Low light action shots

[mrutledge]

Due to injury I was able to get some pictures of my team playing hockey this past week. As expected, many of the shots were blurred due to slow shutter speeds required for the lighting situation. So, what's the secret? A flash would simply light up the plexi-glass and over-expose everything. Different lense? Different camera settings? Some of the pictures were taken with the dial on auto. Most were taken with the dial on "action."

Here are a couple examples of what turned out and what didn't.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/181/463741992_0fa30a3d50.jpg?v=0
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/181/463743094_348b9598cf.jpg?v=0
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/225/463748431_f58e393920.jpg?v=0

The camera is a pentax k100d with the 18-55 lense. Most of the pictures were taken with the thing zoomed in all the way. I know a different lense would get me closer to the action. I'm open to suggestions on that one.

Thanks all!
-Matt

[TrailTJ]

If you are shooting at ISO100 you could adjust to something like 400 or 800. 400 will give you 2 more stops, 800 would be 3 stops. A different(longer) lens could worsen the blur at a slow shutter speed with camera movement. The higher you go with the ISO, the more noise you might get in the image.

I might try using a flash, The only way to get away with it would be either off camera somewhere(watching for bad reflections in glass), or on camera not shooting directly into the glass to avoid glares. Off camera might be better. I think you might need a pretty powerful flash to light something like this and make it look natural.

Another thing you could try is shoot it in raw, I have had some bad exposures shot in raw that I have been able to salvage in camera raw(PS). This method goes against trying to get a good exposure in the first place and is kind of like cheating...but it might work.

Any one or all of these combined may work. I am sure there are other ways to go about shooting something like this that would work great. Another thing that might help, at least with the color, would be a custom white balance.

[mrutledge]

All interesting suggestions. I was set on "auto-ISO" so I really have no idea what it was actually using. I'll play around with that next time I'm out.

When I get my new flash I'll see if I can get something worked out with an off camera set up. Remind me to order the flash from someplace with a no questions asked repair/warranty program. That's just asking for a stray puck or stick. :D

Funny you mention the color. Our jerseys (white/yellow) are in pretty bad shape. That's one thing I'm not too bummed about.

I'm not opposed to touching up photos, just unskilled and currently tool-less.

Thanks for the info!
-Matt

If you are shooting at ISO100 you could adjust to something like 400 or 800. 400 will give you 2 more stops, 800 would be 3 stops. A different(longer) lens could worsen the blur at a slow shutter speed with camera movement. The higher you go with the ISO, the more noise you might get in the image.

I might try using a flash, The only way to get away with it would be either off camera somewhere(watching for bad reflections in glass), or on camera not shooting directly into the glass to avoid glares. Off camera might be better. I think you might need a pretty powerful flash to light something like this and make it look natural.

Another thing you could try is shoot it in raw, I have had some bad exposures shot in raw that I have been able to salvage in camera raw(PS). This method goes against trying to get a good exposure in the first place and is kind of like cheating...but it might work.

Any one or all of these combined may work. I am sure there are other ways to go about shooting something like this that would work great. Another thing that might help, at least with the color, would be a custom white balance.

[TrailTJ]

Not a problem, they were just some ideas that came to mind.

With the color thing, I know in lighting situations like that(high-bay high pressure sodium and the like) the color can be a PITA. Custom white balance helps out quite a bit. I understand on your situation with touching up the photos, although it is more important to shoot things right and not have to do much touch up, than shoot things wrong and have to do a lot of touch up. So maybe it isn't a bad thing.

[Jocko]

Matt,

Those are some tough shooting conditions. Even with a 2.8, long lens it's hard to get enough light. I shoot my daughter's gymnastics in those conditions. I shoot in aperture priority and open the lens to 2.8. Even then I am forced to shoot upwards of 800iso. Sometimes I can go down to 400 but not very often.

Speedlites and/or strobes would be ideal in our situations but they would need to be mounted high and shooting down. If they are too low they may dstract the players. I read a thread not too long ago where a guy mounted strobes to light a rink. The shots were awesome. If I find it I will post it.

Here are your pics with a little color and levels adjusting.

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y144/cj3185002/463748431_f58e393920.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y144/cj3185002/463743094_348b9598cf.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y144/cj3185002/463741992_0fa30a3d50.jpg

[ColoradoSkier]

I know the pro rinks have a strobe system that photogrpahers plug into (wirelessly most likely). You might check with management and see if they installed one here. It isn't likely, but it is possible...

[Sound_Man]

This was shot with a cheapo digital camera and no flash. I like the way it came out but it was not intentional at all.

http://www.colorado4x4.org/vbb/attachment.php?attachmentid=6281&d=1177081917

Low light or difficult lighting (constant change) is all my band ever gets to deal with.

http://www.colorado4x4.org/vbb/attachment.php?attachmentid=6282&stc=1&d=1177082490

[mrutledge]

Matt,

Those are some tough shooting conditions. Even with a 2.8, long lens it's hard to get enough light. I shoot my daughter's gymnastics in those conditions. I shoot in aperture priority and open the lens to 2.8. Even then I am forced to shoot upwards of 800iso. Sometimes I can go down to 400 but not very often.


Thanks. I'll have to look into how do drive my camera to do all that and see if it helps.


Speedlites and/or strobes would be ideal in our situations but they would need to be mounted high and shooting down. If they are too low they may dstract the players. I read a thread not too long ago where a guy mounted strobes to light a rink. The shots were awesome. If I find it I will post it.

Here are your pics with a little color and levels adjusting.


Thanks for the touch up work! Again, I need to buy and learn some software.

I know the pro rinks have a strobe system that photogrpahers plug into (wirelessly most likely). You might check with management and see if they installed one here. It isn't likely, but it is possible...

The thought of that makes me drool. While this is not a pro rink by any means, I know at least one NHL team does pre-season work there. Just maybe...

Thanks all!
-Matt

[TrailTJ]

I know the pro rinks have a strobe system that photogrpahers plug into (wirelessly most likely). You might check with management and see if they installed one here. It isn't likely, but it is possible...

That would be the awesome. I love my pocket wizard set up, I can't imaging shooting with a strobe system like that...:cool: Matt, you should look into photoshop cs3 or at photoshop elements. Elements isn't too pricey. You would be amazed at what photoshop is capable of.

[Jake_Blues]

I'm just talking out my butt here, but I would personally use a relatively wide angle lens and get as much light into the camera as possible so the shutter speed could stay fast enough to catch the action, then take advantage of having lots of megapixels to crop the part of the picture I really wanted, and maybe a little image editing magic to take care of the rest.

My camera (Sony DSC-F828) has a nice lil warning light that comes on when you're shooting without enough light.

-E

[Jocko]

f2.8 is still f2.8 whether you're shooting 17mm or 600mm. Your aperture controls the amount of light, not your focal distance :).

[Jake_Blues]

f2.8 is still f2.8 whether you're shooting 17mm or 600mm. Your aperture controls the amount of light, not your focal distance :).

Yea, but in my case I'm dealing with a zoom lens that is fixed to the camera, so I'm stuck with what I've got for glass. So I can shoot lower f/stops at shorter focal lengths.

If you have a nice big beautiful fast 300mm lens, go for it ;) But I'd imagine in most cases, your average photographer's fastest lens is going to be a relatively wide angle one.

-E

[Jocko]

Touche