Topic: Please Discuss Your Concert Shooting Experiences

[rastasean]

I think your pictures look pretty nice. Before there was digital, there was film  and pictures would be grainy like that.
Perhaps you're just being a little to hard on yourself and expecting photos like sanjay too early on.
Is it hard for you to see in the clubs? If so, imagine how much harder it would be for for your camera.

Have fun doing it and you'll learn from it!

[stevetoney]

Perhaps you're just being a little to hard on yourself and expecting photos like sanjay too early on.
Is it hard for you to see in the clubs? If so, imagine how much harder it would be for for your camera.

Have fun doing it and you'll learn from it!

Ha good advice for sure...especially the part about expecting photos like sanjay.  LOL...I mean rally now [stated with a Charles Emerson Winchester from Mash accent] even though I expected to play guitar like Stevie Ray after and couple years and quit when I realized I couldn't, do you RALLY think I would expect to be as good as Sanjay??

LOL.  Actually goddammit, I DO want to be as good as Sanjay...NOWWWWW...waaaa.      

Just kidding of course.  You're totally right in that I'm being too hard on myself and those pics.  Even so, it's been a good exchange of information and I'm glad that I've been able to learn a little bit more today to get me to the next level...just one step closer to Ansel Souchek!   

EDIT TO ADD:  There is something fairly artsy about the grainy nature of those pictures, if nothing else because it goes back in time to grainy film days, as you mention rasta.  My only real complaint about the images was only that they weren't what I was after and considering the process that I had to go through in order to get to the final images (major photoshop editing) it felt that far less skill and much more luck was involved.  OTOH, as someone mentioned, you can shoot all night long and only get a handfull of keepers, so I guess maybe that's what it's all about anyway.

[Sanjay]

it felt that far less skill and much more luck was involved.

there it is.  this is what I say to myself every night.

[stevetoney]

Cool!  Thanks everyone.  It's been a nice exchange!

Don't know if anyone else got anything out of it, but I did...if nothing else just to validate that I'm on the right track and doing nothing major wrong. 

[Chilly Brioschi]

photography  = photo + graphy
                   = light  +  writing              (or  light + study,  depending on who you ask)

Light is white  (calibrated to your white balance temperature)
Colors are a hue + a gradation of white light
It is the light component (whiteness, if you will) that "writes" on the black "canvas" of background

1) get as much light as you possibly can   (a meter is nice, if you have one, learn to use it)
2) shoot as fast as you can (1/125 or faster) for a single subject (widest aperture)
3) shoot as slow as you can for (as low as 1/60) for wide shots    (narrowest aperture, pinhole is infinite DoF)
4) for low-light, image stabilization can "give you" as much as two stops
5) for low-light try to use some form of support, such as a tripod, monopod, or beanbag

[stirinthesauce]

Tony, concert photography is very difficult.  One of my favorite venues in Nashville, the lighting absolutely sucks.

Pick and choose your shots.  Don't be to concerned with noise.  Noiseware is your friend.  My old 20d was pretty noisy at iso 1600-3200 and my shots would look unusable.  After some noiseware, shots were remarkably better.  Also, with whitebalance, play with your settings in photoshop.  Your curves can help bring out the shadows as darks as well in ps3 (or 2 or 4).  Oh, and like Sanjay said, sensors HATE red lighting. 

Good luck buddy, and be prepared to shoot 3-400 shots a night to get 10-20 usable ones.


Oh, and you don't necessarily nead a 5dmkII, my 5d handles noise perfectly at iso 1600 and beyond.   

[dmonkey]

This may have already been said, but FWIW IMHO ...

Don't be afraid to crank up the ISO speed. Nikon & Canon digital SLRs really give pretty clean high ISO results (especially the newer camera body models), especially after cleaning up with something like Noise Ninja. I've printed 20" x 30" enlargements from stuff I've shot at ISO 800 & 1600 and been very pleased with the results. A little grain ain't bad, IMO.

If shooting high ISO, use RAW mode. RAW really helps with obtaining the cleanest image. After shooting RAW for many years, I once had to switch back to JPG for part of an event I was covering due to lack of flash memory cards (long story)...I was shocked at the results. RAW really makes a difference.

