Gig photography help.

pearljamfan

i go to alot of gigs, and i like to try and get some good photos, i like the subject,- but every time i come away disappointed with them.
last night i took around 130 photos and i might have got 8-10 that i think are ok (not fantastic, but not awful) . so, do you think alot of it is down to my camera?? i have a fuji s9600, i wasnt using a flash or a tripod, and i think if id have stood right in front of the musicians i would have done better. do i just need to learn more!? im looking to upgrade my camera so any advice would be fantastic. ( ill stick up a few photos i dont like when i work out how to do it!)

VisionaryP

Post the exif data. As a general rule, for gig photography you need as high an ISO and as low a shutter speed you can get away with - but not so low as to cause a soft image. 1/60 to 1/100, depending on how steady your hand is and how far away you are.

pearljamfan

a couple i thought were half ok were
exp 1/15
ap f3.9
focal 29mm
iso 800

exp1/15
ap f3.8
foc 21.6
iso 800

still were soft (atmospheric!?) and the house lights were a bit too much on the face. i was standing at the side of the stage for those ones. would i do better with a different lens? i never see photographers at gigs with tripods, but i do see big lenses, is it half because of that??!

Ciaran500

You wouldn't be able to hold a camera stable enough to get a sharp image at a shutter speed that low. I found that below 1/60s shutter speed images start to get softer and blurred and the further you go from that the worse it gets. This doesn't apply to lenses with image stabilisation though.

VisionaryP

Ciaran500 wrote: »

This doesn't apply to lenses with image stabilisation though.

It's more forgiving with an IS lens, but it definitely still applies.

mehfesto

Ciaran500 wrote: »

You wouldn't be able to hold a camera stable enough to get a sharp image at a shutter speed that low. I found that below 1/60s shutter speed images start to get softer and blurred and the further you go from that the worse it gets. This doesn't apply to lenses with image stabilisation though.

Yeah generally about the 1/60 is safe. 1/40 is doable is the band don't move too much and you have less than shaky hands!

You seem to have the basics right:
-Aperture as wide as possible
-shutter speed as low as manageable
-iso as high as possible (without adding LOADS of garin to images)

Other than that make sure you:
-Are using single-point focus if using autofocus.
-Get as close as you can to the bands (might be an idea to hit smaller venues , where the crowds won't be an issue)
-Take the best quality image possible on your camera (not RAW - takes too long to write onto memory cards) - This will aloow you to clean things up in photoshop later.

Here's my rules of thumb for gigs too:
ISO 800 or above. Shutter speed 1/40 – 1/60. Aperture – as wide as possible (lens depending). Then:

If you’re images are too bright and blurry – shorten the shutter speed (make it ‘faster’).
If your images are grainy – lower the ISO, - you may also need to lower the shutter speed too as a result.
If you images are too dark – lower the shutter speed, make the aperture wider or increase the ISO (or two of these or all three).
If your images are VERY dark – take off the lens cap!

There's very little out there at the moment in text form on the subject. There's a book out in August called "Three Songs, no Flash" - I had a preview of it the other day and it looks great.

Hope I've helped!

pearljamfan

thanks a million mehfesto ill keep a look out for that one. heres a couple i took last night, theyre ok, but not really any good!

mehfesto

They're not bad at all! The colour cast is quite strong, but you can fix that in Photoshop. That our adjust your White Balance when you're there. I never take mine off auto. It works grand 99% of the time!

You can see they're slightly soft from the shutter speed being low. You know how to fix that.

Remember too that in most entry zoom lenses, the aperture will get more narrow the more you zoom, so if you can get nice and close you can have faster shutter speeds and wider apertures!

pearljamfan

thanks for the tips, i think its stuff i already know really, just when im there i have to make myself think about what im actually doing, then apply it! i dont really know alot about photoshop, i normally just use the thing on windows gallery as its on my netbook, i have a load of gig photos on my facebook page i like,its just hit and miss though, this one i like:


but i want to improve so i guess ill just keep at it!

AnCatDubh

step 1 - listen to mehfesto
step 2 - do what mehfesto says

As a thought to consider;

The s9600 is a mighty damn fine camera (my first real digital was a fuji/still have it and while it is technically challenged - i still love it ) but there is somewhat of a 'gear' difference/boost/improvement should you move into dslr world at some point - and there is compromise - handiness and good all rounder (bridge) versus stretching every last bit of light out of your scene and likely better quality of image (dslr).

