Snowboarding in Fernie

[fokker]

Took some photos of some mates today up at Fernie Alpine Resort. We were just on one medium sized kicker, messing around. I was using my 5d2, 28mm 1.8 sigma and 430ex. Processed in LR3. Hosted on facebook so quality isn't the best.

Interested to hear feedback on how they work as a set, how the panning shots worked out and if any of the processing seems out of line.


1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

 

[Big Mike]

They are all underexposed.

 

[ZapoTeX]

Yes, as it is typical with snow, the meter underexposes the photos.

The panning ones are nice, but my personal interpretation would have been a shorter exposure time (sharper subject, less dramatically blurred background).

Number 7 is my favorite. I believe it would be even nicer if the boarder was jumping into the frame instead of out of it (e.g., given that he's moving right to left, I would have preferred it to be on the right side of the photo).

Bye bye!

 

[imagemaker46]

First few look like simple happy snaps, the action would have looked ok if you been able to stop the boarders, little more shutter speed.

 

[fokker]

They are all underexposed.

I respect your opinion Mike but I have to somewhat disagree with you here - the backgrounds are underexposed but the subjects are (mostly, with the possible exceptions of #5 and #6) properly exposed. This was something I did on purpose, shooting in manual mode to underexpose the background by about a stop and using the flash in ETTL mode, zoomed in to 70mm while using a 28mm lens, to properly expose the subject. The reason I chose to do this is because it is an overcast day so properly exposing the background renders it almost completely white under the flat lighting. I wanted to try and keep a tiny amount of detail in the snow while at the same time keeping it a bit darker to help make the subject pop more.

In regards to the shutter speed observations, yes, I could have easily increased the shutter speed and got a sharp shot of the riders in mid-air (and I did do this on a few shots) but I felt that these shots were lacking in imagination and weren't really showing off the feeling of speed or anything very well. Anyone can take a photo of someone doing a jump, I thought the panning was slightly different, with the second-curtain sync flash I thought it really helped make the riders pop. Maybe I was wrong, but with the aforementioned flat lighting I had to do something to seperate the subject from blending into the background too much.

 

[Big Mike]

They are all underexposed.

I respect your opinion Mike but I have to somewhat disagree with you here - the backgrounds are underexposed but the subjects are (mostly, with the possible exceptions of #5 and #6) properly exposed. This was something I did on purpose, shooting in manual mode to underexpose the background by about a stop and using the flash in ETTL mode, zoomed in to 70mm while using a 28mm lens, to properly expose the subject. The reason I chose to do this is because it is an overcast day so properly exposing the background renders it almost completely white under the flat lighting. I wanted to try and keep a tiny amount of detail in the snow while at the same time keeping it a bit darker to help make the subject pop more.

That's your call, for sure. I didn't specifically say it before, but I think the skin tones are also under exposed. #3, #6 add #7 are getting close to looking like they have good skin tones...but I think that in most of the others, the skin looks too dark.

And yes, properly exposing snow will mean that it's white...on the verge of blowing out, or actually blow out. So slightly underexposing it can have it's benefits...but when I look at these photos...all I see is 'grey snow'. I think you could have given the backgrounds more exposure. The subjects are nice and colorful, they should stand out pretty well on their own. Using the flash just to fill the shadows (rather than trying to mainly light them with flash) would be enough IMO.

 

[fokker]

They are all underexposed.

I respect your opinion Mike but I have to somewhat disagree with you here - the backgrounds are underexposed but the subjects are (mostly, with the possible exceptions of #5 and #6) properly exposed. This was something I did on purpose, shooting in manual mode to underexpose the background by about a stop and using the flash in ETTL mode, zoomed in to 70mm while using a 28mm lens, to properly expose the subject. The reason I chose to do this is because it is an overcast day so properly exposing the background renders it almost completely white under the flat lighting. I wanted to try and keep a tiny amount of detail in the snow while at the same time keeping it a bit darker to help make the subject pop more.

That's your call, for sure. I didn't specifically say it before, but I think the skin tones are also under exposed. #3, #6 add #7 are getting close to looking like they have good skin tones...but I think that in most of the others, the skin looks too dark.

And yes, properly exposing snow will mean that it's white...on the verge of blowing out, or actually blow out. So slightly underexposing it can have it's benefits...but when I look at these photos...all I see is 'grey snow'. I think you could have given the backgrounds more exposure. The subjects are nice and colorful, they should stand out pretty well on their own. Using the flash just to fill the shadows (rather than trying to mainly light them with flash) would be enough IMO.

I probably could/should have slightly brighter on the backgrounds in most of these, and possibly with the skin tones too. At the end of the day thogh, in situations like this with difficult and mixed lighting it is hard to say what is the 'right' exposure, so I just go with what I think looks good. Of course, that changes every time I look at the computer depending what time of day it is and how much coffee I've had to drink...

Just to illustrate why I had to (or wanted to) use the flash on these, here is one shot where the flash didn't fire, and I have bumped up the exposure in LR to make what I think is the 'right' exposure for the subject. I find the background looks worse blown out like this than it does being dull grey.

 

[loopy]

I have to agree with Mike, these look underexposed to me. I'd like to see the backgrounds a little brighter.

Aside from that, I think #4 turned out the best. The subject looks sharp while the background is slightly blurred. Nice work.

I love Fernie, great hill. What do you use to protect your gear on the hill?

 

[fokker]

I don't use anything to protect my gear, in this situation nothing was necessary since I wasn't riding (walking due to injury). If I was riding with my gear I'd want a nicely padded and waterproof backpack, but I don't have one of those.