Shooting baseball

Jim Davidson91985 · Mar 16, 2003

I've shot 2 baseball games so far and my biggest problem is brightness and contrast. The games are mostly in bright sunshine. Since the uniforms of the home team are largely white, the camera tends to underexpose most of the frame. If I bump up the exposure, large parts of the uniform can be blown out.

I'm considering setting contrast on the camera(D60, soon to be 10D) to a lower setting, but this never seemed like a good idea. Maybe the 10D will fix the problem without fiddling with contrast.

To get decent results from my pictures, I'm shooting in RAW mode and then decreasing contrast when converting. I then judge each image and bump the levels to get the best result from each picture. Any suggestions for improving this workflow?

The camera also seems to be rear-focusing. It is doing it with my 100-400L IS and with my Sigma 120-300 F2.8 zoom. I used a Canon 1.4 teleconverter on the Sigma and it actually seems to -reduce- the problem. Weird. Hopefully that will be fixed by the 10D transplant.

Another thing: I've bumped into a limitation of this camera, which will -not- be improved by the 10D. This pictures was taken at ISO 100, F2.8, 1/4000sec. My problem? I CAN'T STOP THE BALL!

Almost, but not quite stopped. Also note that the dirt is more in focus about 3 feet behind the batter.

With a 1D, I suppose I could go to ISO 400 and crank the shutter speed to 1/16000sec for some interesting results.

See the entire gallery here:

http://www.go-bucks.com/03images/baseball/03-16-03/index.html

The images aren't large, but you can see numerous examples of rear-focusing.

Paul R Greenleaf · Mar 16, 2003

Jim,

As far as blowing out white on a sunny contrasty day, the 10D won't be any better there. But your right, at low ISO your better a little under than over. Here is a hint in PS that you might try.

When you adjust contrast, do it with an adjustment layer and then open the layer style box and "Alt" drag the "this layer" left of the two right triangles to the left. It should decrease the contrast on manily the white uniform.

As far as back focus. Are you using AI on a batter? If so, that's a no no with the D30/60. If not I can't help. If you not going to use one shot and then switch back (a hassle) then either MF or assign the " " button to focus and then tap the button once to set focus (something you can't do if it's assigned to the shutter).

Stopping the ball at 1/4000, it's not gonna happen in most cases. It requires faster.

Jim Davidson said:
I've shot 2 baseball games so far and my biggest problem is
brightness and contrast. The games are mostly in bright sunshine.
Since the uniforms of the home team are largely white, the camera
tends to underexpose most of the frame. If I bump up the exposure,
large parts of the uniform can be blown out.

I'm considering setting contrast on the camera(D60, soon to be 10D)
to a lower setting, but this never seemed like a good idea. Maybe
the 10D will fix the problem without fiddling with contrast.

To get decent results from my pictures, I'm shooting in RAW mode
and then decreasing contrast when converting. I then judge each
image and bump the levels to get the best result from each picture.
Any suggestions for improving this workflow?

The camera also seems to be rear-focusing. It is doing it with my
100-400L IS and with my Sigma 120-300 F2.8 zoom. I used a Canon 1.4
teleconverter on the Sigma and it actually seems to -reduce- the
problem. Weird. Hopefully that will be fixed by the 10D transplant.

Another thing: I've bumped into a limitation of this camera, which
will -not- be improved by the 10D. This pictures was taken at ISO
100, F2.8, 1/4000sec. My problem? I CAN'T STOP THE BALL!

Almost, but not quite stopped. Also note that the dirt is more in
focus about 3 feet behind the batter.

With a 1D, I suppose I could go to ISO 400 and crank the shutter
speed to 1/16000sec for some interesting results.

See the entire gallery here:

http://www.go-bucks.com/03images/baseball/03-16-03/index.html

The images aren't large, but you can see numerous examples of
rear-focusing.

Jim Davidson91985 · Mar 16, 2003

Paul R Greenleaf said:
When you adjust contrast, do it with an adjustment layer and then
open the layer style box and "Alt" drag the "this layer" left of
the two right triangles to the left. It should decrease the
contrast on manily the white uniform.

I'll give that a shot. I've used Photoshop quite a bit, but I haven't delved into adjustment layers.

Paul R Greenleaf said:
As far as back focus. Are you using AI on a batter? If so, that's a
no no with the D30/60. If not I can't help. If you not going to use
one shot and then switch back (a hassle) then either MF or assign
the " " button to focus and then tap the button once to set focus
(something you can't do if it's assigned to the shutter).

