The Photo Snob Thread

J

JrDacks

Likes Bikes
Parents bought me a camera a few weeks ago for my birthday, just a D80 with stock 18 55 lense.



cant decide which one i like better out of these two





 
NCR600

NCR600

Likes Dirt
Ok, I take a few pictures of bands, and they almost always turn out shit because the dives in which the sort of bands I like never have proper front-of-stage lighting and my 17-50 f/2.8 isn't really fast enough for that sort of thing.

Anyway, I had a good night the other night and managed to get a handfull of good shots at very high iso. They're very grainy and not real sharp due to low exposure speeds. I don't normally like post-processing (unlike pretty much everyone who posts here) but I was looking for some advice on where I could go with these in PS. Of course any criticism on the shots would be most welcome too.



I love this shot even though it's a bit crap. Dude looks like a zombie!



The band is Cement Pig from Bendigo, and apparently banned from every venue in their hometown . The singer has all of the swagger and attitude of a young Bon Scott, with none of the charm or charisma. In a good way.



Anyway, I'd appreciate any post processing tips for these. The shit watermark was a quickie thrown up by my girlfriend in PS because she's a graphic designer type who didn't like me giving shots away to the show promotor without one.

All advice, abuse, criticism and tips will be taken in good humour!
 
Last edited:
leitch

leitch

Feelin' a bit rrranty
Looks kind of shit, Will.. The various different light temperatures mean the WB is all over the shop, the highlights are pulled back too far so as to become grey and lifeless (especially below the car), the background is distracting... It may be a composite of multiple images but so far that has achieved nothing.
 
CraigS

CraigS

Likes Dirt
Gluey_trails said:
Would like some feedback please.

Composite of a bunch of images.



Audi A8 4.2 TDI
Click to expand...
Most of your lighting can be fixed with some levels and curves tweeking. I'm certainly no expert but I had a quick 2 min go and came up with something I think looks a bit better. I won't post it up though unless you want me to.
 
AngoXC

AngoXC

Wheel size expert
NCR600 said:
~snip~
Click to expand...
1 and 3 aren't bad at all - 2 may give me nightmares however...

Only PP sorts of things I'd really be doing is trying to bump a bit of fill light (not too much or it will emphasize the noise) and even run the image through a noise reduction program.

Shooting at gigs etc can be hit or miss and it simply comes down to the location and how much light is around to play with. I've been able to shoot happily at ISO400 with a 2.8 zoom lens in the past where as other times, I've been struggling even at higher ISO with a faster prime lens. Timing is of up most importance though, especially with your 2.8 zoom - wait till the subject is in the light before clicking etc. The general rule is no flash photography but some bands may be happy if you use flash which can certainly help and if balanced correctly, not look too artificial.

Last option is really looking at a faster lens like the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 (recently acquired one and it's awesome!) or even the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 which is a bit wider and possibly more suitable if the location keeps everyone at closer quarters.

 
Last edited:
Jaydawgz

Jaydawgz

Likes Dirt
What shutter speed are you using ango?
I struggled at my last concert as if I had a had a shutter below 1/100 I got blurred photos, as there was a lot of action on the stage :p
 
wombat

wombat

Lives in a hole
NCR600 said:
All advice, abuse, criticism and tips will be taken in good humour!
Click to expand...
Tell the dude on the lighting desk that those red lights would be better served illuminating his lower intestine...

Seriously though, they're not that bad in your shots, red lighting can be a real prick though. In addition to what Angus said though, you might want to entertain cloning out any distracting background elements (say maybe the mic stands in the third pic).
IMO though, a lot of the time heavy post work isn't the best choice for gig work. With the exception of some cleaning up, exposure, WB and the like I don't like the idea of working them over too heavily. Of course there's exceptions, where a heavier hand may help enhance the impact and get the feeling of the show across, but otherwise you usually already have some pretty funky lighting, often a lot of contrast and nice elements like smoke and stuff.
 
leitch

leitch

Feelin' a bit rrranty
Marginally, but what are you trying to achieve with the multiple exposures? You've hidden the toned-down highlight under the car, but all that has done is make the highlights on the ground at the rear of the car appear more out of place and discontinuous.
 
A

alexx23

Likes Dirt
One from this afternoon, car photos, happy with the location, but the car isnt anything interesting. But hey, i love taking photos.



Looks a little underexposed now i have uploaded it , but you get the idea :)



Also , i keep being told by lightroom 3 (for mac) to update to 3.3, will this cost me more dollarzzz?
 
Gluey_trails

Gluey_trails

Likes Dirt
leitch said:
Marginally, but what are you trying to achieve with the multiple exposures? You've hidden the toned-down highlight under the car, but all that has done is make the highlights on the ground at the rear of the car appear more out of place and discontinuous.
Click to expand...
I only have 1 flash thus multiple exposures and to try and play with the effect of masking with multiple images. The highlights on the ground are from the down lights from the mirrors illuminating the ground for passengers to the door.

I'm not sure as to what you mean by your earlier post with the WB being out of whack... The different light temperatures are from differnt sort of lights... LED downlights on mirrors = Blue, Halogen inner lights = orange, Red Background lights = Red etc etc.

The composite of images has achieved what I could have only done with more flashes, a couple light boxes and a lot more time.

I'm not going to say it's the bees knees of any sort so I'm not expecting accolades and angels to fly down from heaven to suck my dick but I'm dealing with a subject which;

A) Doesn't have a uniform coloured lighting system
B) Limited to a backdrop which is local
C) Can only be lit by 1 single slave flash.

FWIW this is what the image came from
 
wombat

wombat

Lives in a hole
wombat said:
Stuff about PP and shit.
Click to expand...
So after writing that I remembered that I'd half processed a bunch of shots from late last year, a festival thingo.

When I looked at them I realised that I totally don't take my own advice, so um, don't listen to me.:)

Edit: ergh, colours are a bit borked, meh.

Also, Gluey: have you considered stopping down, cranking the flash power and doing multiple triggers on a long exposure?
 

Attachments

Last edited:
AngoXC

AngoXC

Wheel size expert
Jaydawgz said:
I struggled at my last concert as if I had a had a shutter below 1/100 I got blurred photos, as there was a lot of action on the stage :p
Click to expand...
I've posted this a few times but the rule of thumb for hand held shooting is to maintain a shutter speed above the reciprocal of your focal length (ie. 50mm = 1/50th of a second). Slower and you'll be risking blur. The exception is where IS/VR/OS etc is concerned - that reciprocal value can be 3-4 stops slower but you have to take into account your crop factor.

That image earlier was taken at 1/125th with a 200mm lens with OS turned on - good example of the effectiveness of OS however ISO was bumped up around 6400 according to the EXIF (but the fog machine kinda masked this :eek: )

I was fairly far back for that shot and I was using a slow lens - a faster 2.8 tele would offer at least 2 stops improvement in terms of ISO.

*shrugs*
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top