The University of Georgia had a good night - they coasted to a 197.625 - 194.8 win over the University of Kentucky. Although they still struggled on beam (a recurring theme), they showed some depth tonight. 2-Time defending NCAA All-Around Champion, Courtney Kupets, competed on only 2 events. I tried some new things tonight - unhappy with most of it. Here are some (15) that I thought were keepers. I may regret this post tomorrow - I have nodded off a couple of times while processing; so, who knows what I actually ended up with (probably missed color adjustments on several). Also, I will try to add some comments tomorrow - now, it's time for some sleep. BTW - totally off subject, but I was up until 3am last night - did you know that chocolate is toxic to dogs? My youngest daughter's dog ate most of a 3oz dark chocolate candy bar - he seems to be ok now, but a lot worry/concern last night. We took him to vet (did some of the things you might expect, including charcol). Anyway, I thought I would warn anyone who did not know - milk chocolate isn't too bad, but dark chocolate can be fatal in fairly small amounts. OK - here are some photos from tonights meet:
Andy: I'm so sorry to hear about your/your daughter's dog! I'd heard that about dogs and chocolate, but it's just plain shocking to believe that two things I love so much can be deadly incompatible. I hope your youngest's best friend continues on the road to full recovery. And if she was in any way responsible for the dog getting the chocolate, all the more reason to hope there's no bad ending.
Looking at your shots, I'm guessing you face one of the same challenges in your arena that I face here--different areas have different amounts and temperatures of lighting, thus, exposure and white balance differ from one apparatus to the next. As long as these areas remain fairly constant, there's the hope of nailing it down. If they're different AND changing, well, good luck! Let's start with your #13 because in my opinion, that's by far your best shot of the series in terms of color and exposure. The question becomes: What did you do right with this shot? I think the same can be said for #12, it just doesn't jump out as much, probably because there isn't as much of the red in the leotard visible. Then we can jump to #2 and see something completely different. Here, white balance looks off (too warm) and it looks like you're dealing with harsh spot lights from above that leave anything blocked from those spots in dark shadow. I think you have to let the areas of skin hit by the light blow out a bit more to get the face better exposed, and if you shot RAW, you can accomplish this pretty easily. Can't tell if there's motion blur, noise reduction or what but the face looks a bit OOF and the legs look very 'smooth.' #4 is very similar in terms of exposure, OOF face and 'smooth' look to the legs. 9 and 10 look good. Great timing in the routine and exposure looks fine. Backgrounds are beyond your control. Only thing I'd recommend on these is to go into color adjustment and move the yellow/blue slider toward blue a few ticks in both midtones and highlights. This'll put a bit of red into the color as it removes a bit of the yellow. (The lighting appears so similar to what I deal with at Utah that I'm just sharing what I often have to do to adjust color.) 14 and 15 are just beautiful in terms of timing and "stopped action." You obviously know these routines very well and continue to nail peak moments. (Same color suggestions.) #1 is a cool shot! Nicely done. Did you spot-meter it? I'm not crazy about looking at backs on bar shots, but you nailed #8 and I love that you're at the same height as Courtney. I'd adjust the horizon using the white walls in the background, and make the same very minor color adjustments. Finally, color in #3 looks great, just need a bit more exposure of her face.
I know you're deep into this and it's fun to see. I wish you could get onto the floor almost as much as you do, just to see what you could come away with if you could shoot from wherever you wanted to! Keep at it.....Yesterday I started thinking seriously about Georgia for nationals. Why not? was my initial thought. We'll see where it goes from there....Thanks for posting. --Russ
Thanks for your comments about the photos and the dog. As for who was responsible, that would be my wife, but don't say that I said so - she already feels bad enough. I suppose that I can share in the blame in that I gave her a 3oz, 70% dark chocolate bar on Valentines Day - Thursday night, she opened it and made the mistake of leaving it on a side table by my recliner (out of site - out mind). The rest is history, but it appears the dog has made a full recovery. I guess I should point out the dog's name is Kinsey (after Kinsey Rowe - my daughter's all-time favorite gymdawg), and yes - Kinsey was honored to have a dog named after her. My daughter and Kinsey (the gymnast) - that's a long story that I will share over dinner and drinks if you come to Nationals. There will probably never be another gymnast that has such a profound impact on the life of my family - really can't say enough about this girl; she's something special.
As for the photos, I am trying to learn the "science" (or is art) of white balance - your assumptions are correct, and it is driving my absolutely crazy. Now, as for what I did right on #13 - I would pay good money to know The camera settings for the last 4 are all the same (300mm;f4.0;1/640;ISO 1600). Photos were taken in RAW and adjusted to ~4450K and +40 tint (a little variation, but not much). By the way, I left my seat and moved to an area behind the student section - I may try this again with the 70-200/2.8 next time (I was too close for 300mm on some of the floor shots).
