New Boxing Series

<p>Shameless plug: I am finalizing a show in Detroit for sometime in December of some medium format boxing-related images. The person curating and organizing the show and I think about 15-20 prints ought to do it. I created a PN gallery of 24 shots here, http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=903466. I'll make final decisions in a while, but in the meantime reactions, thoughts, comments are welcome especially is anyone thinks particular shot(s) are redundant, crappy, or boring in light of the whole project.</p>

<p>Though I've been shooting boxing for a while, the images here come out of two nights of fighting in an old, restored music theater converted for boxing. These are professional fights though of relative unknowns before smallish but rabid fans. I decided to use equipment wholly unsuited for sports, a Fuji 6x9 rangefinder shooting Fuji 800NPZ film. The lens maximum aperture is f/3.5 allowing 1/125 second exposure in the well-lit parts of the ring, and some lower elsewhere. I also used a slave and dual strobe for a number of shots away from the ring, though not too many made their way into the final edit. The film was scanned on an Epson v750.</p>

<p>All in all it was a fun project. The shallow DOF, the wacky lighting, and using a cumbersome, big camera next to guys shooting DSLR's made for good conversation. I know all the regular boxing shooters in Detroit, and they know me, but I did have to explain to one that the Fuji did not have a card. I did print up a few images on a wide-body HP Designjet in 18x24 and, putting the question of aesthetics aside, the 6x9 film prints up spectacularly. <br>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/9818257-md.jpg" alt="" width="680" height="640" /></p>

<p>Andy,<br>

I clicked the link and looked at the thumbnails. I almost stopped there, but went ahead and looked at each shot. I'm glad I did. I'm not too into boxing, but more into martial arts. So, I was looking more at content - what caught my attention and what could I relate to. I'm not experienced enough yet to comment on technical aspects of photography, so I won't even go there. Also, I'd be interested to see how you order them for presentation in the final cut.<br>

Left to right, top to bottom.<br>

#4 - really the first one that grabbed me. If you've got it in digital, you might want to edit out that lone light in the blackness - it kept pulling my eye from the subjects.<br>

#5 - appears his opponent was a giant, and stomping his head after the KO. I know niether of those were the case, but that's how it felt in looking at the photo.<br>

#8 - love the theater masks in the background, kind of contrasts or even mocks the darkness/mood/feel of the overall shot. It provided a good tension for me.<br>

#9 - tattooed warrior, but what's the secret being whispered in the background?<br>

#10 - one legged boxer? I knew a one-armed martial artist once - he was good too.<br>

#12 - I know that feeling, great capture.<br>

#13-14 - I didn't care for these at first, until I put myself in the place of the man down and felt the darkness closing in. I prefer 13 to 14, but once a person is inside the guy's mind both are good.<br>

# 15 - the decisive moment, though not what HCB had in mind.<br>

#17 - The door of the fighter's mind - keep it closed - this means you! It works!<br>

#18 - I love it!<br>

#19 - nice!<br>

None of these comments is supposed to have a negative connotation, so please don't read that into any of them. Again, I'll be anxious to know how you order them in the end.<br>

Thanks for sharing!<br>

DS Meador</p>

<p>Andy, you've got a wonderfull and very good series here. Your sense of framing within the photo is superb, something I see in almost every single photo here. You did a great job in capturing the atmosphere (as in being there) while keeping a dynamic though almost casual look partly because of distance used and partly because of perspective which I think is used very deliberately and effectively. It creates a sense of "small" as it should.</p>

<p>Not the best of scans though but you actually made a good choice going with the 6x9 from which the resulting prints should be very good. Depending on the amount of space in the venue they are going to be exhibited I would go for large prints.<br>

Thanks for showing these. I appreciate it.</p>

<p>The use of the "wrong" camera suits your sometimes unorthodox framing. I let the slideshow run through 3 or 4 times, and the effect is to feel the tension & the emotions in the arena. The limitations of the machinery mean large dark areas. Boxing is a very emotional sport isn't it? While seemingly purely physical. Ali, & all the other great ones (& their trainers) knew that.<br>

My favourite is the beer-bellied fan & his friend.</p>

<p>I don't have the time at present to look through your gallery, but I've taken a liking to this one you've got here, remember, sex sells</p>