I was getting similar results with both AI and one shot focusing. The pitcher or batter don't move much in relation to my position, so I've been using single shot more often. Unfortunately, it make getting the on-base action a little more difficult.

Paul R Greenleaf said:
Stopping the ball at 1/4000, it's not gonna happen in most cases.
It requires faster.

So I've learned.

Thanks for the advice.

JimD

jim clarke · Mar 16, 2003

RE: Focus, use the rear button in AI to focus and then leave it there for the batters. I also set the focus point for the middle box. If you then have to quickly recompose to get a shot just hit the button. For exposures I have a trick I can pass on to you, I usually take a reading from either the infield grass with an incident meter (film camera) or the umpires nice grey (close to 18%) pants.Works like a charm even with chromes. Freezing a baseball that can be like catching lightning in a bottle especially with the lag time on the d30.
BTW- I liked your images, keep shooting and having fun.

Jim Davidson said:
Jim Davidson91985 said:

When you adjust contrast, do it with an adjustment layer and then
open the layer style box and "Alt" drag the "this layer" left of
the two right triangles to the left. It should decrease the
contrast on manily the white uniform.

Click to expand...

I'll give that a shot. I've used Photoshop quite a bit, but I
haven't delved into adjustment layers.

Jim Davidson91985 said:

As far as back focus. Are you using AI on a batter? If so, that's a
no no with the D30/60. If not I can't help. If you not going to use
one shot and then switch back (a hassle) then either MF or assign
the " " button to focus and then tap the button once to set focus
(something you can't do if it's assigned to the shutter).

Click to expand...

I was getting similar results with both AI and one shot focusing.
The pitcher or batter don't move much in relation to my position,
so I've been using single shot more often. Unfortunately, it make
getting the on-base action a little more difficult.

Jim Davidson91985 said:

Stopping the ball at 1/4000, it's not gonna happen in most cases.
It requires faster.

Click to expand...

So I've learned.

Thanks for the advice.

JimD

Jim Davidson91985 · Mar 16, 2003

jim clarke said:
RE: Focus, use the rear button in AI to focus and then leave it
there for the batters. I also set the focus point for the middle
box. If you then have to quickly recompose to get a shot just hit
the button.

I'm gong to have to learn how to use this feature.

jim clarke said:
For exposures I have a trick I can pass on to you, I
usually take a reading from either the infield grass with an
incident meter (film camera) or the umpires nice grey (close to
18%) pants.Works like a charm even with chromes.

So, what you are saying is set the exposure manually. I can do that, but I'm still going to try adjusting the contrast settings.

jim clarke said:
Freezing a baseball that can be like catching lightning in a
bottle especially with the lag time on the d30.

Catching the baseball in the frame is not my problem. Even with the lag time of a D60, it is just a matter of timing.

jim clarke said:
BTW- I liked your images, keep shooting and having fun.

Thanks. I'm certainly having fun.

JimD

William Icquatu Jr. · Mar 17, 2003

the best advice I can give you is to use the histogram as your exposure guide (on my 1D I like to keep the whitest stuff just shy of the right edge to keep detail)and shoot in manual exposure mode... it is the only way to be truly consistent, and with practice you will be able to adjust your shutter/aperture instinctively when the light changes from that baseline.

when exposure is critical, go manual

Jim Davidson said:
I've shot 2 baseball games so far and my biggest problem is
brightness and contrast. The games are mostly in bright sunshine.
Since the uniforms of the home team are largely white, the camera
tends to underexpose most of the frame. If I bump up the exposure,
large parts of the uniform can be blown out.

Backdoctor · Mar 17, 2003

Nice shot. I also cant stop the ball, but as mentioned to me by someone, Why would I. It gives it a sense of speed/action. I do see that your camera is focusing behind the subject. Can you choose the area of focus on yours? Or maybe use more DOF and not worry about the ball. Here is one I shot at 1/500th full zoom with my cp5700 and the ball is a blur, but I caught it.
It's Tom Glavine

I also got one of Cliff Floyd hitting the ball onto the ground:

If the ball was at a complete stop, I believe it would take away from the photo.

And the white pants are a pain.

Good luck!

Harris

Jim Davidson said:
I've shot 2 baseball games so far and my biggest problem is
brightness and contrast. The games are mostly in bright sunshine.
Since the uniforms of the home team are largely white, the camera
tends to underexpose most of the frame. If I bump up the exposure,
large parts of the uniform can be blown out.

I'm considering setting contrast on the camera(D60, soon to be 10D)
to a lower setting, but this never seemed like a good idea. Maybe
the 10D will fix the problem without fiddling with contrast.

