Another Hockey Pic
Dudley Hanks
After shooting a few hockey pics, I posted one that has some problems:
http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Images/Hockey.jpg
Today, my son and I went back to the arena. Instead of a game, we found a
practice, which worked quite well for some more test shots.
In order to get around the net, Robert helped me find the door to the lower
level where the players boxes are. I can tell you quite truthfully "I
didn''t see any signs saying staff only," so we got close to the glass at
ice level and snapped some pics.
Instead of using my 75 - 300mm f/4 - 5.6 I tried my50mm f/1.8 and a 2X
converter. With the exposure compensation set to +1 stop and the ISO
dropped to 800, I got a shutter speed of 180 sec at f/1.8 *2.
Here is the result:
http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Images/Hockey2.jpg
Once again, it's not the best pic in the world, but I'm hoping it shows some
improvement in the area of exposure. In particular, I'm wondering if I did
better with the focusing of this shot. Using Live View, focusing is a bit
awkward, but I'm hoping it's closer than the first shot.
At least the net isn't there, but it was shot through glass, and the glass
was quite scuffed. But, I'm hoping I was able to shoot through it with a
bit clearer results than the netting afforded.
Take Care,
Dudley
Troy Piggins
>
> After shooting a few hockey pics, I posted one that has some problems:
>
> http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Images/Hockey.jpg
G'day Dudley, hope you don't mind me making some comments...
Can I make a quick comment that you've posted huge files here -
full size and they're taking ages to load. For display on the
web, particularly if it's only for critiquing, why don't you
resize them down to 1000px wide or thereabouts?
As you're aware, I'd say it's a little underexposed. I've never
shot ice hockey before, but I know shooting snow and anything
else where it's predominantly white there are issues with
exposure because all the white throws off the light meter. It
thinks all the white should be grey.
> Today, my son and I went back to the arena. Instead of a game, we found a
> practice, which worked quite well for some more test shots.
>
> In order to get around the net, Robert helped me find the door to the lower
> level where the players boxes are. I can tell you quite truthfully "I
> didn''t see any signs saying staff only," so we got close to the glass at
> ice level and snapped some pics.
>
> Instead of using my 75 - 300mm f/4 - 5.6 I tried my50mm f/1.8 and a 2X
> converter. With the exposure compensation set to +1 stop and the ISO
> dropped to 800, I got a shutter speed of 180 sec at f/1.8 *2.
>
> Here is the result:
> http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Images/Hockey2.jpg
>
> Once again, it's not the best pic in the world, but I'm hoping it shows some
> improvement in the area of exposure. In particular, I'm wondering if I did
> better with the focusing of this shot. Using Live View, focusing is a bit
> awkward, but I'm hoping it's closer than the first shot.
>
> At least the net isn't there, but it was shot through glass, and the glass
> was quite scuffed. But, I'm hoping I was able to shoot through it with a
> bit clearer results than the netting afforded.
It does show better exposure. The focus does look better too.
My comment on this shot would be shutter speed. 1/80 is way too
slow for sports I think.
I'm surprise the 50 f/1.8 works with 2x TC. It doesn't work with
all lenses.
Good to see you've taken what you learned first time and
definitely have improved it. That's what it's all about.
Just need to keep in mind that exposure compensation thing for
subjects that are predominantly white, and even the opposite for
predominantly dark/black.
--
Troy Piggins
Dudley Hanks
"Troy Piggins" <usene...@piggo.com> wrote in message
news:2009021...@usenet.piggo.com...
Thanks for the comments, Troy. Sorry about the big files. In the past,
some folks have asked to see originals, so that's what I've been posting.
In the future, I'll try to post both the original and a down-sized one for
quick reference.
Re: shutter speed, I'll try bumping the ISO back to 1600. Then, I should
get a speed of about 1/360, which should be getting into the stop-action
area.
Take Care,
Dudley
Dudley Hanks
"Savageduck" <savag...@savage.net> wrote in message
news:2009021621092364440-savageduck@savagenet...
> On 2009-02-16 20:49:10 -0800, "Dudley Hanks"
> There are still tweaks to be made with shutter speed and ISO, but I think
> you are on the right track.
>
> I think there is still a focus targeting issue which has been compounded
> by the movement of the skaters. The upright of the goal is in the center
> of the image and your apparent point of focus.
> If you had stopped down some to broaden the DOF, and brought the skaters
> from your right and centered them in the focus zone you would have the
> shot you wanted.
>
> Keep up the good work.
> --
> Regards,
> Savageduck
>
Thanks for pointing that out; you've got a good, analytical eye...
Since focusing is so slow in Live View, I originally aimed the lens at the
goalie while he was standing around in front of the net. Then I used the
Live View focusing to focus the lens. Then, I waited until I got some
action in an area I thought might be in the same focal range. Apparently, I
was off on my estimation, and you picked it up right away.
You're probably right. I'll bump the ISO back up to 1600 and stop down a
stop. I don't know if I'll get enough DOF for everything, but it should
help a bit.
On second thought, that will knock the shutter speed back down to around
1/180 sec, which is going to be a bit slow for fast action. Since 1600 is
my top ISO speed, nothing more can be gained there. I don't really want to
go back to no compensation regarding EC, so that has to stay the same. So
it looks like I'm running out of options.
I guess I'll have to make some comprimizes. If I drop the EC down to +2/3
and stop down 1 stop, I should still be able to achieve a shutter speed of
about 1/250 sec. It might be a wee bit slow, but that could work if the
shot is suitable. Then, if I take a bit more time to actually focus on the
area I want to shoot in. That should sharpen things up a bit as well.
As long as I don't get kicked out of the lower area, I think I'll be able to
get some semi-decent pics.
Take Care,
Dudley
Dudley Hanks
>>> I think there is still a focus targeting issue which has been compounded
>>> by the movement of the skaters. The upright of the goal is in the center
>>> of the image and your apparent point of focus.
>>> If you had stopped down some to broaden the DOF, and brought the skaters
>>> from your right and centered them in the focus zone you would have the
>>> shot you wanted.
>>>
>>> --
>> Thanks for pointing that out; you've got a good, analytical eye...
>>
>> Since focusing is so slow in Live View, I originally aimed the lens at
>> the
>> goalie while he was standing around in front of the net. Then I used the
>> Live View focusing to focus the lens. Then, I waited until I got some
>> action in an area I thought might be in the same focal range.
>> Apparently, I
>> was off on my estimation, and you picked it up right away.
>
> I just had a thought.
> The old Graphlex/Speed Graphic had a metal frame "sport finder". This was
> basically a two piece sight for fast sport & press target acquisition.
>
> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/Graphlex-01.jpg
>
> If you had some way to fabricate a similar finder for mounting on your
> camera, you would not have to depend on the Live View screen. Basically
> frame your subject and let auto focus do the rest.
>
Unfortunately, I can see more on the Live View screen than I can the real
thing... So, a sight like that wouldn't work for me. However, when I don't
shoot Live View, which is most of the time, I just point the camera in the
direction of sounds and start shooting. (See my post on "Work Hard, Play
Hard" for an example.)
It's those twilight zones where light is limited that my retinal cells tease
me a bit into thinking I can see enough to compose my shots. Sometimes it
works, sometimes it doesn't...
>>
>> You're probably right. I'll bump the ISO back up to 1600 and stop down a
>> stop. I don't know if I'll get enough DOF for everything, but it should
>> help a bit.
>>
>> On second thought, that will knock the shutter speed back down to around
>> 1/180 sec, which is going to be a bit slow for fast action. Since 1600
>> is
>> my top ISO speed, nothing more can be gained there. I don't really want
>> to
>> go back to no compensation regarding EC, so that has to stay the same.
>> So
>> it looks like I'm running out of options.
>>
>> I guess I'll have to make some comprimizes. If I drop the EC down to
>> +2/3
>> and stop down 1 stop, I should still be able to achieve a shutter speed
>> of
>> about 1/250 sec. It might be a wee bit slow, but that could work if the
>> shot is suitable. Then, if I take a bit more time to actually focus on
>> the
>> area I want to shoot in. That should sharpen things up a bit as well.
>
> You are going to have to work at it, and practice, practice, practice,
> with a tweak here and there.
>>
>> As long as I don't get kicked out of the lower area, I think I'll be able
>> to
>> get some semi-decent pics.
>
> Just have the trusty hound hold off the RCMP gendarmes until you have the
> shot in the can.
He's big enough (29" at the shoulders), and he's got the teeth
(http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Images/Tug.jpg) to intimidate just
about anybody. But, unfortunately, that big waggly tail is a dead
give-away...
Take Care,
Dudley
Mark Thomas
> Instead of using my 75 - 300mm f/4 - 5.6 I tried my50mm f/1.8 and a 2X
> converter. With the exposure compensation set to +1 stop and the ISO
> dropped to 800, I got a shutter speed of 180 sec at f/1.8 *2.
>
> Here is the result:
> http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Images/Hockey2.jpg
>
> Once again, it's not the best pic in the world, but I'm hoping it shows some
> improvement in the area of exposure.
struggling for enough light, I think this is probably close to as good
as you can get. I'd leave it at +1, go back up to ISO 1600, and keep
your shutter speed at ~1/250, judging by this result. And donate to the
stadium to help improve their lighting..
> In particular, I'm wondering if I did
> better with the focusing of this shot.
Yes, it's much better. Not quite perfect, but it's hard to tell how
much out or which way.