<p>Had a look and like the subject and series. That said, the strobe's a bit harsh on #3 and i dont think the focus works on #20. You're not a magician, i know, but if only the chap in the green shirt wasnt there on #18 ;)</p>

<p>Best of luck with the show.</p>

<p>Andy,<br>

Took one more look through the shots after reading the other comments. I realized I typed "#19 - nice" but actually was referring to #20, not #19. I know the focus is not "perfect" in #20, but I think the focus is perfect for that shot. Long distance runners know the taste of their own blood in the back of their throats. Well, I bet every boxer you took pictures of has gone enough rounds that what they see is just what you captured in #20 - it's all there, but the focus is just not "right," but the fight goes on and they press on. I've had my own vision do that in training, thus my "nice!" in reference to the shot.<br>

DS Meador</p>

<p>Andy,<br>

Big up for going with unconventional camera and film. There are some great shots there (although the red is a bit repetitive). I'd be interested to know how many frames you shot in all. Next time, consider using colour IR film, available in 120 and other sizes but in limited supply from <a href="http://www.tarquinius.de/">this guy</a> . Rated at 400, but he reckons it can be pushed. Good luck with the show.</p>

<p>Some of this reminds me of Hopper. 1, 11, 13, 16, 20, 24 are the most interesting ones to me, with several others at least good enough for this particular project. I know you probably want a change of pace in scale or approach with a few of them, but 3, 17, and 23 either don't seem to fit or may be inadequate. There are also some that I think center the main subject too much (which is a tendency I have too) or box it in with too much symmetry. Ideally I think I'd edit out about 10 of these. That's my take from web views; prints might show something I'm not seeing.</p>

<p>Thank you all for the input.</p>

<p>DS- As to #20, I chose it over another frame where the focus was on the boxer with some deliberation. Still deciding whether to keep it, and will probably print it up to see what it looks like.</p>

<p>Ton- I think the scans from the Epson are really fine. What suffers is the downsampling from a scanned file almost 11,000 pixels on the long end (at 3200 DPI) to a Web display. I don't sharpen until the final output stage, that is until I make a print file, so the Web displays just typically get a quick USM pass before posting. I find that I can take the scan from the Epson, which I always pass through Digital ICE (you should see the amount of crud on a 6x9 negative, even from a good lab), sharpen through Aperture, and get a beautiful print off the Designjet. For this set, much of the frame area is underexposed, and the film and camera are pretty much the limit what you can get with the light, so there certainly is graininess in the underexposed areas.</p>

<p>Jack- boxing is unique in combining emotion and athleticism. When a fighter doesn't want it, the crowd knows within 30 seconds. It can get brutal then. There is really nothing like it, over 100 years of tradition and skill with severe consequences for a mistake. Compared to boxing, mixed martial arts or extreme cage fighting, is trash. I've shot a few of those spectacles for a local promoter, and it and the crowd that comes out for it are astonishingly sleazy.</p>

<p>Clive-- $18 for a roll is a little steep for me, though the results look interesting. I used about 25 rolls of 220 film during the two nights. I usually buy it in bulk from a vendor who sells expired film-- this batch was about a year out of date-- for about $4/roll. C41 developing is pretty cheap at my local lab, so the costs were not very high.</p>

<p>Ray-- we both know editing is the hard part. Thanks for the input.</p>

<p>I'm not sure why you think that a medium format rangefinder with ISO 800 film is "wholly unsuited for sports". Have a look at some classic boxing photographs, for that matter photographs of performances, and consider what kinds of cameras and film speed they were taken with. There are problems with the photographs that you have posted, and the problems have nothing to do with the camera or the film speed. I think that they have to do with the fact that you didn't believe in the camera - "wholly unsuited", in which case, if that is your view, why use it - and the fact that you apparently went through 500 negatives, or 250 per night, to get these shots. The series might have worked better if you had slowed down. Anyway, just my opinion.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Nice job overall Andy. I agree with Rory-absolutely no reason you can't use that Fuji MF camera. Like the others, i say needs some editing...for what it's worth, off the top of my head I liked: 1,2,4,8,12,15,16,17,19,20,21</p>

<p>I disagree that boxing is unique in it's athleticism and emotion.<br>

But this aint Sherdog.com :)</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I think these have a really painterly impressionistic quality to them. The color palette almost reminds of Chinese and Japanese poster art, very saturated and lush. It would actually be cool to see these printed as large posters, inked on cardboard poster stock. </p>