To get decent results from my pictures, I'm shooting in RAW mode
and then decreasing contrast when converting. I then judge each
image and bump the levels to get the best result from each picture.
Any suggestions for improving this workflow?

The camera also seems to be rear-focusing. It is doing it with my
100-400L IS and with my Sigma 120-300 F2.8 zoom. I used a Canon 1.4
teleconverter on the Sigma and it actually seems to -reduce- the
problem. Weird. Hopefully that will be fixed by the 10D transplant.

Another thing: I've bumped into a limitation of this camera, which
will -not- be improved by the 10D. This pictures was taken at ISO
100, F2.8, 1/4000sec. My problem? I CAN'T STOP THE BALL!

Almost, but not quite stopped. Also note that the dirt is more in
focus about 3 feet behind the batter.

With a 1D, I suppose I could go to ISO 400 and crank the shutter
speed to 1/16000sec for some interesting results.

See the entire gallery here:

http://www.go-bucks.com/03images/baseball/03-16-03/index.html

The images aren't large, but you can see numerous examples of
rear-focusing.

--
Harris
http://www.pbase.com/backdoctor

genefoto · Mar 17, 2003

I found that most folks don't mind a "blurred" baseball. It gives them a sense of action and motion.

.

Here's a shot I took at a little league baseball practice with a Sigma 135-300 f4.

Ken Phillips · Mar 17, 2003

... as they cannot actually shoot the entire frame in 1/4000 of a second. A moving slit ensures that no part of the sensor/film is exposed for more than that, but it takes MUCH longer for the exposure than you would think! So ... with a horizontal slit (Canon) shutter, the time it takes for the slit to cross the ball is the amount of movement that you will get (which can cause a fast moving object to appear skewed!)

I'd bet that a 1D at 1/4000 will show the ball quit a bit clearer ... as it uses the sensor as the shutter for all exposures longer than 1/125.
KP

Jim Davidson said:
I've shot 2 baseball games so far and my biggest problem is
brightness and contrast. The games are mostly in bright sunshine.
Since the uniforms of the home team are largely white, the camera
tends to underexpose most of the frame. If I bump up the exposure,
large parts of the uniform can be blown out.

I'm considering setting contrast on the camera(D60, soon to be 10D)
to a lower setting, but this never seemed like a good idea. Maybe
the 10D will fix the problem without fiddling with contrast.

To get decent results from my pictures, I'm shooting in RAW mode
and then decreasing contrast when converting. I then judge each
image and bump the levels to get the best result from each picture.
Any suggestions for improving this workflow?

The camera also seems to be rear-focusing. It is doing it with my
100-400L IS and with my Sigma 120-300 F2.8 zoom. I used a Canon 1.4
teleconverter on the Sigma and it actually seems to -reduce- the
problem. Weird. Hopefully that will be fixed by the 10D transplant.

Another thing: I've bumped into a limitation of this camera, which
will -not- be improved by the 10D. This pictures was taken at ISO
100, F2.8, 1/4000sec. My problem? I CAN'T STOP THE BALL!

Almost, but not quite stopped. Also note that the dirt is more in
focus about 3 feet behind the batter.

With a 1D, I suppose I could go to ISO 400 and crank the shutter
speed to 1/16000sec for some interesting results.

See the entire gallery here:

http://www.go-bucks.com/03images/baseball/03-16-03/index.html

The images aren't large, but you can see numerous examples of
rear-focusing.

--

29 lbs. of Canon stuff in a backpack that I carry everywhere. A closet full of things that are banned in Britain. A minivan and a Fender Stratocaster. A three bedroom ranch with three owls on an acre. An aversion to rumours. Also, absolutely no Canon 1200mm f/5.6. Yet.

Jim Davidson91985 · Mar 17, 2003

genefoto said:
I found that most folks don't mind a "blurred" baseball. It gives
them a sense of action and motion.

Perhaps. I guess I'm just interested in the challenge of doing it.

genefoto said:
.

Now THAT is good timing.

From my experience shooting only 2 baseball games, I figure I'll stop one baseball hitting the bat maybe once a season.

genefoto · Mar 17, 2003

One of the things I like best about Digital SLRs is the ability to shoot more images. This gives me more choices to pick from.

When shooting for parents I find a lot of them will pick pictures that I may not think are the best "technically". For example the shot below - It's not the sharpest, but it captures the moment that someone's kid is about to make a catch of the ball a few inches from his glove. When the kid's parents look at this picture they will see him making a great catch. They won't notice the bluriness in some of the picture. Will I win a contest with this picture? No. But I have a shot that a kid and his parents will enjoy for a long time,

Jim Davidson91985 · Mar 17, 2003

Thanks for that explanation. I plan on buying the replacement for the 1D, whenever that comes out, so I will have to live with these results until then.

