Alright, now that I'm awake and all that, noticed that I might have started on the wrong foot. Hahaha... No matter! Whatever I'm uploading here is going into another word document on my computer, which I'll compile and eventually upload one shot or something...
Aperture
It can almost be seen as an obsession between music photographers that a large aperture lens is a typical must have! The AF 50mm f/1.8D, and AF 85mm f/1.8D are probably the first on the list for the budget conscious shooter. Maybe even the additional wide-angle (which won't exactly be wide angle, but at least wider the the above-mentioned) AF 35mm f/2D.
Understanding the consequences of aperture size is vital before one ventures into the realm of lenses with a constant aperture throughout length of the zoom. Having such a feature is definitely good to have, but assess your needs before dropping the bomb!
When I first started out low light photography, specifically music photography, my understanding was simple. Switch to the AF 50mm f/1.8D, (by the way, I almost always only use manual mode, cos I like to be in control) turn aperture to 1.8, before playing with shutter speed, before having my ISO as a last resort.
Loaning the AF-S VR 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED changed a lot of my perspective on photography. Throughout my (arguably) first music gig shoot, I was using f/4 (greater zoom = shallow depth of field) so that I would get arguably sharper images all around. Using f/2.8 was really a matter of REALLY close up and single-pointed sharpness. I made no fuss in turning up my camera to ISO 800 (which, for me, is normally defaulted at 200), as I kept my shutter speed at 1/50 of a second to freeze motion (They weren't really moving around the stage that quickly).
Thing about music photography that even I made the mistake of was that it would be dark, like REALLY REALLY dark. That's not the case! The audience needs to see the performer too! Some form of light(s) will be present! The only exception would be at the audience! Which would not be lighted up for obvious reasons.
So for this section, really, I won't assess for the individual. But rather, I'd advice one to go ahead and spend a little to loan the lens of your dream, and assess your needs based on it. For those residing in Singapore, like me! You can go ahead to this place, Camera Rental Centre. It has great rates and rather speedy service.
Monday, January 4, 2010
Music Photography (Techniques:1)
I'm writing this article due to the lack of articles explaining music photography, or in specific, concert photography techniques. I must profess that I myself am an amateur in this realm, being newly introduced into photography myself. Whatever I post on this blog is initially only for my own reference as I progress, but I'll be more than happy to help should anyone wish it.
Low Light Photography
Probably the very basis of music photography lies in low light photography techniques. Many a times we find ourselves in dark pubs, night settings in outdoor stages. The main difference of music photography and other events photography is the lack of ability to engage the use of flash photography.
This basically bars us from a very powerful tool in sculpting our art. No matter! Most of the time even if we are allowed, I would think it only respectful to not stun the performing artist with more sudden onsets of lights.
This leaves us with 3 options. ISO, shutter speed, and aperture size. Allow me to list the advantages and disadvantages of engaging either of the abovementioned.
ISO
This awesome tool allows us to capture more light in the absence of ability to use a larger aperture or slower shutter speed. The reason for ISO as the first mention is because this is the main advantage of digital photography (or so I would like to think). Gone are the days when we're restricted to only 1600 being the maximum ISO on film. With the newest technologies, we're scaling numbers of 102,400! That's almost past our ability of our eyes to witness light!
The relevance of this to music photographers? GET A NIKON D3S! No, I kid. Hahaha... Not all of us can own a Pro level camera such as the above, but let us at least learn what we can do with what we're given with.
On my D90, I've got ISO levels up to 3,200. However, if I want quality pictures (ie. fit to be posters), personally I only accept the noise levels of up to 800. Anything above that is rather noisy. Especially so if you are shooting a lighted subject against a sea of darkness. The black won't be as smooth (albeit you can photoshop it off, I'm more keen on getting it right off the bat).
At this point in time, I would advice for users to check with some test shots at which level ISO can you accept the noise level. The higher ISO noise you can accept, the faster your shutter speed, the greater your f/number (hence more things being sharper).
Shutter Speed
This is another issue that plagues music photographers. There are 2 types of musicians.
The latter won't be as easy. To freeze action, I find 1/100 as the bare minimum. Optimum for me being 1/125. As a result, it is inevitable that the ISO must rise, either that or setting to a lower f/number to compensate.
Hence, shutter speed is basically very dependent on your target and the rate of movement.
Aperture
This is the most problematic one. A lot of theory and science revolves around this. In addition, its rather late into the night (ie. I'm sleepy), thus I shall continue another time. In the meantime, here are a few read-up articles for reference before diving deep into the subject.
Low Light Photography
Probably the very basis of music photography lies in low light photography techniques. Many a times we find ourselves in dark pubs, night settings in outdoor stages. The main difference of music photography and other events photography is the lack of ability to engage the use of flash photography.
This basically bars us from a very powerful tool in sculpting our art. No matter! Most of the time even if we are allowed, I would think it only respectful to not stun the performing artist with more sudden onsets of lights.
This leaves us with 3 options. ISO, shutter speed, and aperture size. Allow me to list the advantages and disadvantages of engaging either of the abovementioned.
ISO
This awesome tool allows us to capture more light in the absence of ability to use a larger aperture or slower shutter speed. The reason for ISO as the first mention is because this is the main advantage of digital photography (or so I would like to think). Gone are the days when we're restricted to only 1600 being the maximum ISO on film. With the newest technologies, we're scaling numbers of 102,400! That's almost past our ability of our eyes to witness light!
The relevance of this to music photographers? GET A NIKON D3S! No, I kid. Hahaha... Not all of us can own a Pro level camera such as the above, but let us at least learn what we can do with what we're given with.
On my D90, I've got ISO levels up to 3,200. However, if I want quality pictures (ie. fit to be posters), personally I only accept the noise levels of up to 800. Anything above that is rather noisy. Especially so if you are shooting a lighted subject against a sea of darkness. The black won't be as smooth (albeit you can photoshop it off, I'm more keen on getting it right off the bat).
At this point in time, I would advice for users to check with some test shots at which level ISO can you accept the noise level. The higher ISO noise you can accept, the faster your shutter speed, the greater your f/number (hence more things being sharper).
Shutter Speed
This is another issue that plagues music photographers. There are 2 types of musicians.
- Those that stay still
- Those that CAN'T stay still
The latter won't be as easy. To freeze action, I find 1/100 as the bare minimum. Optimum for me being 1/125. As a result, it is inevitable that the ISO must rise, either that or setting to a lower f/number to compensate.
Hence, shutter speed is basically very dependent on your target and the rate of movement.
An interesting effect I like to capture is when the rest of the instrument playing members are severely active with a rather passive singer, coupled with a slower shutter speed, does a lovely effect of freezing one yet showing motion and activity within the band.
Aperture
This is the most problematic one. A lot of theory and science revolves around this. In addition, its rather late into the night (ie. I'm sleepy), thus I shall continue another time. In the meantime, here are a few read-up articles for reference before diving deep into the subject.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)