Reading mode: Light Dark

Help me figure out what I did wrong (8 pics)

Go to last post
T

turkeyjerky214

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
450
Reaction score
0
Location
St Louis, MO, US
Went to the park with my family. I got a couple of shots decent shots just around the park (C&C's please), but I'm really looking for criticisms of the last 5 pics. I've been wanting to try out sports photography for a while so I got a few shots of my cousin practicing pitching. I'm pretty disappointed with how they turned out even though they ARE my first action shots since getting my first DSLR a few months ago.





What happens to a tennis court after massive floods



ISO 100, f/3.2, 1/1000



ISO 200, f/1.8, 1/4000



ISO 200, f/1.8, 1/4000



ISO 100, f/1.8, 1/3200



ISO 200, f/1.8, 1/4000



Here's my problems with these pictures. Generally, they seem out of focus. I'm guessing that happened because I had the aperture open too wide and since my subject wasn't stationary, she moved out of the very shallow area in which she would be in focus.

My other problem is that the sky is completely blown out. As you can tell from the shadows, the sun was hitting pretty hard from that side, so I really don't know if there's anything I could have done to avoid this besides metering for the sky and then trying to fix how dark my subject would then be in post.

Any and all comments and (constructive) criticisms welcome!

Edit: Forgot to mention that no post processing was done to these so if anyone thinks some of these might be able to be saved, please let me know.
 
Although I'm far from expert, my recommendation would be to try for a better camera angle in the future. You will get better shots if you shoot with the sun at your back. You will see the "bright side" of your subject instead of a shadowy backlight subject. Also, I do think you could do a lot to salvage these with some post processing. You can't focus your subject but you can make some lighting adjustments that will help a lot.

Michelle
 
Looks like you were aiming for max shutter speeds to freeze the action. However, remember the three factors: ISO, Shutter, Aperture.

Most of the pics were shot at 1.8...not sure what lens you are using, but most lenses are soft when opened up that wide. Even though you had a fast shutter to freeze the action, the 1.8 aperture most likely softened the pics. Stop the lens down and adjust ISO higher

hope this helps
 
i agree that its going to be rough getting crisp shots of in these types of situations at 1.8.

J.
--
400D, 17-70, 70-200 F4, 50 1.8
 
shoot at Av with:

AEB -1/3

Aperture always next from best, example if your lens start from 1.8, then use next one (ex: 2.8 or whatever)
ISO the best you can get (100 if its the minimum)
Speed: whatever the camera suggests you.

I never meter with pattern (all the others are fine)
--

EOS 1000; S45; S80; G9; EOD450D
35-80; 80-200; 18-55 IS
 
As you concluded yourself, f/1.8 is way too large an aperture. It's also unnecessary with that kind of bright light. ISO100,f/1.8,1/4000 could be replaced with ISO200,f/5,1/1000 for much more DOF and sharpness while still stopping the action.

OTOH there's not much you can do about the sky except walk to the other side of the subject or buy a powerful flash.
 
Michelle Schaefer said:
I do think you could do a lot to salvage these with some post processing.
You can't focus your subject but you can make some lighting
adjustments that will help a lot.
Click to expand...
I'm really new to post processing, so how would you recommend I go about this?
beppe_it said:
shoot at Av with:
AEB -1/3
Click to expand...
Sorry if this is a dumb question (still relatively new to shooting), but doesn't AEB mean auto exposure bracketing? if that's the case, wouldn't it take 3 different pictures at -1/3, 0, and 1/3? Or are you suggesting I drop the exposure down to -1/3?
beppe_it said:
I never meter with pattern (all the others are fine)
Click to expand...
I don't really get what you mean by this.
 
You had a lot of bad things going for you.

Aperture of f1.8 not only puts in in a soft part of the lens, but it also provides you with very little depth of field leeway in an action shot.

Then you got extremely harsh lighting conditions.

And you are sort of facing the sun.

I'm no PP expert but I looked at the image and decided that the subject was more important than the sky. I could have fixed the sky somewhat but that wasn't my goal so I left it.