Gig's probably are one of the most challenging forms of photography you will encounter particularly due to lighting situations and a likely preference of the band/gog organisers for no flash so imho, and to do it with consistency of what you are seeking, you need the best of your camera gear.

The difference between bridge cameras like your s9600 and dslr will probably be a couple of stops of light and potentially better quality of image - due to better quality sensor, better quality lens (if you've splashed out on it), better available apertures, and better technical handling of iso - all of this, depending on what you have available to you (lens, dslr body, etc..).

What you do with the extra stop or two of light is up to you but it will most likely mean more potential sharpness to your image (mightn't be perfect but better than the soft-ish images that you are currently taking but it may also be the case that you are looking for the moody softness from an image).

Again, consider everything that mehfesto is saying - it's a been there done that thing.

A move to a dslr is a different decision but invariably if this kind of photography gets your rocks off, then is a likely decision that you will arrive at.

Good luck with it.

pearljamfan

ill take all advice anyone gives me thanks!:D
i really like this camera, ive had it 3 years now, only bought it when my son was born because it was a good price! and its made me want to take this photography lark seriously. but like you said,ive been thinking it was partly to do with the sensor- i think i would take better quality shots if i upgraded.

im very lucky because that venue is down the road from me and they will let me in to soundchecks etc so i will get plenty of practice.
i actually like some of the softness to the photos, i think it lends itself well to band photos sometimes, and it gives a bit of atmosphere, also if the photo is a bit too crappy i make it b+w and it tends to look better! but then i look at other peoples photos and i think mine are awful and should be better.

melekalikimaka

i started out same as yourself many moons ago, the camera is gonna hold you back, after that, practice practice practice

pearljamfan

ill keep an eye out for something 2nd hand, and keep practising! thanks again , ive never really posted on the photography forum before, just a lurker really.:D

pete4130

Coming away from a gig with a 5-10% success ratio is really good. You'll struggle more with a bridge camera and/or entry level DSLR with a kit lens than with a prime lens. Any gigs I shoot are usually with a 50mm 1.4 lens on 3200 ISO or the 80-200mm 2.8 for the longer shots. Sometimes wider depending on the stage/lighting.

GavinZac

Yeah 1 in 10 is pretty good if you're not bombarding the performer with flash or given very close access. At the mini-festival in Cork Opera House last winter I took maybe 500 shots over the course of the day and maybe 50 were worth keeping. I'm sure with practice I could eliminate a lot of the wasteful shots with better timing or getting the settings right first time. That's not to say I would end up with 500 good shots, rather the same 50 decent shots but less of the timewasters.

homerun_homer

AnCatDubh wrote: »

step 1 - listen to mehfesto
step 2 - do what mehfesto says

I personally wouldn't agree with the "don't shoot RAW" advice. I got into shooting gigs as a hobby and only last year started shooting RAW and I've found no big difference in card speed being able to handle taking shots in bursts. The advantages to shooting RAW is too good not to take advantage of, especially in low light, gig situations.

Thecageyone

I took shots at a Cabaret [benefit] gig last night, very poor lighting for sharp shooting but I got some not too bad shots as I was up front. Using only the 50mm f/1.7 the best shots were the ones taken in or around -

ISO: 400
f/2.2 - f/3.5
exp: 1/60 - 1/100

No flash used.

John

homerun_homer wrote: »

I personally wouldn't agree with the "don't shoot RAW" advice. I got into shooting gigs as a hobby and only last year started shooting RAW and I've found no big difference in card speed being able to handle taking shots in bursts. The advantages to shooting RAW is too good not to take advantage of, especially in low light, gig situations.

Definitely agree with this. Since I started shooting gigs in RAW, I've found that the benefits far outweigh the slightly slower card speed (which I only notice if I take a large amount of shots at once which is rare).

Thecageyone

Yup, always shoot RAW when you can. Unless you're using a cam that doesn't support the feature.

Forgot to mention most of my shots required a lot of fill light along with the usual processing tweaks in Lightroom later. Using RAW files allows for greater tweaking before noise kicks in me thinks.

smash

Camera: Canon EOS 5D
Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 200 mm
ISO Speed: 640


Camera: Canon EOS 5D
Exposure: 0.02 sec (1/50)
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 200 mm
ISO Speed: 640