|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
Photographing Concerts
Ok... I have been asked to shoot concerts for the city I live in (they do the concert thing every summer) fo use in their promotional publications.. I am using a Canon 100-400 4.5-5.6 L IS lens (no flash) and most of my photos came out very blurry.. The weather was overcast and the concert was from 6pm to 8pm (still light out). I need advise on correcting this problem and since I am trying to teach myself how to shoot I am asking you pro's out there for help. Jun 10 05 05:26 pm Link Okay, if you need the reach, rent a 400mm f2.8. If not, and you're shooting from the well, like with most concert photography, I like to use the 28-70 f2.8 wide open, 400 iso, usually 1/60 shutter, but meter for it, no flash, hardly ever allowed and usually pisses off the talent. I have a 24-70 coming soon, looking forward to wider range. If I'm shooting chrome for concerts, I usually shoot same set up, but with Provia 200 pushed to 400. For my second camera when shooting concerts, I try to keep a prime 85mm for headshots. Sometimes, if it's a punk band especially, I throw on a fisheye.  Sum 41 - Honolulu, Hawaii 2 months ago  El Jefe from NOFX - Honolulu, Hawaii 3 months ago  No Bare Feet - last month  3 Doors Down - Honolulu, Hawaii last month Jun 10 05 06:07 pm Link i shot the rock band "drowning pool" in almost complete darkness..180mm 1/100sec @ f/2:8..3200iso..do whaterver you can do to get the speed up so you dont get blur...  Jun 10 05 06:37 pm Link I will try the higher speed and leave my apeture wide open..Thanks for all the help guys... I am hoping this can turn in to a long term assignment. Jun 10 05 06:49 pm Link Any lens slower than f/2.8 is not gona be suitible. Best types of lens possibly like cheap 50mm f/1.8 , 85mm f/1.8, 200mm f/2.0 The idea is to set aperture priority mode, set it down to the lowest, increase the ISO up til the shutter speed automatically shows between 1/125 to 1/250. And that should do it. But basically you want f/2.8 or faster, and in aperture priority mode ( so that you dont get like 1/20sec shots and such, or way under exposed in manual mode ). 50mm f/1.8 1/30sec (yea I know) , ISO 3200  also 50mm f/1.8 1/125sec ISO 400  Jun 10 05 07:14 pm Link An 80-200mm f2.8 is extremely useful for this kind of photography. If you are shooting with a digital cam with crop factor the extra reach can help. I have been shooting the the San Jose Jazz Society's annual jazz festival for the past two years and this lens is extremely versatile for outdoor as well as indoor work without a flash. I also frequently photograph smaller music performance events and another excellent lens I use for this is a fixed 85mm f1.4. A second camera with a wide (from 14mm to 35mm) is also worth carrying. Watch out for this those mics! ;^) Best, Mark Jun 10 05 11:39 pm Link You will need the higher iso to shoot this stuff without flash, along with a good prime lens. Most of my stuff is shot with either a 70-200 F2.8, or 300 F2.8, at iso 640-800. I spot meter and go from there. I also like to use star filters.   Jun 11 05 04:01 am Link Posted by Doug Swinskey: Doug, how would you deal with the noise on a shot like that if you were making a print? Jun 11 05 10:13 am Link Posted by Doug Swinskey: actually in a 12x18 print of this image..you dont see much more noise then is evedent in the web image..if it became a problem..i would have used neat image..it has a profile of the D1x camera and can almost completely cancel the noise.. Jun 11 05 10:22 am Link Thanks for the tip. My laptop that I use to surf is kind of bright, so noise in shadow areas tends to be a bit exaggerated. I try and do the whole "expose to the right" thing, but there is always some noise in the shadow areas. I usually avoid going beyond 800iso because of my fear of noise. I see neat image is available for Mac, and there's a free demo. I'll have to play around and see how it works... Jun 11 05 10:30 am Link Posted by XtremeArtists ®: noise ninja is also very good...or we could get some D2X's..they're clean at high ISOs Jun 11 05 10:42 am Link From dpreview: "Compared to the $8000 EOS-1Ds Mark II the D2X is looking like a bit of a bargain." So nice to know that $5,000 is a bargain these days... Jun 11 05 10:53 am Link Posted by XtremeArtists ®: $4650 in pompano..yet a better bargan.. Jun 11 05 10:59 am Link Have any of you done similar shots using film? I seem to recall from back when I was reading about astrophotgraphy that there were tricks to getting faster exposures by freezing the film, push processing, or digital using chilled CCD's. Anyone ever try stuff like that for low light exposures? Jun 11 05 01:31 pm Link Posted by Sand Angel: years ago..film i would push ..never kept anything in the freezer however... Jun 11 05 01:40 pm Link http://members.shaw.ca/jmirtle/coldcam.htm This guy has a special camera that chills the film with dry ice. I doubt anything like this would be suitable for concert photography but I wonder if there is a way to use the concept of using cold temperatures to reduce CCD noise or increase film sensitivity to increase the quality of photography in low light situations. I'm not sticking my DSLR into a cooler of dry ice though.  