Need Feedback on Sports Images!!1

[Ken Little]

I also missed your posting. I like your work. I agree with all of Michael's comments. The first picture of the quarterback is a good one, with the quarterback in the classic pose, focused on his receivers and fairly good bokeh that makes the subject pop. I agree about shooting from a low angle, as this does show more of the face and make the players appear larger than life.

I think by shooting the second picture from a lower angle might have captured a more rewarding picture. I almost always (painfully) shoot from a kneeling position. The second picture could be brightened up a bit overall.

Regarding your picture of the kicker, it depends on the use of the picture. If sold to the individuals, then the kicker or the parents of the kicker might buy a copy. If it was the game winning field goal, then there is probability it might be run in a local paper.

Regarding the receiver catching the ball....excellent timing. It is not easy to capture these! I think for the most part, compositionally, you gave your subjects room to run and breathe. The pass reception picture might be pushing the envelope on this point, but not if you are able to capture the player expression. Also, if people are buying these as prints, you might consider leaving more room for them to frame the picture, as cropping too close will place some important parts of the photo under the frame. It all depends on intended use of the photos.

Regarding the fumble picture, it may be interesting from a journalistic point of view if it was a fumble that turned the game around, but then the picture doesn't give us enough information as to who or which team recovered it. We see the struggle, but I'm not sure it tells enough of the story or highlights the action of a team or particular player. However, if you are documenting the game and putting this on the web, then the players in the photo would surely relive the play by seeing the photo.

Anyway, I guess the takeaways are to shoot from a low angle, shoot wide open to get bokeh and make your subject pop (this also allows for a faster shutter speed, thereby freezing the action), brighten up the pictures more, without blowing out the highlights, although a blown out background is not as bad as a player in the shadows. Overall though, I think you certainly have good timing and with a 300/2.8 lens you can also shoot night games. And as mentioned by David, you can put the 1.4X on with the 300 when shooting in daytime and still maintain much or the bokeh (since you are shooting on the longer end) and be able to post yourself outside the end zone to capture some action coming or going (a different angle). With those tools and your apparent talent, I think the school stands to get some good images.....my two cents!

[Ron Metz]

Thanks guys. The intended audience is the student body. The images are posted on the schools web site and some are sold through the school's store.

The suggestion to shoot lower is one that I think about frequently but have been reluctant to try because I am hung up on constantly using my monopod. This is probably a carryover from my days of shooting film and non IS lenses. I see newspaper photographers doing it but I think that their images are used differently and are not as critical. What has been your experience?

Regarding using a 1.4 converter with the 300mm; I am reluctant here also because I don't want to lose that one stop plus the possiblity of losing some focusing speed. Using the 1.4 could possibly give me enough reach to effectively shoot from the goal lines and getting some face on action shots. Again, what has been your experience? Since I also shoot nature (birds etc.) I have a EF 500mm f4L IS lens but again I have been reluctant to try it because of the f4. Plus, I am no spring chicken and lugging both large lenses to a game would be a chiropractor's dream.

Noel, GREAT shot of that young man. I am sure that the parents loved it.

I will post some of my basketball images. This is a definite challenge for me.

Thanks again.

Ron

[DougAxford]

Originally Posted by Ron Metz

Thanks guys. The intended audience is the student body. The images are posted on the schools web site and some are sold through the school's store.

Thanks for that explanation.

I would rather concentrate your efforts on selling. I think your images are plenty good enough for the players to be happy but IMHO if you don't get enough sales to make this worthwhile, no matter how great your images are, you will quit in frustration. Assuming that you are doing this for more than the pure joy of doing it. I think I'm going to have to try to take on Norm Cabana's job here.

Ron, I know you're asking for suggestions on photography but it's important to ask if you are wanting to do this for fun or if income is important. I'll assume the latter for a moment. First, you rarely sell to the players, you sell to the parents. Your goal is wall sized posters, nothing less. Yes, you sell less, but your GOAL is wall size 24x36. If that's the case, shooting closer is actually not what I would do. In my sales for high-school age football (I do not shoot school games because non-school leagues are preferred in our region) the best sales are showing groups of players, not individuals. They want to see the action in conjunction with the rest of the team/opposition. Single shots of the qback are not big sellers at all. Qbacks are the ego of the team and don't buy in my experience.

Most of our best sales came from shots where the face does not even show. They want to see the action that is taking place, not the face. The attached poster was shipped out last week. It's far from a great shot, but then guess who bought it? The parents of player #6 in orange. Can't see his face in any of the sequence. They were thrilled - so they told me. Another one we sold was a shot of the centre. Head down, you could only see the top of his helmet. Strange but true. The point is that you aim your photography to what sells, not what is great photography.

As a starting point, I would work on getting your own site ready for next season and put a few of the highlights of each game on the school site as an inducement to get them to your site. You need to control the site and control the money.

Let me know if this makes sense or if I'm going a direction you're not interested in.

[Noel_Carboni]

I'd say try hand held shooting. It's all I ever do. IS is a boon and after a while you get pretty good at holding steady and timing your shutter releases between moves.

Honestly I'd love to have the big aperture lens you're using as an option, but I found my 100-400 zoom really did the trick for daytime games, because I could frame the shots well no matter whether the action was relatively close or far away.

-Noel

[MichaelMoenning]

Ron, the glass needed for football is long and then longer and then the "holy crap they're landing on me" short lens.

For football I use the following glass on full frame digital bodies:
Camera 1 400mm f2.8 with and without a 1.4 converter or a 200mm f2.0
Camera 2 70-200mm f2.8
Camera 3 24-70mm f2.8

Also in the backpack:
16mm prime - for huddles or when a ridiculous angle of view is necessary.
3 Pocket wizzard transceivers (1 master & 2 remotes)
point and shoot camera
bogen 210B/8840 mini tripod (goal line remote for football, floor remote for basketball)
Magic Arm with Superclamp and camera platform (for basketball)
SB800 flashes (3 for basketball 1 for football)
Rain covers and poncho

Depending on the situation I use Camera 1 with the 400 kneeling 80% of the time with kneepads under my pants - the other 20% I'm just resting my knees, changing position or getting the heck out of the way!

When the players get close to the goal line and it's a running team, I will switch Camera 1 to the 200mm prime on the monopod and have Camera 2 over my shoulder, and camera 3 is on the ground, turned on and prefocused to the middle of the end zone laying right next to my monopod pole between my knees.

For your situation, the 500mm f4 lens at a day game would be ideal, so I would definitely try that at the next opportunity. I regularly use teleconverters on my prime lenses without difficulty or loss of image quality. So, give it a shot.

As for tactics try not to CHASE the action, but be in position so that it comes to you. This takes more thought than physical effort.

Lastly, I thought Doug's analysis of what sells and why was right on the money. I had the exact same experience shooting for a high school football booster club for a season. I was always surprised at what sold and what didn't. His comments on the QB and the ego of the team are right on. The lesser known and lower profile players and positions are your biggest customers in this situation. Sage advice Doug! I hope you are finding our input helpful and good luck to you!

Mike

[Ron Metz]

Michael,

I am finding this information VERY valuable. As I mentioned, I am just starting to set up my own business in sports photography. This will be my second career so money is important but not as critical as when raising a family. I had the opportunity to shoot some college ball games and I took it for minimal compensation. This particular gig wil be short term. I wanted to dust of some of my basic skills. Do I want to continue shooting college and possibly professional ball? Probably not. I am no spring chicken and probably do not have the physical strentgh and energy to keep up with the younger folks. Right now I am looking at local "little league" and possibly high school ball. My target customers will probably be parents and friends of the players. I am currently in the initial stages of setting up a web site. Since I do not particularly care to get involved directly with supplying prints etc. I will probably utilize a company like Zenfolio.com (Mpix) to handle that end. Less money for me but that is OK.

Now, regarding your VERY impressive list of equipment, I am assuming that you shoot pro and/or college ball. Is this accurate? I lust over the Canon 400mm f2.8 but can not come close to justifying it at my stage. I also cannot justify a Canon full frame camera. More than likely the sports that I will be shooting in my business will be "little league" soccer and baseball. High School football and basketball. Possibly some college football. Knowing this, do you still feel that all or some of the equipment you listed would be the optimum for my needs.

Thanks again.

Ron

[MichaelMoenning]

My work is commercial and usually I am shooting directly for the sponsor of a sporting event and or shooting directly for the team. So, the gear I listed is what I use when making photos that will become the "image" of the team or event for the next 12 months. It's more sports advertising which is a bit different than shooting on spec for resale to parents.

For little league, most fields are covered quite well with a 300mm and a medium zoom. This is especially true on a camera with an APS sensor.

For High School Football, you're going to need long glass just to get the reach you need to get the action. But you mentioned a 500 f4 and I think that will work well. Same thing for soccer, big field lots of area to cover.

For college and pro, the access to the playing field is so much more restricted that your ability to get close to the action is substantially diminished. So, you will definitely want to bring (rent/borrow) long bright glass and your kneepads! It's important to fit in here so as not to draw attention to yourself from event officials or the other shooters. So try to avoid being the guy with a 70-200 on a monopod ;-)

Full frame cameras were just my choice, I've used 1.5 aps sensors for sports and that just makes everything a bit longer, which can help a great deal (especially PGA Tour events). I personally like the look of the images now that my lenses have returned to their normal length.

The market will drive your need for equipment. If what you have gets it done, then don't fret about gear until it's time to replace something. In the end it's the picture, not the tools used to create it, that is paramount. Reread Doug's post about how to shoot what sells, he shows a high level of an understanding of that market. I'm glad you're finding the discussion valuable.

Mike