Crappy pics from INDYSX
- Thread starter IndyMX
- Start date
- Aug 2, 2000
- 13,504
- 19
oh now, stop harshing on your own gig, Indo! They look good to me.
of course, I'm tone deaf in both eyes, so take that with a grain of salt. ;)
of course, I'm tone deaf in both eyes, so take that with a grain of salt. ;)
No, you did the right thing by bringing it. How will you ever learn from your mistakes if you never offer yourself the opportunity? I don't know how many SX races you have shot, but I can tell you that mine didn't look that great the first few times out there either. If it's something that you love to do, put the time and effort into it and the results will come. My first suggestion is to crank up the ISO. The 20D handles high iso stuff really well.
"keeper ratio" if only...
truth is we all get some fuzzys, headless riders... :)
The vintage race I was at...I was so pumped by what I saw on the camera lcd, for some particualr shots....but the "real" picture...DANG ! my heart sunk..
I had lost focus of the rider, but got a real sharp image of the background..
cameras fault of course! :)
truth is we all get some fuzzys, headless riders... :)
The vintage race I was at...I was so pumped by what I saw on the camera lcd, for some particualr shots....but the "real" picture...DANG ! my heart sunk..
I had lost focus of the rider, but got a real sharp image of the background..
cameras fault of course! :)
I hate to admit my keeper rate! Off the top of my head, I'd say it's about 50 percent "decent shots" and about 1% that I REALLY like. Catching a good moment AND getting it technically right is NOT easy! In my case, without some luck, I'd get nothing. Then of course from the stands, you are really limited in comp, from the floor you can setup where you know the shots will be good, and then of course get there before all the other photogs do :)
Same thought as Squid (as if I'd disagree with anything he says, lol!), I use 400 outside on good light days, 1600 worked better than I thought indoors in crappy stadium lighting. They are a tad grainy, but so are the shots from the big guys. A little post process noise reduction does wonders.
Same thought as Squid (as if I'd disagree with anything he says, lol!), I use 400 outside on good light days, 1600 worked better than I thought indoors in crappy stadium lighting. They are a tad grainy, but so are the shots from the big guys. A little post process noise reduction does wonders.
My first few times shooting at a SX were very disheartening so don't get discouraged. As a start until you are comfortable shooting full manual indoors I'd try cranking the ISO up to 800 or 1600, 800 likely would have been plenty at Indy and then shooting AV mode and play with the aperture at 2.8, 3.2, 3.5 and even 4.0 if you have enough light to keep the shutter speed up around 1/400 or above.
Also both of those look like you may have been panning with the rider, that adds to the difficulty as it's very easy to lose your focus spot, are you using center point only for AF?
Also both of those look like you may have been panning with the rider, that adds to the difficulty as it's very easy to lose your focus spot, are you using center point only for AF?
I have finally got some of my crappy pics!
will pattison
Sponsoring Member
- Jul 24, 2000
- 439
- 0
indy, you did fine! the truth is that even a shutter speed of 1/400 isn't THAT high, and what you shot at 1/180 and 1/350 certainly isn't. 400 seems a nice compromise that gets a lot of wheelspin but still gives you good chance of a sharp image. however, i think that until you get up around 800, there will always be some unsharpness. there's a lot of vibration in the subject that's happening at higher frequencies, and that's just physics. until you get over 1/1000, it's just tough.
either that, or i just suck, because i'm almost always unhappy with my sharpness at anything slower.
:whoa:
squid? crash? your thoughts?
wp.
either that, or i just suck, because i'm almost always unhappy with my sharpness at anything slower.
:whoa:
squid? crash? your thoughts?
wp.
