Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I guess this kinda shot....with a nervous ump! :-D....
+1 what John_A_G wrote. The first thing every new baseball player shoots are pitching and batting, and marvels at the first few ball-on-bat shots, then maybe the first-base catch. All because there are SO MANY of them during the game.Different strokes for different folks. In general I find shots of ball at plate very boring. It's like taking shots of free throws at basketball or serves in volleyball. It's cool to get that first bat-on-ball shot but quite honestly when you have hundreds of opportunities, it's really not that skillful to come away with some and images like the one above just aren't compelling storytelling. I mean, when was the last time you saw bat-on-ball or just ball over plate shots in SI or any major sports page? Spend less time taking shots of the pitch and try to capture the real action in the field/bases.
The subject isn't a pitched ball. That's boring. Hundreds of pitches a game. Try to get the ball in the field - THOSE are interesting shots. I think you may take so many shots because you keep trying to freeze a pitch. Just for an exercise, spend an entire game not shooting the pitcher or batters and only trying to capture action in the field. I think you may find you end up with more compelling images when you concentrate on that.Myself, I am going to take as many shots as I can and see if I can get the ball in an interesting spot. It takes me very little time in LR to scroll thru the thumbnails and pick the keepers.
That being said everyone has their own way of shooting. I was just relaying to the OP mine.
But they become boring quickly, and start out boring to people just looking at your photos. Stationing yourself and waiting for the infield play, the steal to second (also fairly common), a run-back slide into first (fairly common but not frequently shot), and home plate plays means sometimes you get almost (or literally) none during a game, but when you get them, they are really special, and show others a moment in time that is tough to see from the stands.
This has been emphasized to me the last two weeks as I have been shooting for cards. That means shooting every player in some action, and the club wants a lot of them batting, batting follow through, batting-to-running transition. And each pitcher in many different positions. Know how many pitchers a team has? I don't, I've lost count, it is a bit like ground hog day. I'm two weeks in and still have at least one more to get.
And concentrating on this means I've missed lots of good action shots from being in the wrong place (like behind home with a 400 on the pitcher when there's a home-plate play and I can just barely get the runners shoe in the frame).
Watch the infield. Look for fielding, throwing, and in particular any base slides. If you are shooting the batter, you may miss the runner stealing second who is much more interesting.
And look for player interactions, high fives, butt bumps on a win, or just goofing off in the dugout if you have access. There's more going on in baseball off the field than on, frequently.
--
Comments welcomed on photos: http://www.captivephotons.com

John,Don,Here are a couple from a recent game I shot.
you need to get a lot tighter on your shots. The only real subject of interest here is the batter/ball and they fill up such a tiny portion of the frame. Sometimes the ump or background is part of the story, but usually not. Not in this case. You really want the subject of the photo to fill the frame. Typically with batters at the plate you want to be able to crop down to just torso & ball.
Now, framing tighter is difficult. You need longer lenses and good positioning and it makes it tougher because you can't see what's happening away from the subject in the camera frame in order to time. So, you need to learn to shoot with both eyes open - or because action at the plate is predictable location, you can pre-focus and don't even need to look through the frame to take the photo (much easier with a monopod than without). Multiple different techniques, but the advice is the end result photo needs to be much, much tighter.
Well I try to get a mix not just batters and pitches....CheersDifferent strokes for different folks. In general I find shots of ball at plate very boring. It's like taking shots of free throws at basketball or serves in volleyball. It's cool to get that first bat-on-ball shot but quite honestly when you have hundreds of opportunities, it's really not that skillful to come away with some and images like the one above just aren't compelling storytelling. I mean, when was the last time you saw bat-on-ball or just ball over plate shots in SI or any major sports page? Spend less time taking shots of the pitch and try to capture the real action in the field/bases.Actually I will have to disagree with you. If the pitcher is throwing at 90 mph, the ball is traveling at 132 feet per second. If the OP has a camera that is shooting at 8 frames per second the ball travels 16 ft for each frame taken. That's why if I am shooting continuous high many times the balls missing totally.OK - I'm going to disagree with this advice. If you're shooting 1500 shots you're wasting your time. You then spend way too much time culling out the 1400 bad shots.It is a great start for sure. Since it's not film shoot shoot and shoot more. It's free! I'll shoot 1500 or so at each high school game.
A big part of getting better is PLANNING instead of just reacting. Baseball needs to be shot from different positions. From a given shooting position, there are only so many types of images that will work in the end. Don't try to waste your time shooting the images that get tossed because the action took place at the wrong angle/position for your shooting position and focal length. If you've got a good sequence of the pitcher, why waste 300 more shots of the same pitcher during windup/delivery? I absolutely agree that you should shoot full fps - but if you're taking more than a 3 or 4 shot burst then you need much more work on your timing. Trust me, working on understanding what types of shots work from which shooting position and working on your timing and shot selection you'll start the PP process in a much better place. 300-400 shots is more than plenty.
Here is a shot I took yesterday. To view and see the detail of the full image click on gallery page and then under the photo click on original size.
The subject isn't a pitched ball. That's boring. Hundreds of pitches a game. Try to get the ball in the field - THOSE are interesting shots. I think you may take so many shots because you keep trying to freeze a pitch. Just for an exercise, spend an entire game not shooting the pitcher or batters and only trying to capture action in the field. I think you may find you end up with more compelling images when you concentrate on that.Myself, I am going to take as many shots as I can and see if I can get the ball in an interesting spot. It takes me very little time in LR to scroll thru the thumbnails and pick the keepers.
That being said everyone has their own way of shooting. I was just relaying to the OP mine.
Cheers.