Jun 11 05 01:52 pm Link Posted by Sand Angel: unfortunatley..film has to be about room temperature..if its much colder, the film will fog over(condesation)it would be useless in my mind..i would have to imagine the same goes for a CCD..i have walked out of an airconditioned building, to shoot outdoors and my lens a finder fogged..that blew big time..took a few hours for it to dissapte... Jun 11 05 01:56 pm Link Well, I think I found part of the answer to my own question. Apparently things have changed a lot since I last looked at doing astrophotography: http://www.csastro.org/gallery/article5.htm Advanced astrophotographers may treat their film with a high pressure hydrogen and nitrogen gas at high temperature to increase the sensitivity of their film in a process called hypering. Another common method to increase sensitivity is a cold camera which uses dry ice in contact with the film. Fortunately, the currently available off the shelf consumer films from the local drug store are better than the best professional astrophotography films of just a few years ago and these advanced techniques are not necessary for the beginning astrophotographer. Jun 11 05 02:13 pm Link Fuck the band... Pop a flash and drag it for about a second. You can usually get away with 400 or even 100 and about f4.5-f8, depending on the venues lighting. I've shot the Rev. Horton Heat like that, the Supersuckers, and a lot of smaller bands like Red Bennies, Policy, Hellbound Saints... on and on. So if you're shooting U2, it probably won't work - they'll bitch. But any smaller band who isn't a troupe of diva's, you can usually get away with popping a flash (just don't use the built in flash... looks way ghetto no matter what). The Supersuckers @ The Velvet Room, SLC...  Eddie Spaghetti solo show in Park City...  Policy @ The Whiskey-A-Go-Go...  Hellbound Saints...   Jun 11 05 02:30 pm Link OK here are 3 I shot of the Sarasota Sunsets in a club in Sarasota using available light...    Jun 11 05 02:57 pm Link Posted by BlacklistVisual ®: Some of the classical music majors would cry if they saw somebody doing that to an instrument. Jun 12 05 10:51 pm Link That is clearly not my photo... Posted by Farenell Photography: Posted by XtremeArtists ®: Some of the classical music majors would cry if they saw somebody doing that to an instrument. Jun 13 05 08:02 am Link David - Are you shooting film or digital? At this point, going with a low-noise dSLR such as the Canon 20D is really the way to go. You can shoot at ISO 1600 quite comfortably without a big hit on noise. Your workflow becomes very important, however. I recommend shooting RAW and using a converter such as Capture One or even Canon's Digital Photo Professional (DPP) to do the conversions. After that you may want to use a tool such as http://www.noiseware.com to knock out color noise - but not luminance noise, to avoid having your photos look like plastic. Fast glass will always help, but depending on the venue may not be required. Some venues have lighting similar to shooting on a cloudy day, some are like shooting in a closet. A good general purpose lens for good concert lighting conditions is something along the lines of a 70-200mm f/2.8, but for some conditions having super fast primes is the way to go. As far as printing goes, I've recently printed both of these photos at 24"x36", and they look fantastic. There is definitely visible grain, but no where near what you'd get with film at equivalent ISOs. Everyone who's seen them says that they're stunning: Canon 20D @ ISO 2400 (equivalent), 1/200th, Canon 85mm f/1.8 @ f/2  Canon 20D @ ISO 2400 (equivalent), 1/200th, Canon 35MM f/1.4L @ f/2  Jun 13 05 09:46 am Link Posted by Sam Bennett: Wow, that is THE SHIT, ooops, I meant RIGHTEOUS!!!!! Jun 13 05 10:01 am Link Posted by Sam Bennett: My only 2 camera bodies I have are the Canon Digital Rebel and the Digital Rebel XT.. I have two L series lenses the 70-200 F/2.8 (without the IS) and the 100-400 F/4.5-5.6. My only prime lens is the Canon 85mm f/1.8.. I will be shooting a concert this Thursday and it's outdoors with plenty of light. I will try the faster ISO and the 70-200 F/2.8 and the 85mm f/1.8. Jun 13 05 06:30 pm Link I guess, I'll chime in. These were taken at 1600 ISO w/ like the shutter speed being around 1/2 to a full second.    These other ones were taken w/ a tripod (don't ask how or why they let me use it during a gig) and the ISO (I THINK) was either 1600 or 400 speed. The shutter was anywhere from .5 second to 4 full seconds.   Enjoy. Jun 14 05 12:04 am Link Posted by David Holloway: Both bodies are quite competent, and the XT is really exceptional - its noise performance is just about as good as the 20D. I've used it on a couple concerts to good effect. Here's a couple shots with the XT: Jun 14 05 10:12 am Link first of all - sam is prob. one of my favorite concert shooters working today. but we have differing views on concert shooting. we shot a show together and compared results - it was pretty interesting to contrast the 2 styles..but anyway... i'm the weird one - i love shooting with flash: [img]http://teamronin.com/gallery/galleries/Live%20Music/Trashlight%20Vision/trashcbslive/trashcbs-126.jpg"[/img]  as well as available light:   canon 10D or 20D, 70-200/2.8 or 28-75/2.8 feh - too much html in my life... Jun 15 05 11:59 pm Link I shoot a lot of jazz musicians for their publicity packs and CDs, and they like being photographed