IMO, more ambient light and less flash = better image. Up close and full power flash can often give the proverbial "deer-in-the-headlights" look.

I have found concert/theater photography metering to be very tricky, especially when farther away from stage and the spotlights are on. I've had luck with spot metering in those situations, and exposing for the highlights. Although it all depends on how tight you're able to pull in, and how you have things framed. I like negative space, so I was always fighting with proper exposure in those situations.

Cheers,
jason

[OOK]

This may have already been said, but FWIW IMHO ...

Don't be afraid to crank up the ISO speed. Nikon & Canon digital SLRs really give pretty clean high ISO results (especially the newer camera body models), especially after cleaning up with something like Noise Ninja. I've printed 20" x 30" enlargements from stuff I've shot at ISO 800 & 1600 and been very pleased with the results. A little grain ain't bad, IMO.

If shooting high ISO, use RAW mode. RAW really helps with obtaining the cleanest image. After shooting RAW for many years, I once had to switch back to JPG for part of an event I was covering due to lack of flash memory cards (long story)...I was shocked at the results. RAW really makes a difference.

IMO, more ambient light and less flash = better image. Up close and full power flash can often give the proverbial "deer-in-the-headlights" look.

I have found concert/theater photography metering to be very tricky, especially when farther away from stage and the spotlights are on. I've had luck with spot metering in those situations, and exposing for the highlights. Although it all depends on how tight you're able to pull in, and how you have things framed. I like negative space, so I was always fighting with proper exposure in those situations.

Cheers,
jason

T+    Thanks for the tip on noise ninja....that program is the S***!

Peace OOK

[Zenith023]

If shooting high ISO, use RAW mode. RAW really helps with obtaining the cleanest image. After shooting RAW for many years, I once had to switch back to JPG for part of an event I was covering due to lack of flash memory cards (long story)...I was shocked at the results. RAW really makes a difference.

Definitely. I was really impressed how much better RAW files handle high ISO noise compared to JPG's.

[ol' dirty taper]

Most of this may have been mentioned, but I just scanned the topic, disregard if I am just reiterating points.

Like you I started with a 50mm f1.7 (Minolta version is 1.7). I think with the sample shots you posted, you could have stepped the iso down and still have recovered a lot if you were shooting RAW. At least in the first shot, it seems a little over exposed on the highlights. I've shot shows where the only lighting was a couple strings of xmas lights 5 feet in front of the artist and still was able to pull a decent shot after a little post processing.

-Never try to auto focus in very low/red lighting, I always found it much easier to shoot using manual focus.
-Learn to shoot in manual, it'll save you in the long run. Even just take your camera out during the day and run test shoots so you get a feel for the different settings in manual mode.
-There is always a happy medium between ambient lighting and a hot shoe flash, just test it out at home before showing up. Might require a hot shoe flash soft box, but the results can be achieved if done properly. If you don't want to shell out for a soft box... sometimes a napkin or tissue taped to the front element works just as well in a stitch

I guess since we are also doing a little "show and tell" I'll post some shots I did in extreme low lighting.


The Heavy
Exposure:     0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture:      f/1.7
Focal Length:    50 mm
ISO Speed:    400
Exposure Bias:    0/10 EV


PWRFL Power
Exposure:     0.004 sec (1/250)
Aperture:       f/2.8
Focal Length:    70 mm
ISO Speed:    400
Exposure Bias:    0/10 EV


Joanna Bolme from Stephen Malkmus & The Jicks (they kept all the lights on Malkmus)
Exposure:     0.008 sec (1/125)
Aperture:    f/2.8
Focal Length:    70 mm
ISO Speed:    800
Exposure Bias:    0/10 EV

and just for the hell of it... a shot with my Lensbaby 3G

Marissa Nadler (this was lit with xmas lights, had to find proper color temp/exposure and results were fantastic, very little post work)
Exposure:     0.125 sec (1/8)
Aperture:    f/2
Focal Length:    50 mm
ISO Speed:    800
Exposure Bias:    0/10 EV

[spreetaper]

your describing my local Brooklyn venue to a T
I really don't like to use flash and even at 1.4 all my shots come out dark so I finally started using flash or bugging the house guy to turn up the lights a little bit more
you def have a grasp of the settings etc so in this case its def the cards you are delt and without flash there is not really a winning hand

considering you have only done 3 shows you just need more practice
I'm by no means a pro and every concert for me I learn or try something new
no one show is the same especially if you are like me and you don't just shoot from stage lip like most guys