JimD

Ken Phillips said:
... as they cannot actually shoot the entire frame in 1/4000 of a
second. A moving slit ensures that no part of the sensor/film is
exposed for more than that, but it takes MUCH longer for the
exposure than you would think! So ... with a horizontal slit
(Canon) shutter, the time it takes for the slit to cross the ball
is the amount of movement that you will get (which can cause a fast
moving object to appear skewed!)
I'd bet that a 1D at 1/4000 will show the ball quit a bit clearer
... as it uses the sensor as the shutter for all exposures longer
than 1/125.
KP

Jim Davidson91985 · Mar 17, 2003

I do shoot a lot of frames, but I find that I'm shooting less than half the pictures that I would normally take at a football, basketball or hockey game. This has the advantage of allowing me to shoot in RAW mode.

I'm not shooting for parents, but I have gotten interest from local papers from players home towns.

JimD

genefoto said:
One of the things I like best about Digital SLRs is the ability to
shoot more images. This gives me more choices to pick from.

When shooting for parents I find a lot of them will pick pictures
that I may not think are the best "technically". For example the
shot below - It's not the sharpest, but it captures the moment that
someone's kid is about to make a catch of the ball a few inches
from his glove. When the kid's parents look at this picture they
will see him making a great catch. They won't notice the bluriness
in some of the picture. Will I win a contest with this picture? No.
But I have a shot that a kid and his parents will enjoy for a long
time,

genefoto · Mar 17, 2003

I find that following a team through a season also helps with my shooting. You get to know players' skills, their strengths, their habits and tendencies. This allows you to better predict the spots and plays where the best action will take place.

I know that I land up with more good shots towards the end of the season that when the season starts. That's one of the reasons I may attend some practices before a season starts. That way I don't go in "cold" for the first game of a season.

nicemac · Mar 17, 2003

After seeing that 200mm is no where near enough reach to shoot youth baseball, I am looking at the 100-400L IS and at the 400L prime. I know I will get sharper shots from the prime, but my question is this; will the flexibility of framing shots with the 100-400L IS outweigh the better quality of the 400mm prime lens? I have never shot baseball before this season (first game April 12).

herriman007 · Mar 17, 2003

I don't have anything in particular to add here; just wanted to say I relish the discussion. It makes me pine for the old days when I was a full-time-part-time stringer for the AP.

I'd shoot about 70 home games a year with actual film cameras slapping away at 5 fps. Ever heard of a Nikor 500mm f5 mirror? Dare you to find one! How about an 800mm 5.6 Canon with a Nikon mount? Back then of course we processed our pushed film in a makeshift darkroom, printed and transmitted within about an hour. BTW, I think the average top speed was about 1/2000 for a shutter - round baseballs looked like potatoes.

On your topic - funny how physics doesn't change after 20 years. White uniforms on a sunny day get blown out even on underexposed negative film. Forget the underexposure through if the players have dark complexions under the shadows of their ball caps. You'd have more luck shooting black cats in tuxedos at midnight

Jim Davidson said:
I've shot 2 baseball games so far and my biggest problem is
brightness and contrast. The games are mostly in bright sunshine.
Since the uniforms of the home team are largely white, the camera
tends to underexpose most of the frame. If I bump up the exposure,
large parts of the uniform can be blown out.

I'm considering setting contrast on the camera(D60, soon to be 10D)
to a lower setting, but this never seemed like a good idea. Maybe
the 10D will fix the problem without fiddling with contrast.

To get decent results from my pictures, I'm shooting in RAW mode
and then decreasing contrast when converting. I then judge each
image and bump the levels to get the best result from each picture.
Any suggestions for improving this workflow?

The camera also seems to be rear-focusing. It is doing it with my
100-400L IS and with my Sigma 120-300 F2.8 zoom. I used a Canon 1.4
teleconverter on the Sigma and it actually seems to -reduce- the
problem. Weird. Hopefully that will be fixed by the 10D transplant.

Another thing: I've bumped into a limitation of this camera, which
will -not- be improved by the 10D. This pictures was taken at ISO
100, F2.8, 1/4000sec. My problem? I CAN'T STOP THE BALL!

Almost, but not quite stopped. Also note that the dirt is more in
focus about 3 feet behind the batter.

With a 1D, I suppose I could go to ISO 400 and crank the shutter
speed to 1/16000sec for some interesting results.

