compliant subjects as it is unfortunate timing! I'm ignoring the fact that they're blurry, sharp images are going to be difficult to get with a lens not suitable for the circumstances. Overall I can see your work improving a lot as you get more practise, Jared Polin's work is sure to inspire you!

 

[OhInsanity]

thanks, that's only the 2nd time I've ever shot a show. Hopefully once I get a more suitable lens, I'll be able to get the quality I want.

 

[Destin]

Alright. This is off topic, and not really my business. But I'm throwing it out there anyway.

Photographers who waste time and money getting a degree in photography, are usually the least successful. EVERYTHING that you will learn in college can be learned online, for FREE in a fraction of the time. You want to succeed in photography? Get a business or marketing degree.

The photographers who generally are more successful are the ones who, instead of wasting years of time in college for photography, teach themselves instead. This is as much to do with their lack of college loans to pay off (think of the gear your tuition could buy you!) as it is about their personality. Generally photographers who teach themselves and don't go to school for it are more driven and motivated. They know that if they want to succeed, they need to do it on their own. Nobody is going to do it for you, and no degree is really going to land you a photography job. College MIGHT get you some connections in the industry, but it's unlikely to be worth what you paid for the degree.

I'm done. Sorry for getting off topic. I'm not trying to crush your dreams, just trying to give you advice. A photography degree is not worth what it costs. Period.

 

[OhInsanity]

Alright. This is off topic, and not really my business. But I'm throwing it out there anyway.

Photographers who waste time and money getting a degree in photography, are usually the least successful. EVERYTHING that you will learn in college can be learned online, for FREE in a fraction of the time. You want to succeed in photography? Get a business or marketing degree.

The photographers who generally are more successful are the ones who, instead of wasting years of time in college for photography, teach themselves instead. This is as much to do with their lack of college loans to pay off (think of the gear your tuition could buy you!) as it is about their personality. Generally photographers who teach themselves and don't go to school for it are more driven and motivated. They know that if they want to succeed, they need to do it on their own. Nobody is going to do it for you, and no degree is really going to land you a photography job. College MIGHT get you some connections in the industry, but it's unlikely to be worth what you paid for the degree.

I'm done. Sorry for getting off topic. I'm not trying to crush your dreams, just trying to give you advice. A photography degree is not worth what it costs. Period.

Don't worry you aren't crushing my dreams, I'm not naive. I was going to take courses in business and management anyways. Also, I'm sorry but my parents aren't gonna et me not go to college and since I dont have a job and I live in a crappy little town in GA, college is my ONLY ticket out of here. Plus with the amount of scholarships I currently have going for me, I wont pay that much for college if I keep up my gpa. I also want to take the opportunity to learn as much as I can about the things that go with photography (large format, etc) I dont have the means to learn some things on my own, but yes, I agree that most knowledge comes from first hand experience. Colleges can provide internships and resources that a teenager just can't get on their own unless they're already loaded, which I am far from it. So sorry that I actually want to go to college and get an education.

Besides dude I just looked at your profile, you're only 18 what the f*** do you know. I know, I'm only 17, I used to have the screw college attitude too, but its proven that people with a college degree earn much more money than those who don't.

 

[Mot]

Circumstances in the UK are slightly different. Fortunately it doesn't cost $35,000 to get a University education, yet. Here there is a culture that means that a degree is almost compulsory, regardless of whether it helps in your chosen field. Such is the saturation of degree graduates that it is now not a guarantee that a degree holder will get a job when they leave University. We're not in a real meritocracy, no matter how skilled an individual is if they don't have the paper, credentials and experience they don't get the job.

I have to disagree about your statement about degree photographers being less successful, this is not something that can be proven or backed up. So you're suggesting that I go and shadow a professional in my area, my brother has attempted a similar feat, albeit in a different field, but was rejected without any consideration whatsoever. I wouldn't be surprised if I had less chance of gaining any experience than him. I also ask, where would you expect me to gain studio experience? There aren't any large studios in my local area, I have no choice but to travel for nearly 2 hours to University.

