I don't know what to title this thread.

Kryptix

Kryptix

Messages
1,730
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm having problems with my photography.

I go to an event to take pictures, come home and have the usual reaction to seeing the images on the computer... Delete, delete, delete, delete, slight sharpen and it'll do, delete, delete, WOW, delete, delete, delete, delete... I'm sure everyone is the same when shooting motorsport and other fast paced sports.

But sometimes I'm not happy with any of them. It doesn't appear to be whether it's in-focus or not, or the sharpness, it just doesn't seem to have the image quality as I'm expecting? It's not just one or two photos, it's the entire set!

I can usually tell if I'm going to be happy with the 1,000+ pictures I've taken just by viewing the first 20 or so.

Have a look at these examples:

8c420610.jpg


ed0721d3.jpg


3d693840.jpg


Sharp, in-focus... Decent 'image quality'

But yesterday, out of 1,400 pictures, these were my sharpish images and this is after a quick edit:

9987c22a.jpg


ce722c29.jpg


e5b90a74.jpg


I don't know what I'm doing wrong. Is it the different lighting? Is it just me being worse on this day? The same camera was used, the same lens was used and I felt I was doing everything the same. The same method was used too.

ISO 100, Tv with a shutter speeds around 1/60-1/250.

Do you think it's worth ordering a polarising filter for my 70-200L?

Can you think of anything that'll help me? I was pretty much gutted seeing the photos yesterday knowing how sharp I've had them in the past.
 
Stop beating yourself up I think you have some pretty good photos there so carry on and start to enjoy your hobby I would be really pleased with these
Bob
 
I agree with Bob. I have never tried motorsport photography, but if I walked away with pictures like yours, I'd be well pleased.
 
I think they're some pretty decent photo's. And in the instance of the 1st 2 from yesterday, you're capturing the car on the corner which would mean that a simple panning wouldn't work so a faster shutter speed would be needed.
 
whats the Exif on the sharp ones? the last 2 look like the focus point hasnt been found, but a bigger version of each to see if its soft or blurred would help
 
I agree that the first 3 images you have posted are sharper then the 3 from yesterday but I don't think I'd be disappointed with any of them. I see your point that from 1400 photos you'd want a fairly high success rate and not be deleting 1300 of them but sports photography isn't easy. I used to do football photography and would probably take about 600 during a match but delete half of them during the game then about 2/3 of the rest when I got home and in hindsight, I didn't have particularly high standards back then.

It sounds to me like you are doing everything right and getting some cracking shots so just carry on doing it and I suppose eventually the hit rate will increase.
 
Bob said:
Stop beating yourself up I think you have some pretty good photos there so carry on and start to enjoy your hobby I would be really pleased with these
Bob
Click to expand...

Carl V said:
I agree with Bob. I have never tried motorsport photography, but if I walked away with pictures like yours, I'd be well pleased.
Click to expand...

TriggerHappy said:
I think they're some pretty decent photo's. And in the instance of the 1st 2 from yesterday, you're capturing the car on the corner which would mean that a simple panning wouldn't work so a faster shutter speed would be needed.
Click to expand...

-Rob- said:
I agree that the first 3 images you have posted are sharper then the 3 from yesterday but I don't think I'd be disappointed with any of them. I see your point that from 1400 photos you'd want a fairly high success rate and not be deleting 1300 of them but sports photography isn't easy. I used to do football photography and would probably take about 600 during a match but delete half of them during the game then about 2/3 of the rest when I got home and in hindsight, I didn't have particularly high standards back then.

It sounds to me like you are doing everything right and getting some cracking shots so just carry on doing it and I suppose eventually the hit rate will increase.
Click to expand...

Sorry guys, im not so sure I agree, if he can get the shots like 1 2 and 3 normally but didnt yesterday then he needs to understand WHY so he can avoid the same issues..:shrug:
 
If I was getting that sort of picture I'd be bloody delighted! Don't beat yourself up so much.
 
The first three are more appealing to me but not because of sharpness. Judging by the shadows they where taken later in the day so the light looks better. Also the side on pan means there is good separation between the car and background.
 
Not a Motor sports tog, but only guess is a little bit of motion blur may be creeping in. I shoot skateboarding and to freeze action I never go below 1/500 sec. Don't know really but might be something to look into. Look pretty good this size, but will prob show a lot more on bigger image size.

As for success rate, try shooting sequences of a trick for 2 hours solid, then having to go hope without a single frame as the trick was not landed!

Just be greatful you got 2.
 
matty said:
Sorry guys, im not so sure I agree, if he can get the shots like 1 2 and 3 normally but didnt yesterday then he needs to understand WHY so he can avoid the same issues..:shrug:
Click to expand...
Thanks mate, that's the idea of the thread basically. I'm annoyed at myself...
 
matty said:
Sorry guys, im not so sure I agree, if he can get the shots like 1 2 and 3 normally but didnt yesterday then he needs to understand WHY so he can avoid the same issues..:shrug:
Click to expand...

