# HighSchool Football Shots 2nd time around



## c_pass (Sep 29, 2011)

I was able to go out to my lil brothers highschool game and here are a few from the many I took..

Image 1







Image 2






Image 3






Image 4






Image 5






Thanks for looking


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 29, 2011)

Tighter crop on a few of them would make them much better, otherwise nice shots.


----------



## gsgary (Sep 29, 2011)

You have got the action but not the focus


----------



## c_pass (Sep 29, 2011)

imagemaker46 said:
			
		

> Tighter crop on a few of them would make them much better, otherwise nice shots.



Thanks... Would you say image 1, 3 & 5?

Nikon D5100


----------



## c_pass (Sep 29, 2011)

gsgary said:
			
		

> You have got the action but not the focus



Thanks... Some of them I cropped from a larger image...

I used the auto focus on the lens on all the shots...

Should I be using the manual focusing on the lens?

Nikon D5100


----------



## gsgary (Sep 30, 2011)

c_pass said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




No, i would say your camera and lens are not capable of keeping up with the action


----------



## c_pass (Sep 30, 2011)

gsgary said:


> c_pass said:
> 
> 
> > gsgary said:
> ...



Ok..thanks!!!


----------



## imagemaker46 (Sep 30, 2011)

What were the camera settings for these photos?  shutter speed etc.


----------



## c_pass (Sep 30, 2011)

imagemaker46 said:


> What were the camera settings for these photos?  shutter speed etc.




image 1 (no crop)
F7.1
Shutterspeed 1/1600
ISO-800
Focal length 300mm


image 2 (cropped in alot)
F6.3
Shutterspeed 1/1250
ISO-800
Focal length 240mm



image 3 (cropped in)
F6.3
Shutterspeed 1/1250
ISO-800
Focal length 140mm


image 4 (cropped in)
F6.3
Shutterspeed 1/1250
ISO-800
Focal length 165mm


image 5 (Cropped in alot)
F5.6
Shutterspeed 1/1650
ISO-800
Focal length 65mm


----------



## gsgary (Oct 2, 2011)

It's not down to shutter speed 1/800 would be fast enough for most of them


----------



## BuS_RiDeR (Oct 2, 2011)

c_pass said:


> I was able to go out to my lil brothers highschool game and here are a few from the many I took..
> 
> Image 1



What if...  in #1.... you dropped the saturation a bit and sharpened it a little...  Then re-cropped it...  Kinda like this...






I used an unconventional crop...  But I just wanted to show a "for example".


----------



## imagemaker46 (Oct 2, 2011)

Those settings should have had everything sharp and stopped, I would say that the lens just isn't focusing fast enough.


----------



## brian_f2.8 (Oct 3, 2011)

If you are going to shoot sports, the 70-200 f2.8 is really worth the investment. That lens focus's really fast. Your body is ok but again not designed for sports.


----------



## c_pass (Oct 3, 2011)

imagemaker46 said:
			
		

> Those settings should have had everything sharp and stopped, I would say that the lens just isn't focusing fast enough.



Ok thanks for the insight

Nikon D5100


----------



## c_pass (Oct 3, 2011)

brian_f2.8 said:
			
		

> If you are going to shoot sports, the 70-200 f2.8 is really worth the investment. That lens focus's really fast. Your body is ok but again not designed for sports.



Cool... Thanks for the info

Nikon D5100


----------



## MT_Stringer (Oct 6, 2011)

Shoot tight, crop tighter. Ball, face and action make for some good images. Look yours over carefully and see where you could improve on your next game.
If I had your equipment, I would shoot everything at 300mm and aperture wide open unless the guy was about to run me over. Oh wait, that is what I do! 

Good luck. Keep on shooting.


----------



## John P Atl (Oct 27, 2011)

also check your horizions some seem a little off
you can fix those in photoshop or lightroom easy


----------



## MLeeK (Oct 27, 2011)

I doubt it's the focus that isn't keeping up, but the shutter speed. I see motion in some of them. What was the shutter speed on them?


----------



## c_pass (Oct 27, 2011)

MLeeK said:


> I doubt it's the focus that isn't keeping up, but the shutter speed. I see motion in some of them. What was the shutter speed on them?




image 1 (no crop)
F7.1
Shutterspeed 1/1600
ISO-800
Focal length 300mm


image 2 (cropped in alot)
F6.3
Shutterspeed 1/1250
ISO-800
Focal length 240mm



image 3 (cropped in)
F6.3
Shutterspeed 1/1250
ISO-800
Focal length 140mm


image 4 (cropped in)
F6.3
Shutterspeed 1/1250
ISO-800
Focal length 165mm


image 5 (Cropped in alot)
F5.6
Shutterspeed 1/1650
ISO-800
Focal length 65mm


----------



## MLeeK (Oct 27, 2011)

Count me wrong. Your shutters are great!!
What lens are you using for these? Did you do any post sharpening? Your 55-250 should work quite well for daytime shots like these. 
What are your picture settings in camera? Did you shoot in jpeg or in raw? Did you do any post processing/sharpen? Where are you hosting the images at to put the links here? That may be the problem and I didn't even think of it... If you have a free flickr or photobucket account or you uploaded to facebook and used that URL to post here that may be why we see soft. Do they look the same on your computer as they do here? Or are they sharper in your editing program?


----------



## c_pass (Oct 27, 2011)

MLeeK said:


> Count me wrong. Your shutters are great!!


Thanks alot!




MLeeK said:


> What lens are you using for these


I used my 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6 lens..





MLeeK said:


> Did you do any post sharpening?


I did not do any post sharpening at all, Just cropped some and ran levels on them in photoshop...




MLeeK said:


> What are your picture settings in camera?


Are you referring to Standard, Vivid, etc?? If so, it was on standard





MLeeK said:


> Did you shoot in jpeg or in raw?


Jpeg





MLeeK said:


> Did you do any post processing/sharpen?


No Sharpeing... Just cropped and adjusted the levels





MLeeK said:


> Where are you hosting the images at to put the links here?
> 
> That may be the problem and I didn't even think of it... If you  have a free flickr or photobucket account or you uploaded to facebook  and used that URL to post here that may be why we see soft.
> 
> Do they look the same on your computer as they do here?



Photobucket

After reading this, I did a google search on photobucket and compressions and seen that they do it.
I checked the file size of the image I posted here and its about 300 kb less than the original that I uploaded...go figure


This is the link on photobucket







Here is a link to the original file on my computer, uploaded to my own server










MLeeK said:


> Or are they sharper in your editing program?



I believe that its sharper on my computer period. The most noticeable to me is the runners facemask and #75's helmet (from the file on my server




Question for you, what photo service is the best to use?


----------



## MLeeK (Oct 27, 2011)

Gotta love the internet! 
A light post sharpening and they'd probably be extremely perfect. 
As for the in camera settings---I am unsure of what Nikon allows for. In canon you can adjust your sharpness, color saturation, contrast, etc for jpegs... If nikon has a similar option I'd also look at where it's set for sharpening there!


----------



## c_pass (Oct 27, 2011)

MLeeK said:


> Gotta love the internet!
> A light post sharpening and they'd probably be extremely perfect.
> As for the in camera settings---I am unsure of what Nikon allows for. In canon you can adjust your sharpness, color saturation, contrast, etc for jpegs... If nikon has a similar option I'd also look at where it's set for sharpening there!




Thanks for pointing that out, So I should just stop using photobuckets free account? lol

What other photo services should be used?


----------



## MLeeK (Oct 27, 2011)

No. Resize and sharpen for internet posting before you upload. Most of the on line services can handle anything 720px or less. Flickr goes up to 1000 on the long side. 
If you resize it then their software doesn't do it and you have the control of your own editing program.


----------



## c_pass (Oct 27, 2011)

MLeeK said:
			
		

> No. Resize and sharpen for internet posting before you upload. Most of the on line services can handle anything 720px or less. Flickr goes up to 1000 on the long side.
> If you resize it then their software doesn't do it and you have the control of your own editing program.



Thanks for the advice!

Nikon D5100


----------



## rambler (Oct 27, 2011)

Gee, I think these are great photos.  Set your focus in the center of the ring, then aim the focus at the eyes, or helmet if no eyes, use continuous burst mode, and continuos focus, not manual.  Are you using a monopod, or maybe the high school will allow a tripod, if you are not too close to the sideline.
Don't forget to go vertical, too, especially when just photographing one or two players.
Sometimes blur is a good way to show motion when panning after your subject from a side angle with a runner going by you.  The subject will be sharp and the background blurred.
1/640 to 1/1000 should be enough to freeze the action.
Don't forget Image Stabilization for handheld shots.  Try a 1.4 teleconverter to get even closer, if that takes a way an f/stop you can get it back by going to a higher ISO.


----------



## c_pass (Oct 28, 2011)

rambler said:


> Gee, I think these are great photos.  Set your focus in the center of the ring, then aim the focus at the eyes, or helmet if no eyes, use continuous burst mode, and continuos focus, not manual.  Are you using a monopod, or maybe the high school will allow a tripod, if you are not too close to the sideline.
> Don't forget to go vertical, too, especially when just photographing one or two players.
> Sometimes blur is a good way to show motion when panning after your subject from a side angle with a runner going by you.  The subject will be sharp and the background blurred.
> 1/640 to 1/1000 should be enough to freeze the action.
> Don't forget Image Stabilization for handheld shots.  Try a 1.4 teleconverter to get even closer, if that takes a way an f/stop you can get it back by going to a higher ISO.




Thanks rambler...

At these games, Im able to literally be on the sideline, I dont have a monopod though....
I dont think that my equipment allows me to use a teleconverter...unless I researched wrong..


----------



## MLeeK (Oct 28, 2011)

Personally I have a very hard time using a monopod for football. While it would sure as hell help me with the weight of my camreas, it gets in the way more often than not. I am running, crouching, bending... I wish I could manage it for football, but it just doesn't allow the range without smacking someone with the monopod or just plain missing the shot. 
That's not to say it won't work for you... What works for one is sometimes the opposite for another!


----------



## gsgary (Oct 28, 2011)

Photos do look crap on this site compared to others i go on, but these are probably soft due to the focus not being able to keep up


----------



## imagemaker46 (Oct 29, 2011)

MLeeK said:


> Personally I have a very hard time using a monopod for football. While it would sure as hell help me with the weight of my camreas, it gets in the way more often than not. I am running, crouching, bending... I wish I could manage it for football, but it just doesn't allow the range without smacking someone with the monopod or just plain missing the shot.
> That's not to say it won't work for you... What works for one is sometimes the opposite for another!



Unless you're using anything longer than a 300 2.8 a mono pod isn't necessary.  Having said that, if it is a struggle to hand hold a 70-200 2.8 it's time to do a little weight training to increase shoulder strength.  It doesn't take much to make a huge difference in how much more stable your camera  willfeel with even a little more strength.  Using a weight that is only a couple of pounds heavier than the body and lens is all it takes.  For example a typical 300 2.8 and a Nikon D3 or Canon 1D , together they weight around 10 pounds, using a 12-15 pound weight a few times a week will stablize and ad that little bit of strength.  Monopods are great for the longer lenses, but definately stick you to the ground and limit the ease of movement.


----------