> At least the net isn't there, but it was shot through glass, and the glass
> was quite scuffed.
That might explain a bit of the softness, but it's actually pretty
acceptable.
Well, that's about a five times improvement over the first, so your next
attempt should be on the cover of Sports Illustrated!
Except I have the slight feeling you are about to hit the wall of
diminishing returns...
Don't let that stop you though - keep at it, Dudley. And just to
confuse you, for this shot a bit of flash might have helped.. (you're
obviously pretty close and there's no netting or other foreground stuff
to get lit up... although you did mention the scuffed glass, so maybe not..)
mt
Dudley Hanks
"Mark Thomas" <mark.t...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:gne7lp$gup$1...@news.motzarella.org...
Sorry, I made a mistake in the reported aperture. It wasn't f/1.8 * 2; it
was f/3.5 * 2. With this in mind, there are a couple of more things I'd
like to try.
I have another lens, a 28 - 80mm f/3.5 - 5.6 (kit lens for the old A2
camera). Setting the aperture to about f/4.5 - 5.6 I can pick up a bit of
speed while leaving the EC where it is (or even bumping it up a bit) should
result in an exposure with a good shutter speed and overall brightness.
Also, I think it's a better lens than the 50mm lens (especially when the
50mm is coupled to the TC), so it should focus a bit better.
You're right about the Law of Diminishing Returns, but I think some
additional benefit can be had by improving my positioning and the pic's
composition. If I can set myself up a bit deeper in the corner, I'm hoping
to get a better angle on the goal crease area, where I've had good luck
getting dramatic pics in the past.
If I get good results from the next attempt, I'll probably drag out my old
540ez flash and see what happens there...
This is where things start getting fun!
Take Care,
Dudley
Chris Malcolm
> "Savageduck" <savag...@savage.net> wrote in message
> news:2009021621092364440-savageduck@savagenet...
>> On 2009-02-16 20:49:10 -0800, "Dudley Hanks"
>> <photos....@dudley-hanks.com> said:
>>> "Troy Piggins" <usene...@piggo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:2009021...@usenet.piggo.com...
>>>> * Dudley Hanks wrote :
>>>>>
>>>>> After shooting a few hockey pics, I posted one that has some problems:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.photography.dudley-hanks.com/Images/Hockey.jpg
>>>>
>>>> G'day Dudley, hope you don't mind me making some comments...
>>>>
>>>> Can I make a quick comment that you've posted huge files here -
>>>> full size and they're taking ages to load. For display on the
>>>> web, particularly if it's only for critiquing, why don't you
>>>> resize them down to 1000px wide or thereabouts?
[snip]
>>> Thanks for the comments, Troy. Sorry about the big files. In the past,
>>> some folks have asked to see originals, so that's what I've been posting.
>>> In the future, I'll try to post both the original and a down-sized one
>>> for
>>> quick reference.
It should be possible to up the jpeg compression to get the image file
size under a megabyte without changing image size or losing any
detail.
>> I think there is still a focus targeting issue which has been compounded
>> by the movement of the skaters. The upright of the goal is in the center
>> of the image and your apparent point of focus.
>> If you had stopped down some to broaden the DOF, and brought the skaters
>> from your right and centered them in the focus zone you would have the
>> shot you wanted.
> Thanks for pointing that out; you've got a good, analytical eye...
> Since focusing is so slow in Live View, I originally aimed the lens at the
> goalie while he was standing around in front of the net. Then I used the
> Live View focusing to focus the lens. Then, I waited until I got some
> action in an area I thought might be in the same focal range. Apparently, I
> was off on my estimation, and you picked it up right away.
I don't know what your budget is like, but you might like to
consider one of the Sony alpha DSLRs that can use fast phase detection
autofocus at the same time as live view, which means in addition to
fast focussing response to the shutter button you can also use
continuous and predictive focussing while using live view.
--
Chris Malcolm
Dudley Hanks
"Chris Malcolm" <c...@holyrood.ed.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:700ktnF...@mid.individual.net...
That would be nice, Chris, but it's a bit out of my budget. Also, for the
limited amount of pics I take using visual framing, it wouldn't be worth it
to me. Most of my shots are taken sans sight, just by pointing and
shooting, so my Rebel works fairly well, most of the time.
Take Care,
Dudley
Viperdoc
and shooting through the glass, even at an NHL rink also introduces
distortion.
The best is to figure the frequency the pros are using for the overhead
strobes and synch them to your camera with a radio trigger!
Dudley Hanks
"Viperdoc" <jn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:RCKml.4712$PE4....@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
We're just talking about a neighbourhood skating rink, here, where minor
hockey games are played, figure skating lessons given, etc. I doubt there
are any overhead strobes installed...
I'm just using it to practice shooting in adverse conditions.
Take Care,
Dudley