[sunjan]

I'm new to shooting shows, but currently frustrated.  I'm 0 for 3 in terms of getting any shots that I'm happy with, mainly because the lighting is from behind the stage and there's virtually no lights facing the performer.  I know everyone has been suggesting bigger glass for shows, but seems to me that this lighting situation is probably fairly common, and no glass is gonna fix it.  It's also seems to me that ANY type of flash will completely ruin the ambience of the shot. 

Hey tonedeaf, don't let it get to you.
I started out back in the "film age" (first concert shot in 1989), and it took me years of trial'n error to get it right.

A few pointers:
 - don't be afraid of long exposure times. Movement can add  "creative blur" to your shot, if mastered the right way.
 - if there's absolutely no front light on the artists, work with shadows and shades instead. Just expose according to the backlight, and make the contour of the artist your image.
 - if you feel that you need it, get a good external flash. Full-on flash does spoil the picture, but most models lets you shoot with a fraction of the full power. On Nikon, the TTL-BL (backlight only) is a very useful setting. It will saturate the image with exisiting light, and fill up with flash to freeze the movement.
 - Learn to bounce the flash in the ceiling if you work small venues at the stage lip. Like others mentioned, a diffuser makes a difference too.

Here's an example:

Tindersticks, live in Stockholm 2008
Camera:     Nikon D70
Exposure:    0.025 sec (1/40)
Aperture:    f/4.5
Focal Length:    70 mm
ISO Speed:    1600
Exposure Bias:    0/6 EV
Full size shot here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jansundstrom/3148385573/sizes/l/

[OOK]

I am may be way out of my league here but I am really digging this thread.....I am learning a lot too....Here is one of my experiences....  I am thinking about getting DSLR but can't justify it yet....

Camera: Panasonic TZ5
Exposure:1/30
Aperture: f/4.7
Focal Length: 21.8 mm
ISO Speed: 400
Exposure Bias: 0

I learned quick you shoot 300 shots to walk away with 100 good ones.....thank god for digital.....

Peace OOK

[stevetoney]

I am thinking about getting DSLR but can't justify it yet....

LOL...chuckling about this statement because I'm sure we can all relate to your feelings.  I notice from your signature line that you've got a full compliment of capsules for your MBHO's.  LOL, your justification for getting your first DSLR I think will probably be similar to how you justified getting those extra capsules...don't need them but sure do want them! 

FWIW, I have a Canon 40D and the body that John has listed in the yard sale is a great value for what you get. 

Plus, what I find with DSLR is just that my enjoyment of the hobby is just SOOO much higher with the DSLR.  My point and shoot camera made images that were every bit as good as my 40D, but I can't say that I had any fun taking them.  I could even see where some would say that the DSLR isn't worth the effort.  Well that's fine for them, but I'm LOVING being back in SLR/DSLR world...just because it's a damn lotta fun.

[rastasean]

I am thinking about getting DSLR but can't justify it yet....

LOL...chuckling about this statement because I'm sure we can all relate to your feelings.  I notice from your signature line that you've got a full compliment of capsules for your MBHO's.  LOL, your justification for getting your first DSLR I think will probably be similar to how you justified getting those extra capsules...don't need them but sure do want them! 

FWIW, I have a Canon 40D and the body that John has listed in the yard sale is a great value for what you get. 

Plus, what I find with DSLR is just that my enjoyment of the hobby is just SOOO much higher with the DSLR.  My point and shoot camera made images that were every bit as good as my 40D, but I can't say that I had any fun taking them.  I could even see where some would say that the DSLR isn't worth the effort.  Well that's fine for them, but I'm LOVING being back in SLR/DSLR world...just because it's a damn lotta fun.

My whole thing with DSLRs is that the shutters have a limited life and eventually fail. Yes, its 100,000 to 200,000 but I would be counting down from there from every photo I take and it would probably be very expensive to replace the shutter. Does anyone have experience with shutter replacement?

But with all this said....a DSLR would be nice. haha.  it never ends