Congratulations to mholdef for winning Feature Thread of the Week with 2 votes - View Previous Winners
Was privileged to be able to shoot some photos with two dancers from the Lyon Opera Ballet (Lore Pryszo & Marissa Parzei) early yesterday morning here in Lyon.
Below are a handful of the images from the series, feedback most appreciated +++
I think they would all benefit from shallower DOF as I can see the background a bit too much for my taste. This would also benefit to isolate them and add to the artistic component to the shots.
As they are, I feel a bit of a "kit camera" feel if that makes sense, which is a conflict, because the venue and poses are fantastic.
Also, in (4), which is my favorite, they are off-center a bit (see their hands for reference). This image would soar to the moon if the dancers were centered and the background had been lost in beautiful bokeh.
I think they would all benefit from shallower DOF as I can see the background a bit too much for my taste. This would also benefit to isolate them and add to the artistic component to the shots.
As they are, I feel a bit of a "kit camera" feel if that makes sense, which is a conflict, because the venue and poses are fantastic.
Also, in (4), which is my favorite, they are off-center a bit (see their hands for reference). This image would soar to the moon if the dancers were centered and the background had been lost in beautiful bokeh.
I shot all of these wide open using the 70-200/2.8 (except #4 ! ), but on the background blur, I agree would have been nicer to be one stop more open. While I do own an 85/1.4, I really wanted to try out the 70-200 for its flexibility and shooting outside to have the reach and not have to change lenses too often, but for some of these the 85 would have stood out more.
all are excellent but 4 and 5 are stunning. The red vs the black and the mirrored poses make for a brilliant white vs black swan sort of feel. That being said, 5 is so dynamic and powerful!
I see what you mean and would think the same thing - but when we shoot at 150/2.8, even shooting half body will give a much creamier background
I think it’s the distance, keeping in mind these are full body shots - I can’t say there is much cropping either, although 1-2 may be cropped 10% or so just to frame as balanced as possible
So I don’t think the Sigma will do much different in identical situations...
I am pleased with these images overall, and while most processing might indeed add the extra bonus, would involve a lot of work.
I guess I just need to invest in a 135/2.0 !!!
gheller wrote:
Really surprised that the background is not more blurred @ f/2.8 (and 2.0!)
My Sigma 150 f/2.8 seems to render much more background blur, especially with the background so far away.
I would process these to isolate the subjects *much* more, but that may not be your vision.
With the 70-200, you're going to get a better blur at 200mm than you are at 150, and certainly better than at 85 or smaller. When I shoot these shots, I treat my 70-200mm lens as if it were a 200mm, and I simply walk to wherever I need to be to the composition I want at 200mm. Zoom in on the subject and the blur is magical.
In other words, I was expecting you to say what you did regarding the lens lengths.
I’ve just recently ventured into shooting dance outdoors, so this was definitely a good experience for Act II !
Next time will step back and shoot at 200mm
The only thing is communication which can be a bit harder, but can always spend a bit more time briefing, then shooting a bit, etc
friscoron wrote:
With the 70-200, you're going to get a better blur at 200mm than you are at 150, and certainly better than at 85 or smaller. When I shoot these shots, I treat my 70-200mm lens as if it were a 200mm, and I simply walk to wherever I need to be to the composition I want at 200mm. Zoom in on the subject and the blur is magical.
In other words, I was expecting you to say what you did regarding the lens lengths.
I always talk with my dancers, talk about whether I want them to have a vertical or horizontal presence, whether they will pose or do a leap, and then we go to our spots and shoot. I shout things to them, or make hand gestures.
I look forward to seeing the difference when you shoot at 200mm. I think you'll be quite pleased.
Jonathan Brady wrote:
I like the setting and don't want it more blurred. You took the time to go to this specific location, why not include it?
IMO, the background for images such as this should be recognizable, but not distracting. The subject (dancer) is the focus, and background (while nice), is just too much in focus for my taste.
I agree with Greg on this. Right now, the way it's shot, the background is competing for attention with the dancer. If they are shot at 200mm, the background will become a nicer blur, you'll still see exactly what it is, but it will no longer compete with attention. But.... that's my style, the way I like to do things. Doesn't mean it's the right way or only way to do things.
I feel like the competition for attention in the image between the subject and background has more to do with exposure on each as opposed to in-focus vs out-of-focus. Notice in the first two images that the subject stands out more as she's brighter than the building in the background whereas in the images towards the end of the post the building is brighter and competes more for attention. Supplemental lighting on the subject, IMO, would have made a more impactful difference than a faster aperture... Again, IMO.
Makes sense and is easier to make changes on exposure in PS than image blur
I’ve tried working with blur with subject select and it just doesn’t seem natural
I will try to work on one changing the background exposure and share this weekend
I also have another shoot lined up early June with a gymnastics dancer and a ribbon and will definitely try shooting at 200mm @ 2.8 and will share those as well
Thanks everyone for the helpful feedback
Jonathan Brady wrote:
I feel like the competition for attention in the image between the subject and background has more to do with exposure on each as opposed to in-focus vs out-of-focus. Notice in the first two images that the subject stands out more as she's brighter than the building in the background whereas in the images towards the end of the post the building is brighter and competes more for attention. Supplemental lighting on the subject, IMO, would have made a more impactful difference than a faster aperture... Again, IMO.
), but on the background blur, I agree would have been nicer to be one stop more open. While I do own an 85/1.4, I really wanted to try out the 70-200 for its flexibility and shooting outside to have the reach and not have to change lenses too often, but for some of these the 85 would have stood out more.