SLeague : Albirex Niigata vs Tampines Rovers @ J.E Stadium 170605 7pm

[ray_stinger]

Here are my newbie virgin attempt in soccer sport photography. Comments appreciated.

1.


2.


3.


4.

[ray_stinger]

5.


6.


7.


8.

[ray_stinger]

9.


10.


11.


12.

[ray_stinger]

13.


The End

[sehsuan]

1. can't see the faces. keep this shot to yourself.

2. action has too much motion blur. back to camera.

3. too loose. players TOO FAR apart.

4. so what happened after this moment?

5. why would you want to show the back of 2 players to us viewers?

6. nice try, but a little too late for the shot.

7. freekick?

8. players are not facing INTO the camera. can't see what really happened.

9. you've shot too early. how about what happened a second after this shot?

10. you've only shot nazri and someone else blocking the action.

11. no particular action. so what about the throw-in?

12. what happened? if you don't write about it, i'll guess suguru and the player on the left are dancing.

13. not enough action and details. can't see reactions of the defending wall.

don't mean this reply to be offensive, but i'm asking more questions than commenting, if you noticed...

[ray_stinger]

Originally Posted by sehsuan 1. can't see the faces. keep this shot to yourself. 2. action has too much motion blur. back to camera. 3. too loose. players TOO FAR apart. 4. so what happened after this moment? 5. why would you want to show the back of 2 players to us viewers? 6. nice try, but a little too late for the shot. 7. freekick? 8. players are not facing INTO the camera. can't see what really happened. 9. you've shot too early. how about what happened a second after this shot? 10. you've only shot nazri and someone else blocking the action. 11. no particular action. so what about the throw-in? 12. what happened? if you don't write about it, i'll guess suguru and the player on the left are dancing. 13. not enough action and details. can't see reactions of the defending wall. don't mean this reply to be offensive, but i'm asking more questions than commenting, if you noticed...

Thanks for your comments. Really appreciate it.
I found that almost all my shots are rather blur, which I attribute it to the shutter speed I have chosen, 1/200th and occasionally 1/160th. I shot all the photos @ f/4 ISO 1600. I have learnt that to freeze the motion, I will use 1/400 or more in similar shoots next time. I believe that I will have alot to work on the composition as well as developing an eye for the "moments". Keep the comments coming, thanks lots.

[sehsuan]

f/4? i'd venture to guess you're using the 70-200/4?

[Jed]

Originally Posted by ray_stinger Thanks for your comments. Really appreciate it. ... Keep the comments coming, thanks lots.

Sigh. An incident on another thread makes me wonder if I should bother giving comments. If you're serious just say and I'll post them.

[ray_stinger]

Originally Posted by sehsuan f/4? i'd venture to guess you're using the 70-200/4?

Originally Posted by Jed Sigh. An incident on another thread makes me wonder if I should bother giving comments. If you're serious just say and I'll post them.

Yes to both.

[Jed]

Sorry I haven't responded earlier, but have been caught up with things.

I haven't read Sehsuan's comments but I suspect many will be similar. I will eventually read his but I'm going to put my twopennyworth down first.

[1] A sports image tends to need a face in it if it's to survive. In fact, it tends to need the faces of all the main parties involved. There are some obvious exceptions to this, but the picture has to be very strong on a different level to compensate.

[2] Again, no faces. The blur in the image is also too strong for a "sharp" picture and not blurred enough for a creative interpretation, and it's been caught in between.

[3] There's no action in this shot at all, the two players are miles apart. It might have worked as a stock image of the guy on the left, with the other guy cropped out. Still when you view the image, it looks like the guy on the right has possession/is in the ascendancy.

[4] No faces again. Too much movement. You need to drop the empty space on the right hand side out.

[5] Faces. Movement. Empty space. Sound familiar?

[6] Best one yet. There's actually action in this, you can see both faces. Waay too much empty space again (this is a vertical shot), and there is a movement problem but if you don't have the glass or the light, there's not a lot you can do about that.

[7] It's a very average stock picture. You need to lose the space on the left again, and ideally he'd be more head on. Needs to be sharper for a stock picture.

[8] Faces. And Nazri is too predominant.

[9] It's not in focus. It's not the height of the action. Too many people are looking on rather than getting stuck in to make it a winning picture.

[10] Way too much going on in the frame, with too many backs, too little ball. Not exactly height of action either, and you would have needed to have lost the space on the right.