The three year course that I'm starting will not only get me industry links, as you said, but two of the years contain work experience. That's exactly what you're suggesting.

Please don't accuse me of not being driven, you made a ridiculous generalisation. We all need to find ways of achieving what we want, but then again I'm sure it's easier in New York. Easier than a rural, isolated county in England.

 

[ghache]

yeah my birthday is coming up, so I'm just gonna ask for money this year and invest in a nice lens, I can totally do 400 =D
Man, I need a job. I want a lens that has a zoom function though

for +-400$ and want a zoom you can have a look at the tamron 17-50mm F2.8. it a great lens and fairly fast (faster than the regular f3.5 lens)
distortion isnt bad and the damn thing is sharp all over the zoom range and pretty good wide open so for show where you can shoot from the pit well it could be a great lens. Bumping the iso to 400-800 at F2.8, depending on how the stage is lid you could do fine. prime will give you alot more play with the available light but will also keep you from taking some shots that require you to move quickly and we all know that these suckers on stage move quite fast sometimes.

If money isnt an issue, 24-70 for the close shots and a 70-200 for longer shots + a wide angle or a fisheye for shots really close to the stage is still the way to go.

have a look at Concert Photography & Band Portraits: Music Photographer Todd Owyoung

this guy is pretty good at shooting live band

 

[Destin]

Alright. This is off topic, and not really my business. But I'm throwing it out there anyway.

Photographers who waste time and money getting a degree in photography, are usually the least successful. EVERYTHING that you will learn in college can be learned online, for FREE in a fraction of the time. You want to succeed in photography? Get a business or marketing degree.

The photographers who generally are more successful are the ones who, instead of wasting years of time in college for photography, teach themselves instead. This is as much to do with their lack of college loans to pay off (think of the gear your tuition could buy you!) as it is about their personality. Generally photographers who teach themselves and don't go to school for it are more driven and motivated. They know that if they want to succeed, they need to do it on their own. Nobody is going to do it for you, and no degree is really going to land you a photography job. College MIGHT get you some connections in the industry, but it's unlikely to be worth what you paid for the degree.

I'm done. Sorry for getting off topic. I'm not trying to crush your dreams, just trying to give you advice. A photography degree is not worth what it costs. Period.

Don't worry you aren't crushing my dreams, I'm not naive. I was going to take courses in business and management anyways. Also, I'm sorry but my parents aren't gonna et me not go to college and since I dont have a job and I live in a crappy little town in GA, college is my ONLY ticket out of here. Plus with the amount of scholarships I currently have going for me, I wont pay that much for college if I keep up my gpa. I also want to take the opportunity to learn as much as I can about the things that go with photography (large format, etc) I dont have the means to learn some things on my own, but yes, I agree that most knowledge comes from first hand experience. Colleges can provide internships and resources that a teenager just can't get on their own unless they're already loaded, which I am far from it. So sorry that I actually want to go to college and get an education.

Besides dude I just looked at your profile, you're only 18 what the f*** do you know. I know, I'm only 17, I used to have the screw college attitude too, but its proven that people with a college degree earn much more money than those who don't.

I NEVER said don't go to college. I said don't go to college for photography. BIG difference. Am I myelf going to college? No, but only because the career I'm trying to get into has an age cap of 27 for applicants, and doesn't require a college education (firefighting). My time is currently better spent taking courses at my county's fire training center. Currently I'm enrolled in my EMT course, and I've already completed 4 other courses there this year. I'm taking college level classes, and some even give me college credit (firefighter 1, EMT). I get them all free, for being a volunteer firefighter. That's why im not in college, not because I have a screw college attitude.