 
Howdy,

My disclaimer - I'm new as well, been shooting for 8 months or so, but here are my thoughts.

You are right, AEB means it will take 3 different exposures. I'm guessing he perhaps meant to set EC (Exposure Compensation) to -1/3. This is b/c you have "hot" areas on the pic.

Your camera has different metering modes: Center Weighted, Partial and Evaluative. I think pattern metering may be the evaluative metering. Its how your camera decides on the exposure (or helps you decide if in manual mode). Pattern or evaluative metering takes in the whole scene equally, which is good for average scenes. Center weighted metering puts a weight on the center, and partial only used the center 9%. Your manual will talk more about metering and how its used. I personally do use evaluative probably half the time and the other half i use partial metering. Partial metering is good in tricky situations as well.

Another thing to note, not only will the 50mm f/1.8 lens be softer wide opened (at 1.8), the DOF will be really small too and this can lead to misfocus. I would imgaine 1.8 aperture is tough on a moving subject since they could easily move out of the focus plane.

I think your pics can be salvaged. I'm not good at post processing yet, but you could apply some sharpening to help with some of the softness. I assume you shot in RAW. You could also mess with the brightness and contrast as well.

Keep practicing, it takes a lot of work. I suggest getting Friedmans book on the Rebels as a good read on using your camera. I'm currently reading Bryan Peterson's Understanding Exposure, which is an excellent read and has some great food for thought on it.

BUt others here have good advice: Stop down the lens a bit and you should have a sharper picture as well as plenty of DOF for focusing.
--
Just trying to learn

Blog: http://novicephotog.blogspot.com/
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/9778447@N07/
 
Digital cameras can't duplicate what your eyes can see. In harsh lighting such as this the images need some help.

 
Try and get the ball in the picture. The last two especially look posed, because there is not sense of action.
 
I'll round up the tips:
  • Try not to shoot against the sunlight, get the sun behind you and the dynamic range will be dramatically reduced.
  • Stop down to at least f/2.8 at 4m distance. depth of field (DOF) will be about 0.68m just enough to get the whole body in focus from the side.
  • slightly underexpose the shot to preserve highlights in the sky (or shoot raw exposing for the sky. Meter +1.66 to +2 using M mode for white clouds). if there's anything brighter than the white clouds, meter off that to read +2 ev.
  • Set the focus point so that the eyes will be in focus. You can use an off center focus point for this while also composing for the rule of thirds. (make sure the subject has space in front to 'move' in)
  • Shoot raw to be able to recover highlight or shadow detail.
I'll add some more:
  • You can use f/1.8 or f/2.2 for nice blurred backgrounds but be careful of the dof, stand farther back if you can f/1.8 will be prone to fringing and ghosting make sure the contrast in the shot is not too big. Use AI servo and track the head and shoot in continuous mode. In single shot mode the subject moves and by the time you've locked focus, the subject may have moved outside the dof, AI servo makes sure (kind of) that focus is retained.
  • Shoot with your camera level to the subjects head. Other perspectives may work like close to the ground but you'll need a telelens to make best use of that angle.
  • Try to get the whole body in the shot, you can crop later
Good luck!
--
Imqqmi



http://www.pbase.com/imqqmi
 
This has been a really great thread with so much useful info.

If lenses are really soft wide open, then the question I am asking is whats the point in buying a lens that has such a wide f number, like 1.8 or 1.4 or 2.8 if the images are going to be so soft? they are sold as being suitable for low light, but if the image is so soft, then just how useful is it really?

also, what would be a good 'sweet'spot for 1.8/1.4/2.8 lenses that results in a sharpish shot of the subject?
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dipak49ers/sets/72157602470636767/
 
The point of very fast lenses is that it is sharper at the equivalent aperture. ie a 50mm f/1.4 is sharper at f/1.8 than the 50mm f/1.8 mk II. I've read the the 50mm f/1.2L is very usable wide open, but stopped down the image quality and sharpness goes up a few notches, but if you really need speed, you can trade off some sharpness for speed getting less motion blur at the cost of a little softness.

