- Messages
- 1,300
- Name
- Jonny
- Edit My Images
- No
Hi all,
Just going through a few shots from last years MotoGP event from Silverstone and I'd love to hear your opinions of this image of Jorge Navarro from the Moto 3
Jorge Navarro - Honda NSF250RW by Jonny Henchman, on Flickr
Now I'd like to ask you to formulate your opinions of the image before reading any further if I could & as much as possible be honest (its ok no offence will be taken)
Here's some info about the image
Camera: Canon 5D Mark III Lens: EF400mm f/5.6L USM Mode: Aperture Priority File type: Raw EXIF: ƒ/8.0 - 1/500 - 400.0 mm - ISO 100
Location: Through the fence at copse corner, Silverstone.
I have cropped and processed the image in a fairly standard way, that is there has been no fancy composite editing. Just my normal run through Adobe Camera Raw, so highlights, shadows, contrast, sharpening and colour adjustments.
I cloned out a few bits of tyre debris on the track but that's as much destructive editing as I've done.
Now this is a Moto 3 bike during the race, so while not as fast as the top flight, they certainly aren't slow. As anyone who's tried to shoot from this position behind the fence at Copse knows, it's challenging to track them here, the bikes round the pit exit at high speed and you have a split second to pick them up, achieve focus and fire before you start getting fence posts and the bikes moving away from you. I'd say the 1/500 shutter speed, while certainly not the slowest you can achieve, is pretty respectable for bikes and more so given the shooting location.
Here's the kicker, this was shot by one of my friends with next to no experience of shooting with a DSLR, bar a few short tries with my gear while im trying to have a beer he only really uses an iPhone or a compact as most people do for the everyday stuff without too much creative thought. Now he is a big motorsport fan and has been for nigh on 30 years (so yea like since he was 3)... I wonder if that has some subliminal effect on how to determine what a good motorsport photo should look like (or at least a goal of achieving something) after being exposed to that kind of imagery for so long, maybe I guess. I set up the camera and chose the location so that is a factor too (also I'm not suggesting this is a wonder shot, but it is a shot I don't think I could have done any better and actually would be very happy with).
For the sake of argument - here's what he would have been left with without the basic processing or cropping I applied to the image (i.e the original, scaled down to 2048px wide)
This raises a few things for me:
Caveats before I throw away the camera - Consistency was, as you might expect, bad many, many more examples of user error, missed focus and clipped frames for example. That's not to say this was a lucky shot, there were plenty of usable images, but to be able to shoot a moment on demand, not so likely Also, as mentioned, I made all the decisions in terms of positioning and camera set up... so it was just the act of tracking focus, framing (in terms of getting the subject in the frame) and firing the shutter they had to worry about.
As I think applies to most of us who shoot motorsport that cant afford the fastest, 500 or 600mm lenses, I think its quite acceptable to treat composition as something that can be left to post to an extent. So long as the original frame contains the elements of the image positioned as you intended I don't think it matters that you crop in or even embellish DoF if you physically don't have the means to achieve the shot you want with the equipment you have... so when I say getting closer 'in camera' I mean achieving good exposure, sharpness and technical accuracy within the tolerances of your equipment in the context of the shooting conditions at the time.
My main take away from this, anyone can produce great photographs, being a great photographer though is a much more difficult thing to achieve
So yeah I'd love to hear your opinions of the image which I'll feedback to him... and also look forward to your opinions on the questions the rest raises
Just going through a few shots from last years MotoGP event from Silverstone and I'd love to hear your opinions of this image of Jorge Navarro from the Moto 3
Jorge Navarro - Honda NSF250RW by Jonny Henchman, on Flickr
Now I'd like to ask you to formulate your opinions of the image before reading any further if I could & as much as possible be honest (its ok no offence will be taken)
Here's some info about the image
Camera: Canon 5D Mark III Lens: EF400mm f/5.6L USM Mode: Aperture Priority File type: Raw EXIF: ƒ/8.0 - 1/500 - 400.0 mm - ISO 100
Location: Through the fence at copse corner, Silverstone.
I have cropped and processed the image in a fairly standard way, that is there has been no fancy composite editing. Just my normal run through Adobe Camera Raw, so highlights, shadows, contrast, sharpening and colour adjustments.
I cloned out a few bits of tyre debris on the track but that's as much destructive editing as I've done.
Now this is a Moto 3 bike during the race, so while not as fast as the top flight, they certainly aren't slow. As anyone who's tried to shoot from this position behind the fence at Copse knows, it's challenging to track them here, the bikes round the pit exit at high speed and you have a split second to pick them up, achieve focus and fire before you start getting fence posts and the bikes moving away from you. I'd say the 1/500 shutter speed, while certainly not the slowest you can achieve, is pretty respectable for bikes and more so given the shooting location.
Here's the kicker, this was shot by one of my friends with next to no experience of shooting with a DSLR, bar a few short tries with my gear while im trying to have a beer he only really uses an iPhone or a compact as most people do for the everyday stuff without too much creative thought. Now he is a big motorsport fan and has been for nigh on 30 years (so yea like since he was 3)... I wonder if that has some subliminal effect on how to determine what a good motorsport photo should look like (or at least a goal of achieving something) after being exposed to that kind of imagery for so long, maybe I guess. I set up the camera and chose the location so that is a factor too (also I'm not suggesting this is a wonder shot, but it is a shot I don't think I could have done any better and actually would be very happy with).
For the sake of argument - here's what he would have been left with without the basic processing or cropping I applied to the image (i.e the original, scaled down to 2048px wide)
This raises a few things for me:
- The gear matters for this kind of shot, there is no question
- It's quite possible to spend your way to a good (in my opinion) technical photograph with some guidance
- I'm more reliant on the gear than I thought, developing creatively with the camera is the most challenging thing
- Post processing is a massive differentiator between beginner and experienced photographer (*Getting it closer to the result in camera is a parallel skill i.e they have equal importance, if you struggle with one (or unable for any reason to achieve it) you must be able to do the other)
Caveats before I throw away the camera - Consistency was, as you might expect, bad many, many more examples of user error, missed focus and clipped frames for example. That's not to say this was a lucky shot, there were plenty of usable images, but to be able to shoot a moment on demand, not so likely Also, as mentioned, I made all the decisions in terms of positioning and camera set up... so it was just the act of tracking focus, framing (in terms of getting the subject in the frame) and firing the shutter they had to worry about.
As I think applies to most of us who shoot motorsport that cant afford the fastest, 500 or 600mm lenses, I think its quite acceptable to treat composition as something that can be left to post to an extent. So long as the original frame contains the elements of the image positioned as you intended I don't think it matters that you crop in or even embellish DoF if you physically don't have the means to achieve the shot you want with the equipment you have... so when I say getting closer 'in camera' I mean achieving good exposure, sharpness and technical accuracy within the tolerances of your equipment in the context of the shooting conditions at the time.
My main take away from this, anyone can produce great photographs, being a great photographer though is a much more difficult thing to achieve
So yeah I'd love to hear your opinions of the image which I'll feedback to him... and also look forward to your opinions on the questions the rest raises
Last edited: