# beach volleyball



## imagemaker46 (Aug 12, 2013)

Here are a few from today.


----------



## jenniferrose (Sep 3, 2013)

The only thing I can see is that in 3, 4, and 6, the subjects in the foreground are out of focus. This ends up drawing my eye away from the central subject. Other than that, I think that these photos capture awesome moments in beach volleyball. My favorite would have to be the first one, as it captures a moment between players interacting in a non sports related setting.


----------



## mishele (Sep 3, 2013)

I play vball and I love the last one! Great set. =)


----------



## vintagesnaps (Sep 3, 2013)

Another nice set, I like the first one the best. I thought the games were done - or is this another event?. (nm looked it up)


----------



## OLaA (Sep 4, 2013)

2 and 5 are my favorite.  Great shots!


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 4, 2013)

jenniferrose said:


> The only thing I can see is that in 3, 4, and 6, the subjects in the foreground are out of focus. This ends up drawing my eye away from the central subject. Other than that, I think that these photos capture awesome moments in beach volleyball. My favorite would have to be the first one, as it captures a moment between players interacting in a non sports related setting.



3, 4 and 6 are out of focus? Where in the frame are you looking? The players are sharp. In #6 the players are looking directly at each other, even with the glasses it's obvious.  If the near player in this images was also sharp there would be no depth to the image.


----------



## sm4him (Sep 4, 2013)

#7 is my absolute favorite, followed closely by #2 and 4. But I like 'em all; nicely done! I've never tried shooting beach volleyball (what with the nearest beach being over 6 hours away), but I imagine it's a tough game to get good action shots.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 4, 2013)

sm4him said:


> #7 is my absolute favorite, followed closely by #2 and 4. But I like 'em all; nicely done! I've never tried shooting beach volleyball (what with the nearest beach being over 6 hours away), but I imagine it's a tough game to get good action shots.



It's easier than you might think. Having only to shoot 2 players per side. It's a matter of just following the ball. The near court players when they are serving the ball give hand signals that tell the server where to place the ball, once you understand that, you already know where the ball is heading.  At the pro level, like most it is a much faster game, especially when the men are playing, the spikes are going almost straight down, tougher to get the digs in the sand.  It's a great way to spend a sunny day.


----------



## Hooligan Dan (Sep 4, 2013)

imagemaker46 said:


> jenniferrose said:
> 
> 
> > The only thing I can see is that in 3, 4, and 6, the subjects in the foreground are out of focus. This ends up drawing my eye away from the central subject. Other than that, I think that these photos capture awesome moments in beach volleyball. My favorite would have to be the first one, as it captures a moment between players interacting in a non sports related setting.
> ...



My thoughts exactly. The ball, unless the ball and athlete are moving parallel to the camera, is rarely going to the in focus if the athlete is. And #6 is just good layering. My guess is Jennifer is probably pretty new to this.


----------



## cbarnard7 (Sep 4, 2013)

Awesome pictures! I just would have like to see more butts...that's normally why I watch these events on tv.  . But seriously, great shots! Captured all aspects of the game.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 4, 2013)

Hooligan Dan said:


> imagemaker46 said:
> 
> 
> > jenniferrose said:
> ...



Thanks Dan, I had the same thoughts on this.


----------



## kathyt (Sep 4, 2013)

Nice set imagemaker.


----------



## amolitor (Sep 4, 2013)

jenniferrose is perfectly correct that having a giant OOF object in the foreground is visually distracting. Pointing out some technicalities that explain why it's OOF doesn't change the fact that it's distracting. #3 in particular is irritating because a) it hides the athlete's face and b) the ball isn't actually that OOF, it's just soft.

I am pretty sure that the big OOF object in the foreground an idiom in sports photography, but I'm not convinced that it's a good one, and it most certainly doesn't work 100% of the time. To be visually strong rather than weak it needs to be more or less unobtrusive leaving the subject obvious and clear, _and_ ideally the OOF object is both recognizable and relevant to the context. The ball in #4 is excellent, the ball in #3 is crap.

Now, you can roar away about how I must not shoot sports (I don't), and therefore I cannot understand how it's hard to accomplish all this in one frame. Feel free. The fact that I don't shoot sports does not mean either that I cannot see, or that producing sub-par pictures is OK due to degree of difficulty.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 4, 2013)

You have your opinion and I respect that. By the way it's called a volleyball, not a big OOF.  Would the shots look better as good action shots without the ball? It's not really too difficult to accomplish this all in one shot, I could have shot it at f11-22 and had everything from the ball to the background in focus, however that's not how I do things.

 I have no reason to roar away about how you don't have a clue about shooting sports, or that you believe sub-par pictures are ok due to a degree of difficulty.  You have an opinion, that's fine. But don't try and bait me, this isn't a fishing derby.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Sep 4, 2013)

Guess photographers shooting for SI aren't doing this right either.

NHL news, scores, stats, fantasy - Hockey - SI.com


----------



## amolitor (Sep 4, 2013)

vintagesnaps said:


> Guess photographers shooting for SI aren't doing this right either.
> 
> NHL news, scores, stats, fantasy - Hockey - SI.com





Oh look, a contextually relevant, recognizable object which so far from detracting from the main subject (the athlete) is quite muted (darker toned) and actually creates a line pointing directly AT the athlete without being in the way, or being visually distracting.

That's exactly what I was talking about, thanks for the really great example of what I was describing as a good use of this idiom.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 4, 2013)

Tell you what amolitor, if I ever need any tips on how to shoot static flowers or sleeping babies you'll be the first person I check with.  I have to say that I'm not really too thrilled with the hockey shot, I know that is a standard pose, there are just so many poses you can do with hockey players and a stick.


----------



## runnah (Sep 4, 2013)

I disagree with Andrew and agree with 46 on this one.


----------



## amolitor (Sep 4, 2013)

Oh, I hardly know anything about flowers and babies, I just muddle through. But feel free to ask!


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 4, 2013)

amolitor said:


> Oh, I hardly know anything about flowers and babies, I just muddle through. But feel free to ask!



Oh sorry, the only pictures I've seen of yours were a flower and a baby.


----------



## amolitor (Sep 4, 2013)

imagemaker46 said:


> amolitor said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, I hardly know anything about flowers and babies, I just muddle through. But feel free to ask!
> ...



Well, those are certainly things I take pictures of. I just don't claim to have any special knowledge.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 4, 2013)

Some fields of photography require a knowledge of the subject and others don't, shooting sports does require an understanding of each sport.  Whatever works for the individual.


----------



## gsgary (Sep 4, 2013)

Only one bum shot


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 4, 2013)

gsgary said:


> Only one bum shot



I do have lots more in the "personal file"


----------



## vintagesnaps (Sep 4, 2013)

That photo was literally the first thing I saw when I looked at SI's NHL page. I would think the stick is recognizable (but with hockey at least where I live you never know) and no it's not obscuring the subject but I think it can work either way. I never thought about it to realize I use that technique and not just when I've been shooting hockey. I may have something in the foreground out of focus and partially obscuring what is in focus, or not, it depends on what it is.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 4, 2013)

I'm doing a shoot with 7-8 hockey players tomorrow for some newspaper ads and will probably be using that pose for a couple of them, I have a few ideas for the others, but only have 30 minutes for the shoot before practice starts. I wonder sometimes just how much these "creative" directors understand photography and what's involved in setting this stuff up.


----------



## amolitor (Sep 4, 2013)

vintagesnaps said:


> That photo was literally _etc etc_


What? I have no idea where you're going here.

Anyways, go find me a picture on SI.com where the subject's face is hidden behind the ball, or the stick, or the wall, or the fan, or, well, anything. You know what SI does with those pictures? It doesn't publish them.


----------



## Hooligan Dan (Sep 4, 2013)

I had a long thought out response to all of this then I deleted it. Long story short, pro photogs shoot sports with very shallow DOF to single out the subject. A ball out of focus is far less distracting than a subject lost in the background because a deep DOF is used. A sports (ball)sports action photo without the ball is completely useless in almost every case, so it needs to be there. Layering, which in many sports is unavoidable, is also a standard professional sports practice(and in photojournalism in general). I was recently told by my editor that I'm not layering enough.

 Google olympic beach volleyball. There are countless shots similar to these shot by AP, SI and any other large publication you can find. Same goes for soccer, baseball, rugby, football. 

If you don't like that style that's fine. But it is the way sports are shot on an amateur and pro level. I hate photos of babies, flowers, selective coloring and I'm not particularly good that them. And I really hate babies dressed as flowers. But does that mean that style of photo, which is everywhere, is the wrong way of shooting a baby?


----------



## Hooligan Dan (Sep 4, 2013)

amolitor said:


> vintagesnaps said:
> 
> 
> > That photo was literally _etc etc_
> ...



Associated Press. They cover far more sporting events than SI does and they publish them every single day.

London Olympics Beach Volleyball Women


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 4, 2013)

Hooligan Dan said:


> I had a long thought out response to all of this then I deleted it. Long story short, pro photogs shoot sports with very shallow DOF to single out the subject. A ball out of focus is far less distracting than a subject lost in the background because a deep DOF is used. A sports (ball)sports action photo without the ball is completely useless in almost every case, so it needs to be there. Layering, which in many sports is unavoidable, is also a standard professional sports practice(and in photojournalism in general). I was recently told by my editor that I'm not layering enough.
> 
> Google olympic beach volleyball. There are countless shots similar to these shot by AP, SI and any other large publication you can find. Same goes for soccer, baseball, rugby, football.
> 
> If you don't like that style that's fine. But it is the way sports are shot on an amateur and pro level. I hate photos of babies, flowers, selective coloring and I'm not particularly good that them. And I really hate babies dressed as flowers. But does that mean that style of photo, which is everywhere, the wrong way of shooting a baby?




Thanks for this Dan.


----------



## amolitor (Sep 4, 2013)

Layering, sure. Sports has depth, go figure. Shoving a great bloody ball in front of someone's face is, well, let's just say that's a subset of the layering technique, and not one that is as widely used.

I'm just gonna let that AP photo tell the story for me, really. That's a fine.. example.


----------



## Hooligan Dan (Sep 4, 2013)

How's about Reuters? http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/euroaction/bp11.jpg

Getty  with an oof ball and a big oof player in the foreground:  http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/euroaction/bp20.jpg

Reuters  at it again but with water this time:  http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/oly2012_080212/bp7.jpg

oof  birdie, racket and an obscured face:  http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/oly2012_080212/bp92.jpg

Just because you are unfamiliar with examples, and apparently unfamiliar with the work of a lot of sports photographers, doesn't mean you're correct about it not being a widely used technique. It is everywhere. OOF equipment, obscured faces, large oof objects in the foreground.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 4, 2013)

The ignorant rarely admit that they don't understand.  amolitor takes pictures of flowers and has admitted that he doesn't shoot any sports. He has an opinion based on a field of photography that he doesn't understand.  He will argue the point to death, regardless of the photos that are presented to him.  amolitor, just say, I don't like the photos, and leave it at that, there is no reason for you to try and convince me or anyone else that a key part of the photo doesn't belong.


----------



## gsgary (Sep 4, 2013)

The 3rd shot if you had moved to the right 2 feet we would have had full cleavage shot who cares about the ball


----------



## Woodsman (Sep 4, 2013)

I enjoyed the whole set with #7 then #2 being my favorites.  And I am not bothered by any of the out of focus objects at all in these action shots.


----------



## SCraig (Sep 4, 2013)

Very nice shots in my opinion.  Detractors can say what they will, but sometimes you just don't have a half hour to get things exactly where they need to be for a studio shot.  Sports shots have MOTION, something that static photographs do not.  You either get the shot that is presented, as it is presented, or miss it entirely.  The players aren't going to pose for the photographer until the game is over.


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 4, 2013)

gsgary said:


> The 3rd shot if you had moved to the right 2 feet we would have had full cleavage shot who cares about the ball



Also in the "personal file"


----------



## amolitor (Sep 4, 2013)

imagemaker46 said:


> The ignorant rarely admit that they don't understand.



Really? It's me, huh? You're the one who puts photos up, and then fights to the death rather than accept that one of them might not be awesome. Grow a set.

All the examples Hooligan Dan posted just now? Faces clearly visible. I think my point is made.

I'm done here.


----------



## ratssass (Sep 4, 2013)

imagemaker46 said:


> The ignorant rarely admit that they don't understand.  amolitor takes pictures of flowers and has admitted that he doesn't shoot any sports. He has an opinion based on a field of photography that he doesn't understand.  He will argue the point to death, regardless of the photos that are presented to him.  amolitor, just say, I don't like the photos, and leave it at that, there is no reason for you to try and convince me or anyone else that a key part of the photo doesn't belong.



...pot,meet kettle


----------



## pixmedic (Sep 4, 2013)

Lets try and keep this within the sprit of the post, which was to share some pictures. 

If SI, Reuters, or any other sports photography outlet wishes to comment on these pictures, they are more than welcome to give their professional opinion. lets keep things to our usual civil and non personal discourse please.


----------



## Tailgunner (Sep 4, 2013)

Cool action set, I love # 7


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 4, 2013)

amolitor said:


> imagemaker46 said:
> 
> 
> > The ignorant rarely admit that they don't understand.
> ...



You've only made one point, that you clearly don't know anything about sports photography, which you have admitted to.  Perhaps I'll post a few flower pictures for you to comment on.


----------



## ratssass (Sep 4, 2013)

:mrgreen:


----------



## mishele (Sep 4, 2013)

You guys are cute and all but...


----------