In general with a few exceptions the sweetspot is usually 1 or 2 stops down from wide open. Fast lenses on crop camera's often peak between f/5.6 and f/8. Full frame camera's are allegedly sharper one more stop down.

I just purchased a sigma 30mm f/1.4 and it looks very promising even wide open (haven't got the time to download them to the pc just yet).

--
Imqqmi



http://www.pbase.com/imqqmi
 
bluefox9er said:
This has been a really great thread with so much useful info.

If lenses are really soft wide open, then the question I am asking is
whats the point in buying a lens that has such a wide f number, like
1.8 or 1.4 or 2.8 if the images are going to be so soft? they are
sold as being suitable for low light, but if the image is so soft,
then just how useful is it really?

also, what would be a good 'sweet'spot for 1.8/1.4/2.8 lenses that
results in a sharpish shot of the subject?
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dipak49ers/sets/72157602470636767/
Click to expand...
If you look at an f1.8 lens, it might be properly sharp stopped down a bit, say f2.8-f4

If you bought an f4 lens instead, it will be able to open up to f4 where you were using the f1.8, but the sweet spot will then be shifted up to f5.6-f8. So the f1.8 lens gives you a better picture at a wider aperture than an f4 lens.

Also, just because you have an f1.8 lens, that dosen't mean you have to use it there, I choose aperture to suit the depth of field I want, so even if I was a fair bit higher for most general stuff, it is great to have f1.8 available for when I want a realy narrow dof
--
http://www.illaname.deviantart.com
 
Like others have said, even if soft wide opened, the aperture where its sharp will still be "faster" than a slower lens. I'm not positive about this, but I've read L lenses are sharp throughout, but I could be wrong. Also, its relative too. When someone says its softer wide opened, it doesn't mean you should never shoot wide opened. It means, if you can, stop it down to get the best IQ. However, if you are in a low light situation, I'd take softness and get the picture (and maybe save on the ISO) then not get the picture. I have the 50mm f/1.8 lens as well and I've taken pics wide opened. I do agree its not as sharp as it stopped down, but its not bad either. I have fine pics taken at 1.8.
bluefox9er said:
This has been a really great thread with so much useful info.

If lenses are really soft wide open, then the question I am asking is
whats the point in buying a lens that has such a wide f number, like
1.8 or 1.4 or 2.8 if the images are going to be so soft? they are
sold as being suitable for low light, but if the image is so soft,
then just how useful is it really?

also, what would be a good 'sweet'spot for 1.8/1.4/2.8 lenses that
results in a sharpish shot of the subject?
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dipak49ers/sets/72157602470636767/
Click to expand...
--
Just trying to learn

Blog: http://novicephotog.blogspot.com/
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/9778447@N07/
 
imqqmi said:
  • Set the focus point so that the eyes will be in focus. You can use
an off center focus point for this while also composing for the rule
of thirds. (make sure the subject has space in front to 'move' in)
Click to expand...
How do I change how the autofocus works? I always see the different red dots beeping in the viewfinder, but I didn't know I could pick which one specifically it uses (guess I missed that part of the manual).
imqqmi said:
  • Shoot raw to be able to recover highlight or shadow detail.
Click to expand...
I actually did shoot these in RAW, but the sky was so blown out I wasn't really able to do anything about it. Also I've read when you're shooting sports, it's better to shoot at a high quality jpg because you don't fill up the buffer as quickly as you do with RAW so you're not able to get as many shots in continuous shooting. Is that true?
imqqmi said:
Use AI servo and track the head and shoot in continuous
mode. In single shot mode the subject moves and by the time you've
locked focus, the subject may have moved outside the dof, AI servo
makes sure (kind of) that focus is retained.
Click to expand...
So if I understand what you're saying correctly, AI servo is kind of a continuous autofocus that follows your subject? How would I do that?

Thanks to everyone for all the great comments and tips! I feel like I'm really learning a ton from this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top