[11] Arguably your best picture so far. 6 is a better action picture but it's too small in the frame and not sharp. But this is what I mean by, you don't need faces in the frame if the shot works on a different level. I'm not sure if I might have prefered the focus to have been on the pair of players, but it's a nice shot. I'd chop some off the left again.

[12] Moment has passed. At this moment there isn't any action. Also, it's not sharp enough.

[13] For some reason something about this shot just doesn't strike me as right... it feels cropped wrong somehow. I'm made uncomfortable by the missing goalkeeper even though you can figure out where he is if you look. The best freekick pictures from this end of the pitch are ideally a fraction later, when the ball is over the wall. That said, I've had plenty used when the ball was in a similar position to this. Altho they're not worth hanging on to typically unless it is a goal or a save crucial to the outcome of the game - in the latter obviously you want the ball on the keeper's fingertips.

[14] People often try to do shots like this with the idea that it's different. The problem is that it's so often done, it no longer becomes different. I take them too myself but I think I've yet to even bother sending one because for me they just don't work. In this specific case, you can also tighten up the framing (lose space on the right), and there's too much of a gap (horizontal strip) between the ball and people in the background.

And let's see how I did... actually, not TOO many were similar to Sehsuan's comments. Hope they're helpful anyway. Don't be too disheartened, shooting at night with an f4 lens and you'll struggle at the best of times.

[sumball]

Sorry for the OT but may I just ask if we are allow to photograph in the stadium? Where did you photography these at? The running tracks?

How about in indoor stadium for the Singapore Badminton Open? Can we take photos there?

Sorry for the OT, Ray. No comments on your photos as I am not qualify to but do agree with Jed and sehsuan's commetns and learnt something today.

Thanks three of you.

[sehsuan]

sumball, you mean the Aviva Open?

probably you'd need a f/2 lens to shoot over there, focal length from 85 and longer. no flash will be allowed, AFAIK.

[erwinx]

Originally Posted by sehsuan sumball, you mean the Aviva Open? probably you'd need a f/2 lens to shoot over there, focal length from 85 and longer. no flash will be allowed, AFAIK.

TV screen capture by someone from the recent Sudiarman cup. those should be 70-200?:

http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...tid=9294&stc=1

[billpepsi]

Tonight I will be going to Bishan Stadium for soccer coverage. Have one question. What is the minimum shutter speed to freeze soccer players in actions? 1/400 sec?

my settings will be, ISO 1600, 80-200mm f/2.8.

Those photos I recently shot at Bugis uses 1/1000 to freeze the water and children. Suspect the photos could be under-exposed if apply the same shutter speed at Bishan Stadium.

http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthrea...t=imaginations

[SpitFir3]

Originally Posted by jeffhiew Tonight I will be going to Bishan Stadium for soccer coverage. Have one question. What is the minimum shutter speed to freeze soccer players in actions? 1/400 sec? my settings will be, ISO 1600, 80-200mm f/2.8. Those photos I recently shot at Bugis uses 1/1000 to freeze the water and children. Suspect the photos could be under-exposed if apply the same shutter speed at Bishan Stadium. http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthrea...t=imaginations

use 1/250 would be enough. i was using exactly same settings as you when i was shooting soccer. u can do 1/320 also

[james2]

Originally Posted by SpitFir3 use 1/250 would be enough. i was using exactly same settings as you when i was shooting soccer. u can do 1/320 also

Can we shoot soccer in the stadium if we are not using f2.8 lens? I am using a 5.6 one.

[sehsuan]

Originally Posted by erwinx TV screen capture by someone from the recent Sudiarman cup. those should be 70-200?: http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...tid=9294&stc=1

i would seriously doubt that the lighting in the indoor stadium to be that bright though. should be in the vicinity of iso1600,f/2.8, 1/250s, roughly.

[sehsuan]

Originally Posted by james2 Can we shoot soccer in the stadium if we are not using f2.8 lens? I am using a 5.6 one.

yes you can, but your shutter speed will need to be four times as long as those using the f/2.8 lenses. if they're using something like 1/250, yours would be two stops slower aka 1/60s. that would limit you to almost only panning shots.

[SpitFir3]

Originally Posted by james2 Can we shoot soccer in the stadium if we are not using f2.8 lens? I am using a 5.6 one.

Erm you can. However you really have to use ISO1600 already. Because at F5.6 u need to quite low shutter speeds to get properly exposed pictures. And if its too low u get motion blur...soo..well..try to strike a balance..

[billpepsi]

Originally Posted by SpitFir3 use 1/250 would be enough. i was using exactly same settings as you when i was shooting soccer. u can do 1/320 also

Tx, roger that.