Will you earn more with a college degree than if you don't have one? Yes, it's been proven that you will. But that's the AVERAGE of all careers in America. If you look at just photography, statistics show that photographers with a college degree earn on average $1,000 more per year than those without one. Big Whoop. Book an additional wedding and you've overcome the difference and then some. It's been proven time and time again that your photography skills are NOT what make you money as a photographer, it's your business and marketing skills.

If you have your heart set on majoring in photography, go for it. I'm just pointing out that in America, a photography degree will take forever to pay for itself with the $1,000 per year advantage that it gets you.

How do I know all this? Because a year ago I was set on going to the Art Institute of Pittsburgh for photography, until I did the research. It just doesn't make financial sense. If you are blowing money on a college degree today, it should be on something that gives you a plan B, like a business degree for example. If you get a photography degree, and can't get a job as a photographer, or your business fails, then your degree gives you no plan B. That's the biggest downfall.

I'm not trying to stop you, I'm just laying the facts out in front of you. I'm not some punk with a screw college attitude! But in an economy like we have, where over half of college grads end up working in something completely unrelated to their major, you have to be sure you get the most bang for your buck out of college.

 

[Destin]

. We all need to find ways of achieving what we want, but then again I'm sure it's easier in New York. Easier than a rural, isolated county in England.

The Part of New York I live in is rural too bud. I live in a town of 800 people, for me to get to a city I have to drive almost an hour. In my community of 800, there are 4 professional photography businesses, not including myself. I live in the most saturated part of the country for wedding photographers. Succeeding here as a photographer is nearly impossible, and I don't want to live in a city, which is why I chose not to pursue full time photography, and just run it as a side gig.

 

[Mot]

Well this got off topic. Maybe we should stop discussing photography as a career and return to the original idea of the thread, which has been exhausted already. I guess this means the end of the thread, just another one to add the the overarching tone of negativity that I find quite overwhelming on this forum. I see so many threads that deteriorate into an argument, I'm ashamed to be part of one.

So, OhInsanity, have you looked any further into the 50mm 1.8?

 

[OhInsanity]

I was going to argue some more, because that's my nature, but Mot you're right I don't want this to be a negative forum. ANYWAYS, thanks to all of you guys for your helpful lens suggestions and website references. I've learned a lot and this has been very helpful, so thank you!!! I think I'm gonna save up and try to get a 24-70mm 2.8 I dunno though. Its a tough call with the various lens suggestions you guys have given me. I'm just going to go to my local camera shop and try out lenses to see what suits me best. I'm definitely going to look into the 50 1.8 mostly because it is so affordable.

 

[Mot]

Wow, that's a big jump from a $100 lens to a $1200+ lens. It would still be a good idea to spend that $100 and learn with the 50mm 1.8, it is going to be much more valuable than saving up for a lens that, in reality, won't cope with every situation. I think you still need to understand fully the advantage you'd get from having such a fast lens, there's a reason why the fast fifty remains so popular, even on crop bodies.

 

[OhInsanity]

yeaaahhh I just now looked at the price of the 24-70mm >.< *sigh* maybe someday. Man I hate how expensive photography is. Oh well i'd prefer a zoom lens, but I'm probably going to go with the 50

What about the 50mm 1.4? It's reviews says that the color is better?

 

[Mot]

There seems to be a lot of debate over the 1.4, some say it's not worth the extra $300 while others seems to think it's exponentially better! It's usually the professionals choice when it comes to a 50mm; it has better build quality and full-time manual focus over-ride not to mention half-a-stop more light. I'm currently watching some on eBay because the 1.4 is probably going to be my next lens, replacing the 1.8.

Don't think that the lack of zoom will limit you, while photographer's areas are small at gigs you still have room to move about with your legs.

 

[OhInsanity]

hmm...I dunno I'll just have to think about it some more. The 1.4 sounds tempting. yeah I'm not worried about not being able to get close, its that it'll be too close up that I'm worried about. I shot those pics at mostly 17mm except for the top one which was probably at 55mm...I like wide shots mostly