See the entire gallery here:

http://www.go-bucks.com/03images/baseball/03-16-03/index.html

The images aren't large, but you can see numerous examples of
rear-focusing.

AC Miller111259 · Mar 17, 2003

Jim;

I use to catch one a season with my D30... Now with the 1D, I caught 8 last season. Here is an example of my son:

Jim Davidson said:
genefoto said:

I found that most folks don't mind a "blurred" baseball. It gives
them a sense of action and motion.

Click to expand...

Perhaps. I guess I'm just interested in the challenge of doing it.

Jim Davidson91985 said:

.

Click to expand...

Now THAT is good timing. From my experience shooting only 2
baseball games, I figure I'll stop one baseball hitting the bat
maybe once a season.

--
AC

Jim Davidson91985 · Mar 17, 2003

Dave Herriman said:
I don't have anything in particular to add here; just wanted to say
I relish the discussion. It makes me pine for the old days when I
was a full-time-part-time stringer for the AP.

I'd shoot about 70 home games a year with actual film cameras
slapping away at 5 fps. Ever heard of a Nikor 500mm f5 mirror? Dare
you to find one!

Like this one?

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/6070nikkor/reflex/500mmf5/

That's a weird looking lens.

herriman007 said:
On your topic - funny how physics doesn't change after 20 years.
White uniforms on a sunny day get blown out even on underexposed
negative film. Forget the underexposure through if the players have
dark complexions under the shadows of their ball caps. You'd have
more luck shooting black cats in tuxedos at midnight

I guess I'm going to have to lobby for the return of the grey home uni's! :/

JimD

biscuit · Mar 17, 2003

Hello nicemac,

I shoot mostly baseball from February through October, and for most baseball fields a 400mm lens is the perfect focal length with a 35mm film body. I borrowed a D60 from Canon last month and shot a college game in Georgia to try out a digital camera for the first time, and with the 1.6 focal length multiplier, my 400mm was almost "too much lens" for the field I was shooting at. If you're a d60 or 10d owner, I'd recommend getting a 300/2.8. I just received my new 10D today, and a 300/2.8L will probably be my next purchase (as soon as my credit card stops smoking).

nicemac said:
After seeing that 200mm is no where near enough reach to shoot
youth baseball, I am looking at the 100-400L IS and at the 400L
prime. I know I will get sharper shots from the prime, but my
question is this; will the flexibility of framing shots with the
100-400L IS outweigh the better quality of the 400mm prime lens? I
have never shot baseball before this season (first game April 12).

Ben Horne · Mar 17, 2003

Shoot into the sun, manually expose for the shadows, and crank up your ISO. I often shoot at ISO 800 to 1600 in daylight with the 1D. If you shoot into the sun, the players will have a nice halo effect, and you won't get harsh shadows across the face. Don't worry about blowing the highlights, it's the faces that are imporatnt. After all, the uniforms ARE WHITE. It seems like so many people here are paranoid about blown highlights. ;-)

Jim Davidson said:
I've shot 2 baseball games so far and my biggest problem is
brightness and contrast. The games are mostly in bright sunshine.
Since the uniforms of the home team are largely white, the camera
tends to underexpose most of the frame. If I bump up the exposure,
large parts of the uniform can be blown out.

I'm considering setting contrast on the camera(D60, soon to be 10D)
to a lower setting, but this never seemed like a good idea. Maybe
the 10D will fix the problem without fiddling with contrast.

To get decent results from my pictures, I'm shooting in RAW mode
and then decreasing contrast when converting. I then judge each
image and bump the levels to get the best result from each picture.
Any suggestions for improving this workflow?

The camera also seems to be rear-focusing. It is doing it with my
100-400L IS and with my Sigma 120-300 F2.8 zoom. I used a Canon 1.4
teleconverter on the Sigma and it actually seems to -reduce- the
problem. Weird. Hopefully that will be fixed by the 10D transplant.

Another thing: I've bumped into a limitation of this camera, which
will -not- be improved by the 10D. This pictures was taken at ISO
100, F2.8, 1/4000sec. My problem? I CAN'T STOP THE BALL!

Almost, but not quite stopped. Also note that the dirt is more in
focus about 3 feet behind the batter.

With a 1D, I suppose I could go to ISO 400 and crank the shutter
speed to 1/16000sec for some interesting results.

See the entire gallery here:

http://www.go-bucks.com/03images/baseball/03-16-03/index.html

The images aren't large, but you can see numerous examples of
rear-focusing.

--
http://www.benhorne.com

Shooting baseball

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Member

Member

Member

Active member

Leading Member

New member

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts