Messages

1

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: First photo pass to a concert! Lessons learned...

« on: May 13, 2013, 04:08:14 PM »

Nice pictures of these Transatlantic guys!

Lol, it took until Page 3 before the prog fan identified the act.  Technically, the shots were of The Flower Kings followed by The Neal Morse Band, but there was a Transatlantic encore. 

As the OP, shame on me for leaving the topic.  :-P

- A

2

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: First photo pass to a concert! Lessons learned...

« on: May 13, 2013, 04:04:37 PM »

I've LOVED this thread because I'm dying to get more into this arena.  I've been directly asked to shoot band performances before, but never done the whole Press Pass thing. 

So, for all of you guys who do lots of this:  What should I do to start obtaining these Press Passes?  Do I need to work for/represent a publication directly? 

There are several concerts I'd love to shoot which are coming up.  I'd really like to make this happen.

Thanks in advance for your help!

Off the cuff, I'd recommend approaching local papers (with an entertainment presence, section, etc.)  and local music blogs and ask if they need a photographer for shows.  Offer to work for free, take what shows you can, and build up a portfolio.

Not being a pro, I wish I could be of more help -- I just fell into this opportunity because I knew someone in the music press.

Good luck,
A

3

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: First photo pass to a concert! Lessons learned...

« on: May 10, 2013, 10:58:26 AM »

However, I really like to enjoy the music and the atmosphere and therein lies my problem!

Thanks, again.

I understand completely.  My editor friend who got me in was quick to say 'get your shots out of the way and then get your gear out of the way.'  He knew I loved the bands on stage that night, and that once my fifteeen minutes was up I should enjoy the music and not try to squeeze 1-2 more keepers out from the crowd.

- A

4

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: First photo pass to a concert! Lessons learned...

« on: May 10, 2013, 10:55:52 AM »

This is an excellent write-up. I think it's great that you have taken the time to help the community.

I would like to add a couple of other pointers (I have been doing concert photography for 5 years, and got a whole lot of things wrong in the first years, so this is a list of my "Battle scars")

1.Make friends with security. If you have time to get to the venue early, talk to them, they are really great people (in the most part), and will make your life a whole load easier, and might even give you access to areas that you really shouldn't have access to.
2.Do what security say! It doesn't matter if you have a photogs pass, if security ask you to move, or whatever, MOVE-you won't be able to hear why they want you to move, and having a conversation with them is impossible. Failure to comply with their wishes inevitably and quickly leads to you being removed from wherever you are.
3.Use two cameras. You don't have time to change lenses
4.Learn how to replace a memory card(or change lenses if that's what you need to do) in complete darkness
5.If you are in the photographers pit, don't stand for any longer than necessary in one position, you will annoy the fans, and either they will give you a crafty thump in the back, or they will ask security to remove you, either way, not good
6. General band photography (i.e. doing all the bands in a multi-band line-up) is generally not permitted, regardless of what your pass says, you need the permission of each bands management to take photos. If you don't have that, again, security will be called
7. Take crowd reaction shots. The bands just LOVE pictures of the crowd going wild
8. The bigger the band(Later on in the event), the more of a  light show they get, so, if you are shooting an early band, be ready to push the ISO as high as you can get it without totally intrusive noise appearing in the shots
9. Take a few "Safety shots" in automatic, then move to fully manual, you will end up with much more impactful shots that show the band being flooded with light, or maybe, just getting a musician with a little rim light.
10.Listen to the music. The lighting may be tuned to the music that's being played, and by timing your shot to go with the beat, you might end up with a better lit target.
12. Wear ear plugs! I'm now pretty deaf as a result of being in the photographers pit for too many hours, which is right next to the speakers. Don't end up like me!
13. If you are in competition with other photographers a) respect their needs-don't get in the way of their shots b)Get your shots off to the commissioning magazines/web-sites/e-zines, before the other guys do. (You are in competition with them!) "Fast" is commonly better than "Best", when it comes to what shots an editor chooses

Thanks for the veteran feedback!  Excellent comments.

It spurs a few more thoughts on my part (numbered to yours above):

1) Along the lines of making friends with security, make friends with the other photographers.  If you are approaching their spot, be polite, use your hands to point to spot with an 'is that okay?' look (as they can't hear you).  Also, my editor friend said never hoist your camera above your head to get a shot -- it has a good chance to ruining another photographer's shot (also, at this venue, getting above stage level was a no-no).

3) My second body is a rebel and likely would have been devoured by the darkness, but yes, having two cameras are certainly a huge advantage.  I managed changing a lens in about 20 seconds at this show, but it was 20 seconds I could have been shooting and I could have clumsily dropped the lens in that darkness...

12) Essential point, thanks -- I don't care how tough you think you are, ear plugs are a must.


Thx for the great feedback, celliottuk.  It is truly appreciated!

- A

5

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: First photo pass to a concert! Lessons learned...

« on: May 10, 2013, 10:45:08 AM »

How'd you manage to get the pass?

I actually had two 'ins' to get one at this event.  My friend runs a large music blog (large staff, many writers) and it counts as press.  He could have played that card, but he didn't have to.  He previously interviewed one of the acts over the phone, and just dropped that artist a request on his twitter feed.  The artist himself green-lit the request.

- A

6

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: First photo pass to a concert! Lessons learned...

« on: May 10, 2013, 10:42:06 AM »

I have good experiences of using 70-200/2.8 IS II in events. 85/1.2 II is also very good lens for low light as well as 135/2L which you mentioned. Get close to capture THE FEELING. Check some of my Air Guitar World Championship photos from last year.

I've heard of this event.  Crazy.  Great, great shots.

- A

7

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: First photo pass to a concert! Lessons learned...

« on: May 09, 2013, 05:01:25 PM »

Can any concert vets tell me how strict the 'stay below the stage' mandate is?  Will I get bounced if I sneak the camera above stage-level?

- A

8

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: First photo pass to a concert! Lessons learned...

« on: May 09, 2013, 04:29:34 PM »

A few others...

9

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: First photo pass to a concert! Lessons learned...

« on: May 09, 2013, 04:22:34 PM »

A few hits and one clear miss (the drum shot) to show how much I still have to learn!

10

EOS Bodies - For Stills / First photo pass to a concert! Lessons learned...

« on: May 09, 2013, 03:58:57 PM »

I was fortunate enough to get a photo pass to shoot a rock concert in my area. 

I am not a pro photog by any stretch, but the chance to marry up my two great interests (music + photography) was too good to pass up.  I've attached my really crude 101-level experience and lessons learned from the activity.  I welcome the concert vets to straighten me out if I've come away with the wrong learnings.

Gear selection

• Faster wins.  Unless you are shooting a daytime outdoor show, you will 95% of the time be shooting close to wide open to avoid ISO values above 6400.  Faster glass will let you walk that back to 3200, 1600, etc. depending on the light.
• Closer wins.  Shorter focal lengths handle longer shutter speeds better.  The golden rule of a maximum shutter of 1 divided by focal length is about right.   So a 50mm lens can get by with a 1/50s shutter, but a 200mm lens will need a 1/200s shutter, which often will require disastrous ISO levels.
• So it's no surprise that I rarely see large sports glass off on the wings of concerts in large venues.  I don't think I've ever seen anything longer than an 70-300L at Coachella once the sun goes gown.  Most everyone I see in concert photo pits is carrying some sort of ultrawide (fishbowl, 14 prime, 16-35, etc.) and either a standard zoom (24-70 or 24-105) or prime (the 50 F/1.2 and the 135 F/2 are a regular sight).  Some folks pack the 70-200 as well.
• I recognize this point (closer = better) completely dismisses the value of different glass for framing and composition, but if you want a sharp shot in this light, you have to make tradeoffs, right?
• Also, your proximity to the stage, the size of the stage, etc. will drive the lengths you need.
• What I brought and what I used it for:
• Body = 5D3.  Not a selection issue for me as the alternative was my old T1i.
• 28mm F/2.8 IS.  Not super quick, but IS on such a wide angle is super useful in the dark.  Used for wide shots up close at the stage (two guitarists in frame together, wide stage shot, etc.) as well as venue shots from the sidelines. Used it 5% of the night.  More about that later.
• 50mm F/1.4.  This is my staple low light tool, but I noticed that it was front-focusing when I was setting up prior to the band coming out, and I didn't want to have to use MF.  It stayed in my bag until late in the night for some balcony shots as a result.  Used it for about 5% as well.  Need to set the AFMA on that and get it sorted.
• 70-200 F/2.8 IS II.  A flagship sports / photojournalist / wedding lens, but F/2.8 is not ideal for concert lighting.  That said, there aren't many faster options at this length (other than the impressive 135mm F/2 and the comically large (but equally impressive) 200mm F/2).  Though I was planning on using the 50mm most of the night, I ended up using this 90% of the time.  It fared better than expected on focusing in low light, but the concerns of length vs. shutter speed needs obviously came up, so the ISO had to climb.  The 70mm end was not wide enough just a handful of times, but I made do.

   
Shooting up front
       
I got to the stage before the set and one of the organizers was on stage.  I flagged him down and he explained the classic thing I've read about:

• I had fifteen minutes stage access, i.e. right at the stage (in front).  This is often phrased as being for three songs, but being a prog rock show, that could be 90 minutes.  So, for this show, it was stated as '15 minutes'.  Then I'd have to skedaddle.
• No flash, of course.
• No video, of course.
• In that first 15 minutes, my head had to stay below the level of the stage, i.e. on my rear-end or kneeling.  Thais was not a traditional pit -- it was a four foot stage at a concert hall. 
  
  • This ended up greatly limiting my framing.  I was limited to waist up shots of the players for the most part, and shooting the drum kit was simply not happening without framing out the bottom 30% of the kit (the drum risers were not particularly high at this event).
  • This requirement effectively killed the up close / wide opportunity of the 28mm lens.  I had the awful choice of 1/3 of the VF being blocked by the stage or my two rocking guitarists being stuck in the bottom corners of a wide shot (not a good look, even after perspective correction).
• For this show in particular, I could not mill about the aisles to shoot after the first fifteen minutes (house rules about blocking view or people leaving for the restrooms).

           

Camera Settings
       

• RAW only.  Say this ten times.  I didn't even bother with the JPG + RAW as my card was rather full already.  With ISO 3200+ and with crazily shifting lighting, RAW is really the only way to go anyway.  JPG is useful for some shooting needs, but here, RAW is the best call.
• Mode: I believe that Av, Tv and M all work (as always) provided you keep an eye on what you are not prioritizing. As a creature of habit, I shot aperture priority, but I was constantly working the triangle of Ap / shutter / ISO to get the best possible balance I could.   Call it 'manual shooting with metering for better exposure'.
• Default setting was wide open or perhaps 1/3 - 2/3 stop narrower, ISO 6400 (3200 with the fast primes, perhaps).  ISO and aperture adjusted to get a more desirable shutter speed.  Exposure was generally a shade under normal (like -1/3 or -2/3 EV) as you don't necessarily want the background fully exposed (your subject will be too bright).
• Standard (evaluative) metering -- I didn't need to mess with it at this event as the lighting was decent enough.  (Spot metering has been a prior call in some dark caves I've shot in the past.)
• One shot focusing.  It's the most accurate unless you want to capture a burst of some David Lee Roth jump kicks (and the house lights are on).  This was not that kind of show at all.
• Single point AF or the very small plus-shaped point cluster AF.  AF worked really well that night.  Lighting was decent.   Darker lighting + less modern AF glass = AF will hunt and you will miss shots.
• Focused and then reframed on the wide glass (those are more DOF forgiving), but largely moved my AF point to the subject in the desired framing for the longer zoom I was using.

Composition lessons learned
       

• Obvious, but must be restated -- shooting nearly fully open has a tiny working DOF.  F/1.4 - F/2 on the 50 prime is fine for a single subject, but if you want more than one musician in the frame, I had to do one of the following:
• Stop the aperture down to F/5.6 - F/8, which usually meant increasing the ISO even further (i.e. 8000+)
• Wait for the two musicians to be about the same distance away.  That happens less often than you'd like.
• Wait for the house lights to come up.
• Get further away, like on the balcony.  Larger distance = larger working DOF for a given aperture.
• Move your feet.  Unless you know a band very well, your principal subject might not be where you want them to be.
• Keyboards, mic stands can interrupt your framing, look unattractive, etc.  Again, move your feet.
• Knowing the songs really helps.  With an emotive frontman or musician, if you know when the hook drops or the solo starts, you can time your shots for a rock face, fist pump, gospel arms, etc.
• Don't forget the stage lighting.  Try to frame up the subject against a stage spotlight, or possibly just shoot the band member as a black silhouette in a field of color.  (Need to do that more next time.)

                       
Output / post-processing (note I'm somewhat odd in that I just use PS's Adobe Camera RAW instead of LR, Aperture, DXO, etc.)
       

• Skintones are flat and tough looking at these high ISO settings, even on my great low light rig.  Extreme care has to be taken to avoid saturating skin tones in post processing, or your rock star looks like he spent a week in a tanning bed.  Also, software that avoids oversaturating skin tones can often fail as the stage lighting (if you didn't back it out with RAW WB processing) pulls the skin tone out of 'skin tone range'.  I need to do selective color editing in post, but I never do.  More work than I'd like.  I just did macroscopic RAW adjustments like vibrance and saturation, but at a fraction of what I'd normally do for the aforementioned skin tone reason.
• White balance management is great with RAW, but I don't know if the goal is to subtract out the lighting tint on the subject or if I want to capture that as part of the composition.  I can do either, but I wasn't sure which to do.
• Noise reduction is unfortunately necessary as the ISOs are high.  I generally hate what this does to details, so I do it sparingly.
• Sharpness adjustments in RAW processing are a staple adjustment usually, but with low light it amplifies the noise.  So I generally did less sharpening to limit the noise reduction needed.

Please set me straight if I've misinterpreted the concert shooting experience with my statements above.  There may be a vital trick I am missing.

Thanks for your thoughts!

- A

11

Lenses / Re: Just got the canon 16-35 ii and having a hard time seeing the value in this uwa

« on: April 19, 2013, 07:52:48 PM »

I tried my 2x Mk1 on my 100L IS and it was a no go.

On that topic, from TDP:

"As a rule, but subject to change, the Canon lenses compatible with the Canon EF 2x III Extender include fixed focal length L lenses with focal lengths of 135mm and longer, zoom L lenses with at least 70mm of focal length on their wide end (the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS USM Lens excluded) and Canon TS-E Tilt-Shift lenses (though these are not included on Canon's official compatibility chart). The following list of discontinued lenses fitting these parameters are compatible, but may require camera microfocus calibration for accurate focusing (note that not all DSLR cameras support microfocus calibration):

Canon EF 200mm f/1.8 L USM Lens
Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L USM Lens (non-IS)
Canon EF 400mm f/2.8 L USM Lens (non-IS)
Canon EF 400mm f/2.8 L II USM Lens (non-IS)
Canon EF 500mm f/4.5 L USM Lens
Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6 L USM Lens"

Link = http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-Extender-EF-2x-III-Review.aspx
(pan down about halfway)

Who knew you could extend a tilt-shift?  You learn something new every day.

- A

12

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma Announces 18-35 f/1.8 DC HSM Art for APS-C

« on: April 18, 2013, 11:14:19 AM »

I was flummoxed when I heard that this thing is APS-C only.  Why?!  If this is a premium lens aimed at serious shooters, why go crop?  This is not a screaming need for the relatively few APS-C guys who spend big money on glass (i.e. birders, sports guys), so I can't make heads or tails of this.

Why not push for (idk) a 24-50 F/2 for the FF guys?  That would likely have a larger interest level.

- A

Now that's a lens I would buy.

It was offered somewhat in jest.  Half this forum would buy that lens.

- A

13

Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Sigma Announces 18-35 f/1.8 DC HSM Art for APS-C

« on: April 18, 2013, 10:37:31 AM »

I was flummoxed when I heard that this thing is APS-C only.  Why?!  If this is a premium lens aimed at serious shooters, why go crop?  This is not a screaming need for the relatively few APS-C guys who spend big money on glass (i.e. birders, sports guys), so I can't make heads or tails of this.

Why not push for (idk) a 24-50 F/2 for the FF guys?  That would likely have a larger interest level.

- A

14

Lenses / Sigma 18-35 F/1.8 just announced?!

« on: April 18, 2013, 02:24:00 AM »

When I saw a rumor listing for an F/1.8 zoom lens, I giggled and assumed it was the hoax du jour, late April fool's, etc.

Now I am not so sure:
http://photorumors.com/2013/04/18/sigma-18-35mm-f1-8-dc-hsm-lens-officially-announced/

And now I am sort of overwhelmed:
http://www.sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a_18_35_18/

So Sigma has the nerve to make a faster than F/2.8 zoom and they make it for APS-C?!.

Someone help me understand the market target for such a lens.  After all, I thought the people buying high end glass for their APS-C rigs are 7D users buying long primes for birding.  What APS-C users have been lamenting that their 17-55 F/2.8 IS isn't quick enough?  I would argue that as cool as such a new lens might be to use, this can't be a massive gap in the APS-C users' bag, right?

So so so confused.  Help me make sense of this, thx.

- A

15

Lenses / Re: I need a 24mm focal lenght Lens.. is the 24mm f2.8 IS right for me?

« on: April 17, 2013, 07:21:47 PM »

It'll be interesting to see how Canon does with new 35L and 50L revisions.  I'm guessing they'll be better than the 24-70 II, else you might as well take your chances with less expensive 3rd party alternatives.

Will be less impressive from a pure resolution / sharpness perspective, I'd guess. 

It seems that Canon's F/1.4 prime lenses gives up sharpness to some extent to pull off the crazy wide apertures.  To me, those are art / DOF / portrait lenses, not landscape / product / corner-to-corner lenses. 

For instance, with both the (beloved) 35L and 50L lenses, they are currently out-resolved sharpness-wise by non-L glass unless you are in the F/2 or wider neighborhood.   The venerable 50 F/1.4 trumps the 1.2L on all but center sharpness, and though I haven't seen a head to head, I'd wager the new 35 F/2 IS would out-resolve the 35L.

But then again, there's more to it than just sharpness.  I say that to this forum every week, it seems.   

- A