Now for the difference between these and #2 - the vault is on the opposite end (looks like a dungeon from my seats). I frequently put the camera down and watch - or take pictures of the girls not competing (they are only a few feet from me). This time I tried (and really remembered why I don't usually do it). It probably is too warm - but the seats in the background about right (I think I used curves (droppers) and found the darkest, lightest and a medium gray). I suppose it was that last one that got me - I wish I could select the colors of the leotards BTW - 4450/+42; so, Temp and tint were very similar (not to imply that lighting is the same - just ironic). You are right - I did not nail the focus on these; and I did use noise reduction to clean them up (too much?).
As for the color suggestions, I will try this again. I had tried this previously, and I wasn't very pleased with my results (but I don't think it adjusted the highlights and midtones). What I have been doing for the past couple of weeks is to select the color under saturation and make minor adjustments to hue, saturation and lightness - I am probably trying to over analyze.
I did use spot-meter on #1. I didn't know what to expect - but I liked the outcome.
I don't like the backs on bars either, but almost all of my good bars photos were carbon copies to my previous posts; so, I thought I would share something different. Also, tried moving away from center point focus to all points on bars - my keeper rate dropped a little.
#3 - I will try adjusting the exposure a little. Unfortunately, I cut her feet off - wasn't shooting verticle at that moment - don't know why (brain freeze).
As for floor access - I am hoping that I will get an opportunity. I really don't have any reason to think I will, but I am still hoping.
I am about to try the hotels again (for Nationals). I tried a couple of months ago, but it seems that most were "tied up" at the time. I have seen this before, they usually open up just before the event. Nonetheless, I will probably try to secure a room at one of my top 3 - if you need suggestions, drop me an email. Heck, I will send you one to let you know what I find out. Thanks again for the feedback/help. Just when I think I am starting to make progress with the camera, I realize how far I have to go to have a good picture - WhiteBalance/color is my biggest weakness/nightmare.
Consider it done. All is well now - I am just glad that my wife knew that dogs and chocolate don't mix. This occurred ~5pm on a Friday afternoon; so, we were fortunate to catch the vet before they left (we could have called them...it was just a lot easier and saved a lot of valuable time). We are blessed.
acrabb wrote:
Now, as for what I did right on #13 - I would pay good money to know
I suspect it's as simple as skin color. The gymnast in #13 looks to have fairer skin, which seems to be treated more accurately by the sensor. I see this same thing, where the darker the skin, the more yellow/green and muddy its tone in the photo in low/artificial light. Two photos taken in the same spot with the same settings, two different subjects, and the results can be quite different. Go figure...
Nice series and I like #8 the best...an excellent capture of a peak moment!
Regarding the dog/chocolate mix...glad to hear your dog is doing well. I have a good-sized Chocolate lab that ate a full box of 10 very rich chocolate truffles on Christmas day a few years ago. We called the emergency vet and they had us make her swallow 1/2 cup of hydrogen peroxide...which made her throw them all back up. It worked great. Too bad our food-loving dog didn't remember the incident, because last year she climbed up on the counter when we were gone and ate a bunch more chocolate. The hydrogen peroxide worked again, thank goodness.
brown_dog wrote:
Nice series and I like #8 the best...an excellent capture of a peak moment!
I have a good-sized Chocolate lab that ate a full box of 10 very rich chocolate truffles.
Thanks - and what did you expect from a chocolate lab Seriously though, this mixture (chocolate and dogs) is no laughing matter. I am just glad that my wife realized the danger that our dog faced. Our 20 lbs English Toy/King Charles Cav mix had probably eatten a toxic dosage of dark chocolate. Hydrogen peroxide and charcol probably saved him. He and my daughter are happy now - well, the rest of us are too, but we recognize that he is back to being a high maintenance mutt
Andy, nice shots. I think you captured the spirit of the event. I can't give you the detailed lowdown like Russ, he's the master at this sport, but I like the way they tell a story of what went down.
The camera settings for the last 4 are all the same (300mm;f4.0;1/640;ISO 1600). Photos were taken in RAW and adjusted to ~4450K and +40 tint (a little variation, but not much). By the way, I left my seat and moved to an area behind the student section - I may try this again with the 70-200/2.8 next time (I was too close for 300mm on some of the floor shots).
BTW - 4450/+42; so, Temp and tint were very similar (not to imply that lighting is the same - just ironic). You are right - I did not nail the focus on these; and I did use noise reduction to clean them up (too much?). 
I suspect it's as simple as skin color. The gymnast in #13 looks to have fairer skin, which seems to be treated more accurately by the sensor. I see this same thing, where the darker the skin, the more yellow/green and muddy its tone in the photo in low/artificial light. Two photos taken in the same spot with the same settings, two different subjects, and the results can be quite different. Go figure...