live in clubs, maybe because other photogs they've worked with aren't foolish enough to try it. Unlike a rock arena or club, most jazz clubs are considered extremely well lit if they have four lights. I turn up the ISO as high as necessary to get what I know to be a hand-holdable shot with VR lenses. For my 80-400VR, that means I need a shutter speed of 1/15 if I have something to brace against, 1/30 if I don't. For my 24-120VR, I can go down to 1/4 handheld without bracing. Thankfully most jazz musicians are relatively still during some numbers, or you can time a pause if you know the music. I use a D100 for these. I have a D2X, but continue using the D100 for these gigs since it seems to be cleaner at ISO 1600. The real problem I have is color balance. If there are four lights, there will be four color gels, and each one a deep color of some sort. It's impossible to make someone look human when they are lit with a yellow light from one side and a blue one from another. Not enough spectrum on either side to color balance, for example the most popular yellow gel gives zero data in the blue channel. I know most of the clubs now, and go really early to talk the lighting guy into putting reasonably colored gels on the lights just for the night I'm shooting. I even carry some with me in case they don't have any. At least for me, I get less benefit from a fast lens than I do from VR. If I was in a really well lit place, I'd go for the f2.8 or 1.8 glass in a heartbeat. Jun 16 05 12:38 am Link WOW! There are some really GREAT CONCERT SHOOTERS in this bunch! Film cameras have been my choice for years of shooting music events, but I'm starting to get used to digital ... I still don't feel comfortable yet with it! It's because I can still do more cool things with film than I can with digital. For example, double exposures done in camera. I also like having the negatives or slides to back up my digital scans. The stuff I've shot way back then is still far better than what I'm getting with my digital camera. So I guess it's a learning curve all over again? Digital is still has advantages of speed when meeting a deadline though! Jun 16 05 01:12 am Link I noticed all the photos are from inside venues.. The concerts I am shooting will be outdoors from 6pm to 8pm and it will still be daylight out.. I am shooting digital. Should I still shoot at a faster ISO? Some of the shots I seen on this post are blurry, that is not want I want to accomplish. The photos I take are for submission to the city in which I live in for possible publication so they need to be in focus. Jun 16 05 03:29 am Link I shoot concerts myself. If you look at my port there is only one photo of local band here.. But if you tell me how to insert images I can Upload a few more. I use the Stock Nikon D70 I don't have alot of problems. But I do need to get a better lens for sure. I was thinking a 50 or 70 2.8 depending where I shoot from. Jun 16 05 12:14 pm Link Posted by David Holloway: Do shoot at a faster ISO anyway if it's starting to go down and there are no added lights provided. It will also be good for a faster shutter speed to avoid the blur. Those shooting digital that want to get "artsy" can add the blur later. Best wishes! Jun 16 05 12:21 pm Link Outdoors daylight at that time can be dim, might be hidden behind the backdrop leaving you with a real dilemma, bright skies and dark subjects. Front flash with daylight is a pretty cool look, and if you drag your shutter, can be even cooler. It may also save your bacon if there's not enough light or it turns out to be backlight. I like outdoor concerts for that reason, no one seems to care as much about using flash, so you can fill in heinous shadows, or emphasize ones you want emphasized. Jun 16 05 02:27 pm Link Posted by Patrick Walberg: Posted by David Holloway: eh, i'd rather do it in camera with natural blur - digital blur added in post just doesn't look quite right. Jun 16 05 02:30 pm Link Posted by Patrick Walberg: Posted by David Holloway: Do shoot at a faster ISO anyway if it's starting to go down and there are no added lights provided. It will also be good for a faster shutter speed to avoid the blur. Those shooting digital that want to get "artsy" can add the blur later. Best wishes! Better yet, those shooting digital that want to be artsy can do so without resorting to cheap photoshop tricks. Jun 16 05 02:58 pm Link Posted by Patrick Walberg: Posted by David Holloway: Do shoot at a faster ISO anyway if it's starting to go down and there are no added lights provided. It will also be good for a faster shutter speed to avoid the blur. Those shooting digital that want to get "artsy" can add the blur later. Best wishes! I will try it.. There is no lighting for this venue at all (only natural light) so I will try the higher ISO and any suggestions on shutter speed or should I just meter it? Jun 16 05 06:11 pm Link Posted by David Holloway: You'll definitely want to meter it. Metering can be difficult in concert situations (or any high contrast situation), but since you'll be outside in the evening, it shouldn't be too bad. You should shoot RAW to give yourself a bit of wiggle room. Jun 16 05 06:14 pm Link How do you eliminate the grain when shooting at a faster ISO? Jun 17 05 10:00 am Link Posted by Sam Bennett: wow. those are awesome. Jun 17 05 10:49 am Link |
