Attended an event at the Siegal Center in Richmond Va. this past weekend. I was really lucky because the organizer used the arena lighting instead of stage lighting. I was able to shoot at 1/640, iso 2500 and f3.5 with my 7D and 70-200. I have also started experimenting with composite images so I included a couple.
I like all the shots - but less so on 2 and 3 because you don't have a face: the action is there, but not a face of the competitor. Otherwise, the timing and composition of the rest are great - although, tell me they are full frame, uneditted and ready to print... and I'll be really impressed.
Not too sure about your comment: I was really lucky because the organizer used the arena lighting instead of stage lighting.
as house lighting, while decent for exposure, is lousy for depth. There is no separation from the competitors to the background. Part of that is shooting at a 'safe' f/3.5 instead of opening up your lens to get better bokeh at f/2.8, but with most house lights, the images remain flat.
I think you noticed this, as you went through the effort to create your own background for the last couple - which is no doubt, cool and creative, but the time to do that in post is too much to expect to get to potential customers right away. (but it all depends on what/who your shooting for)
Suggestions:
-- Go wide open (or prime) to get better bokeh and subject isolation
-- Don't be afraid to shoot tighter (shoot to sell, straight from the camera)
-- Learn to love stage lighting (if properly focused) and don't be afraid of high iso if opening up aperture doesn't get you enough shutter speed (and even then, only 1/4 of your posted photos gain anything from faster shutter speed.)
When stage lighting is done properly, it's usually the preferred method. That being said though, this is some pretty damn sweet house lighting.
I like all except #2 and #3. Well done. The cutout shots are a lot of work for little payoff in my opinion. Especially considering that the backgrounds on these are very acceptable.
I really appreciate the comments and I have been practicing to get better. I did really good with shooting tight. Only images 4, 8 and 12 were cropped.
I also spent alot of time reading every post on this forum regarding shooting cheer events. "Shoot it tight, get it right, sell onsite" is burned in my brain. The first two things I am working on... sell on site? Not for me. It does not take a rocket scientist to realize how much infrastructure you need to make that model profitable. Plus, I am a decent photographer, but a weak businessman. That my friends, is a losing proposition. If anyone needs a walk on photographer to assist them in the Richmond area, I would love the chance.
I am shooting for the joy of shooting, I have two granddaughters cheering and lots of "adopted kids" from several teams that seem to show up on the weekends. When I do shoot for profit, I want to be able to offer something that parents and athletes cannot get from the other photographers. I am leaning towards composites. Several people made mention that they don't seem worth the trouble, but on the other hand I like working on them.
boomanbb wrote:
(snip)... I am leaning towards composites. Several people made mention that they don't seem worth the trouble, but on the other hand I like working on them.