That's why I offered a suggestion about 2 of his images ;)
 
Interesting - why AV. I'd have though TV to set to shutter speed, or is it Av to set the depth of field?
 
Have you thought of your mood?

If im in the mood to take pictures then I get far far better shots that when im not really overly interested in the event. I always take pictures at the rallys and when im not feeling inspired I come away with technically good shots. The good stuff only comes when im feeling quite inspired by the event.

Inspired:
2123492664_d3c51f95d2.jpg


2123485426_4739b87e73.jpg


3237495751_b9f1d4313f.jpg



Just taking shots for the hell of it:
3498292767_c403ca2e97.jpg


3499103102_ecaea49aa2.jpg


3498289347_5bc3419b40.jpg


I would quite often get comments to the same effect where people other than myself (im very critical of my own work) notice it too.

I've tried to figure out for ages what the difference is and the only thing I can actually come up with is that I really enjoyed the rallys that the first 3 shots are from and the ones from the last 3 shots while still enjoying them am just taking pictures because im at the stage and have the camera gear with me.
 
Yes please,

One consideration may be aperture size...

If your shooting in Tv on a bright day you'll be using a smaller aperture, which will give a bigger DOF, helping with sharpness all over and some will tell you increased colour rendition.

Your first set is fab and I can see why you might not be so happy about the second set. If its consistency your after perhaps you should stick a diary in your bag, write about your mood, how much coffee you've had, light conditions etc on each occasion you shoot and see if you can establish any patterns.
 
matty said:
I got carried away with the quote button.

Kryptix, publish the exif
Click to expand...
The EXIF is pointless because I just bung it on ISO 100, Tv (shutter priority) and basically just use exactly the same setup on every different shoot. The exposure seems OK so there's nothing wrong with the exposure adjustment. Same filter (just a Hoya UV).

Can I ask, what's the method to get the sharpest picture possible? What aperture roughly (or doesn't it matter?), what shutter speed roughly (or doesn't it matter?), what ISO... and so on. You get the idea.

I'm just wondering, because I always shoot on ISO 100 (even though I did in the first set too), and on the camera settings I've turned the sharpness right up, the colour and contrast up and a few other adjustments. Is it better to do all this after or will it not effect anything other than what it says? I haven't changed anything from the first set and I'm very happy with those, so I thought I'd check.

Also, on my 70-200L, I have IS mode 1 and 2. What do they do? What should I be on? Is it good to have IS on even if I'm panning?

I'm listing everything in case anyone spots anything I'm doing wrong. I know I can take the picture and I know what I'm doing so it really frustrates me when they aren't what I want. :thumbsdown:

Another thing, a few times when panning I noticed it randomly un-focused weirdly. It happened about 5 times through the day. I can only presume I shot through the window or something and it focused on something else, but it worried me a bit as it has never happened before.

What auto focus mode should I be on?

I think that's about it!
 
If it was pointless the nice photographers who are taking time out of their day to try and help you wouldn't be asking about it. Exif contains information about aperture size, focal length, wb, compression, metering, focus etc - all very useful info when people on here are taking the time to try and help you.

If you have safety shift enabled in the custom functions you may find that your often straying below 1/100 when the light drops - EXIF would show that too ;)

One of the IS modes is for Panning and one is for Static work. I suggest you consult the manual or google to explain which is which.

There are lots of motorsport photography tutorials around so I'm not going to repeat the info from those here but if you can give a bit more info on your technique and exif data I'm sure someone be able to help.
 
im no expert, however I would say that the first 3, you are panning parallel to the car, therefore focus should not change much, where as the drifters are coming towards you as well as them "hanging it all out" sideways, unless you are on AIServo, then the focus will be off

the last panning shot seems nice, not sure of the car speed, judging on the blur of the red car in the background (which looks like an mgb gt) and also the track blur it seems similar to the top set, however its further away, not sure if that changes the panning speed required, but it certainly means theres less detail at this resolution as your not as close to see it,

it does look a better quality of light on the top set, which may mean you had a smaller aperture (larger number) which would mean more in focus depth wise, where as if its darker on the 2nd set, the depth of field would be less, making it harder to get a lot in focus.

hope thats of some help

Phil
 
hyakuhei said:
If it was pointless the nice photographers who are taking time out of their day to try and help you wouldn't be asking about it. Exif contains information about aperture size, focal length, wb, compression, metering, focus etc - all very useful info when people on here are taking the time to try and help you.

If you have safety shift enabled in the custom functions you may find that your often straying below 1/100 when the light drops - EXIF would show that too ;)

One of the IS modes is for Panning and one is for Static work. I suggest you consult the manual or google to explain which is which.

