I'm not looking for feedback on the quality/sharpness of the image. (I know that needs work). More I'm working with a remote and wanted to see do any of these even jump out enough to say yeah that was a good photo? Or that was close, but here's what is missing....
My quandary is, you are getting the back of the goalkeeper, no eyes no face, most of the time. However I liked one I saw about a year ago of Tim Howard, and felt if it was good enough to be published, maybe I could find a way to make this angle work.
I think the concept of shooting behind the net is interesting and works to an extend for all of them, but in my opinion # 5 and 4 are the strongest. The composition doesn't have the viewer guessing about what's going on in the shot. #5 leaves you wondering if the ball is going to go in or not, while # 4 clearly shows it's too late for the goalie. :-)
A few of thoughts come to mind here... First, I'm rarely a big fan of the netcam behind the goal. I like them when the netcam is IN the goal. The netting just causes too much distraction in my humble.
That being said, I'm not in love with the inspirational shot. There is so much better out there to try and emulate. Not trying to knock the photographer here, I just feel that if you're looking to emulate a look, there are better examples out there.
On the shots you have presented, you have two things going against you. The netting... which is an inconsistent more distracting pattern, and a sky backdrop which washes out the ball and sometimes the players. A treeline background or a stadium would work better. If you want to continue to shoot behind the net like this, at the very least, the camera MUST be closer to the net. It's just too far away. All I see is net. The players and action are a distant afterthought.
I don't think there is anything wrong with continuing to practice technique and angles, however, I think you're facing an uphill battle. It's going to be tough to make a compelling frame given the concerns that I have presented.
Part of the problem is that the 'inspirational' shot was taken with a taut net - there's is a back crossbar and it's tightly stakes into the ground. Most HS/rec nets will be 'free-drooping', and as such getting them up and out of the way will prove impossible. As well, with the drooping net getting a camera IN the net will prove difficult since it would have to be that much closer to the goal line and in potential danger of players landing on it. I know that all NCAA refs around here will not allow a camera to touch any netting for soccer, and we have the drooping net at the school where I shoot, so I've simply given up on the shot for the same reason Paul outlined about the net distraction.
I'll look for better examples. I think the inspirational photo may be tainted from my point of view because we are Tim Howard fans. So, I'm probably forgiving the errors in the shot for the player.
So, netting and too much sky. In this round I was shooting with a 17-50, at the 17mm. I'm not a fan of fisheye shots, as personally I like my lines to be straight not rounded. So, I'm not sure how much wider I could be. I set the camera to cover the entire net, which caused the camera to be back about 5-6 feet from the net. I think in the next series I will bring the camera closer to the next and only shoot one side - gambling on where the action takes place, but giving a tighter feel.
Also, I shot from the ground roughly level, I could elevate the camera say 2 feet and go for a higher point which should give less sky.
My state high school rules are no cameras on or in the netting / goal, so I'll just keep fiddling with the images behind the goal. (I've got two goalkeepers in the family, so I'm likely dedicating the next 6 years of my photography to getting better goalkeeper shots)
jspytek wrote:
So, netting and too much sky. In this round I was shooting with a 17-50, at the 17mm. I'm not a fan of fisheye shots, as personally I like my lines to be straight not rounded. So, I'm not sure how much wider I could be. I set the camera to cover the entire net, which caused the camera to be back about 5-6 feet from the net. I think in the next series I will bring the camera closer to the next and only shoot one side - gambling on where the action takes place, but giving a tighter feel.
Also, I shot from the ground roughly level, I could elevate the camera say 2 feet and go for a higher point which should give less sky. ...Show more →
jspytek wrote:
I'm not a fan of fisheye shots, as personally I like my lines to be straight not rounded.
Who are you shooting these for? (you or parents, kids or paper?)
We as photographers should remove our personal preferences to get the shot that the 'client' wants - whomever that client may be. If these are for your own use, then I have no argument (but then how do you deal with the very curvy 'lines' of the net?)
One solution to cure all your ills - shoot from the side of the net.
- you get the camera closer to the net (so less net in the frame)
- the lines on the net should be much more straight
- mostly - if positioned and timed great - you get more of the keeper in the shot.
of course, as you mentioned, you'll be only getting half the captures as from the back.
Shoot the goalies pre game during warm ups, Move into the field about 20 feet, I usually ask the coach if it is OK, you will get images that you will love.!
(but then how do you deal with the very curvy 'lines' of the net?)