+1. It's hard to get too tight. This was really a grab shot with too long of a lens on a 3rd base slide. They've used it a LOT, and I think mainly as I was low enough to see the whole face including the eyes, usually these slide shots the eyes are under the visor.THE EYES HAVE IT: 99% of the time I cannot/will not submit a baseball photo where the viewer can’t make easy eye contact with the player. I need to fill 80%+ of that frame with the player(s) and I need to see some eyeballs.
Not baseball - but I know what you mean about the eyes.....THE EYES HAVE IT: 99% of the time I cannot/will not submit a baseball photo where the viewer can’t make easy eye contact with the player. I need to fill 80%+ of that frame with the player(s) and I need to see some eyeballs.
Many years ago I heard a Nat Geo photographer talk about the importance of eye contact in impactful photos ... said there is something psychologically quantifiable about how much more deeply we connect with a photo if we can make eye contact with the featured person. Even the time spent looking at an images increases significantly if the photographer makes that possible. The extreme example of that is McCurry's famous Afghan Girl.Not baseball - but I know what you mean about the eyes.....THE EYES HAVE IT: 99% of the time I cannot/will not submit a baseball photo where the viewer can’t make easy eye contact with the player. I need to fill 80%+ of that frame with the player(s) and I need to see some eyeballs.
That would be good to see !Many years ago I heard a Nat Geo photographer talk about the importance of eye contact in impactful photos ... said there is something psychologically quantifiable about how much more deeply we connect with a photo if we can make eye contact with the featured person. Even the time spent looking at an images increases significantly if the photographer makes that possible. The extreme example of that is McCurry's famous Afghan Girl.Not baseball - but I know what you mean about the eyes.....THE EYES HAVE IT: 99% of the time I cannot/will not submit a baseball photo where the viewer can’t make easy eye contact with the player. I need to fill 80%+ of that frame with the player(s) and I need to see some eyeballs.
That lecture stuck with me. I think we all know it intuitively -- it's central to portraiture. But we don't always factor it into our sports pictures as effectively as we might. I know I'm guilty.
OK --I'll start an EYES thread.
This would certainly been fun to try and shoot!!!!Yep - every one of those is 1000 times more interesting than a pitcher or batter shot. All are much more interesting stories

AgreeDifferent strokes for different folks. In general I find shots of ball at plate very boring. It's like taking shots of free throws at basketball or serves in volleyball. It's cool to get that first bat-on-ball shot but quite honestly when you have hundreds of opportunities, it's really not that skillful to come away with some and images like the one above just aren't compelling storytelling. I mean, when was the last time you saw bat-on-ball or just ball over plate shots in SI or any major sports page? Spend less time taking shots of the pitch and try to capture the real action in the field/bases.
John,
I did laugh out loud this morning when I opened the sports section of the newspaper today and saw the Associated Press photo staring at me.
Gotta admit that's pretty funny
Cheers
Agreed! The saturation is distracting.Personal taste? Too much saturation caught my eyes before I focused on the batter.




























OK, but it looks like you may have some exposure issuessome new shots of baseball action
some on field coaching
no eyes in the shot, but the number and a play at first
a beautiful strike
pitcher
an error
an out on a sliding play at 3rd
barely safe at first
who wins the race the runner or the ball
coaching the team between innings
pitcher from 1st base side
Safe at first