There are lots of motorsport photography tutorials around so I'm not going to repeat the info from those here but if you can give a bit more info on your technique and exif data I'm sure someone be able to help.
Click to expand...
I thought he only wanted to see the basic EXIF as that's what is posted 99% of the time, but here we go...

ce722c29.jpg


Make: Canon
Model: Canon EOS 450D
Date Time: 04/052009 - 09:25:13
Shutter Speed: 1/250 sec
Exposure Program: Shutter priority
F-Stop: f/10
Aperture Value: f/10
Max Aperture Value:
ISO Speed Ratings: 100
Focal Length: 111mm
Lens: EF 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM
Flash: Did not fire
Metering Mode: Pattern

All of that is pretty much automatic, so I have no-idea what anyone would say about it anyway. Plus, it looks pretty good to me...
 
can you post a slightly larger version? I suspect that you havent got a full focus lock on the car, the focus might be elsewhere, I wanted to know the shutter speed to see how fast it was to narrow it down..the focal length is important as some lenses are soft at full range, and aperture can give better sharpness with set away from f5.6..all the above are good(infact i would go a little slower on shutter to try and get the wheels to show a bit of motion, but thats just me)
 
matty said:
can you post a slightly larger version? I suspect that you havent got a full focus lock on the car, the focus might be elsewhere, I wanted to know the shutter speed to see how fast it was to narrow it down..the focal length is important as some lenses are soft at full range, and aperture can give better sharpness with set away from f5.6..all the above are good(infact i would go a little slower on shutter to try and get the wheels to show a bit of motion, but thats just me)
Click to expand...
Agree with everything you said. I can only think it's a mixture of camera shake (or the car juddered) and maybe very-slightly out of focus.

http://i596.photobucket.com/albums/tt47/kryptix/02e9e5fe.jpg
 
If it's a focus problem (and I'm a complete newbie so don't feel qualified to judge on that), then it's worth looking at which focus point(s) the camera is using. If in doubt, set the camera to use just one (usually the centre one) - then you know the camera is doing what you want it to do and not what it thinks is best.
 
camera shake i think, though the large one looks a little better than the smaller one
 
Kryptix said:
I'm having problems with my photography.


I don't know what I'm doing wrong. Is it the different lighting? Is it just me being worse on this day? The same camera was used, the same lens was used and I felt I was doing everything the same. The same method was used too.

ISO 100, Tv with a shutter speeds around 1/60-1/250.

Do you think it's worth ordering a polarising filter for my 70-200L?

Can you think of anything that'll help me? I was pretty much gutted seeing the photos yesterday knowing how sharp I've had them in the past.
Click to expand...

I don't know what you are doing wrong either. I know hee-haw about your subject, but the pics look pretty good to me.

Polariser could be a hit and miss. You need to twist it in it's mount till the best effect is seen. Very hard with a moving subject since the effect will be in a constant state of change.
 
I know nothing about motorsport photography, but I guess for focusing I'd use:

AF point selection - Manual select - center point (as it looks your subcject is in center most of times);
AF mode - AI Servo AF (to help camera keep focusing on one subject when panning/moving).

Hope that helps
 
I'm sorry Kryptix. It was not intended by me to kill that thread with my stupid comment :thumbsdown: I was just trying to help :shrug:


BTW that last skyline shot is a cracker!!! I'd love to have it as my desktop wallpaper!
 
I have only been to a couple of races to photo cars and from the few keepers I got the side panning shots are a lot easier to get (imo), the focal distance is not changing greatly, when you start to take shots of cars moving closer to you at the speeds they go even with camera set to servo mode auto focusing constantly it is hard to keep up with the forward movement and shots are harder to get.

It is one of the situations where practise will get you there which depending on your job/location.cash flow etc may be sooner rather than later.

I think we are all highly critcal of our own shots which is good and keeps us going !! we all hit brick walls at some time or another but if everyone walked away with 100% keepers life would be very bland.

I would say keep going and try to focus on the shots your not getting right for the majority of the time you are shoting. expect to have to delete a lot at first and but you will start to get a feel of the shots and will get more keepers in the bag,

maybe also try to start using more of a manual setup so you can start to lock down the different variables on settings etc.

good luck and keep up the good work.
 
My two observations for what they are worth:

1. If you're panning with IS turned on, you really need it set to 'mode 2'. It's all in the manual, but in essence, this will only stabilize movement in one direction (the one perpendicular to the movement of the lens). So if you're panning horizontally, it will stabilize vertical movement. This brings me on to point 2...

2. When panning, it's far far easier to get a sharp picture when shooting a car that is moving parallel to you. ie. down a straight. This is because you will only have to move the camera in one direction! If you are shooting from an angle because you are high up, or on a corner, you will have to move the camera in both directions (perhaps only slightly, but it's there). This makes it harder to get the pin sharp shot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top