cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Concerts are hard to shoot sometimes.

ilzho
Rising Star

So I went to local venue and did some quick concert shooting for a few songs with random lighting and found out, it's challenging at times.

Here's a true throw away picture, but I wanted to post it to show any other beginners, what not to do.

 

For this pic, I had my camera settings in raw, av mode, bbf, 2.8, awb, auto iso limited max to 6400 and tried to set minimum shutter speed to 250. I did something wrong as the minimum shutter speed didn't work.

Also, I used evaluative metering.

 

Now, I did get some tack sharp images, but I should have going to manual mode, set shutter speed to atleast 250, 2.8, bbf, auto iso and spot metering and I would have had better results.

 

Just wanted to share my learning experience for anyone else who is trying to learn.... ( I realize most of you all are experts)

 

383A8697.jpg

13 REPLIES 13

ScottyP
Authority

Do I assume that f/2.8 is the widest your lens goes?  

 

If so, I think I'd have shot in TV mode, because in the dark the camera will not need to be told to open the aperture all the way; it will just do it.  Your biggest concern is keeping a fast enough shutter speed.  I also think auto ISO is the way to go.  

Scott

Canon 5d mk 4, Canon 6D, EF 70-200mm L f/2.8 IS mk2; EF 16-35 f/2.8 L mk. III; Sigma 35mm f/1.4 "Art" EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro; EF 85mm f/1.8; EF 1.4x extender mk. 3; EF 24-105 f/4 L; EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS; 3x Phottix Mitros+ speedlites

Why do so many people say "FER-tographer"? Do they take "fertographs"?

Yes, it was my 70-200 2.8.

I tried a few in tv mode, exposure compensation, but those didn't turn out to my liking.

The background was not always black. The back of the stage was lite, but at an angle you could get the black background....

Good learning experience.


@ilzho wrote:

Yes, it was my 70-200 2.8.

I tried a few in tv mode, exposure compensation, but those didn't turn out to my liking.

The background was not always black. The back of the stage was lite, but at an angle you could get the black background....

Good learning experience.


The posted photo is a great shot, just the same.  You're a good learner.

--------------------------------------------------------
"The right mouse button is your friend."

Thanks, I'm trying.

It was a rockabilly show. I love that music....

IMHO, you don't want Tv.  You want Av.  Av locks the aperture, f2.8, so the camera selects the fastest SS possible.  Shoot RAW and forget WB.  Fix the ISO to a setting you can libe with, say, 1600.

EB
EOS 1DX and 1D Mk IV and less lenses then before!

I always shoot raw and have lightroom to help clean things up.

I shot in AV mode, but set my iso to no more than 6400. Yeah I know it's high, but it was ok.

Those red stage lights, ugh......

Anyway, here's a link to what I took at the Rockabilly show with Wanda Jackson, Gene Summers and Cowhide Cole.

It was fun nonetheless.

 

<Removed Per Forum Guidelines>

 


@ilzho wrote:

I always shoot raw and have lightroom to help clean things up.

I shot in AV mode, but set my iso to no more than 6400. Yeah I know it's high, but it was ok.

Those red stage lights, ugh......

Anyway, here's a link to what I took at the Rockabilly show with Wanda Jackson, Gene Summers and Cowhide Cole.

It was fun nonetheless.

 

https://flic.kr/s/aHskDS3bPH

 


Some of those are pretty darned good, but there's too much similarity and repetition. You should weed them down a fair amount. Find a set of pictures that all look similar; pick the best one; and dump the rest. There's an important principle operating here: Good pictures don't look their best when displayed alongside lesser pictures; they look best when displayed with other good pictures.

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA

Great advice.

Thanks.

It's hard for me to decide which one is the better of the group, but I understand what you are saying.

I see something that I think is cool, but someone else may not get it......


@ilzho wrote:

 

It's hard for me to decide which one is the better of the group, but I understand what you are saying.

I see something that I think is cool, but someone else may not get it......


Assessing the relative quality of pictures depends on artistic judgement, understanding of photographic principles, and knowledge of your subject. It's difficult, boring, and time consuming, especially for event photography, where the volume of shots to be dealt with can be vast. But it's what separates a good photographer from a mediocre one. Some of it can be taught, but most of it comes from instinct and repetition. Some people can't do it at all, but even those who can usually have to work long and hard to perfect their skill.

 

From time to time, go back and look over some of your old shots. You'll know you're making progress when you start to cringe at what you see.

Bob
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania USA
Avatar
Announcements