Ian Shalapata Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <p>The current issue of Sports Illustrated (Vol 109, No. 23) is a collection of sport's most dramatic photographs of 2008. Staff photographer Heinz Kluetmeier says, "You have to be ready and you have to be lucky," in order to capture the "wow" photo. However, many of the featured photogs speak about picking the right photo from all the frames of the shot that they have.<br> There's no "3 round burst" on a camera. When shooting 8 frames a second, isn't it more of "you're going to get the shot" rather than being particularly lucky or ready?</p> Ian Shalapataipsfoto.com | info@ipsfoto.comFreelance Multimedia Journalist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjjackson Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <p>hi ian, i may sound naive, but it never occurred to me why someone might need to care about frames per second until i read your post. i am so used to manual cameras that i never understood the value of this feater, i sorta wish i had remained ignorant. maybe the luck he refers to is bestowed upon the athlete?</p> <p>rj</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffs1 Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <blockquote> <p>When shooting 8 frames a second, isn't it more of "you're going to get the shot...?</p> </blockquote> <p>Not at all (in my experience, at least). You still have to frame and get the right angle for the really dramaitc shot. High frame-rate (and good auto-focus) really just allow you to concentrate on different things when you're shooting. I'd place more emphasis on the "be ready" part of Kluetmeier's quote. If you're not in the right place and ready for the shot, no frame rate is high enough to get a photo that's just not there.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a._j._jacobs Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <p>I think you still have to be at the right place at the right time, and then hope with your 8fps you got "THE" shot. Some shots happen so fast it could be missed or whatever, and while you are snapping away, you still may not get the greatest shot ever. I think you have to be prepared to a certain extent then get lucky.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_dorcich1 Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <p>A 90 mph fast ball travels 16.5 ft in 1/8 sec. If you don't know how to properly time your shot even with a high fps camera, you will miss the shot.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenPapai Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <p>Having an SI Press Pass and a pro sports camera -- access and equipment are non issues. As are burning 1,000 images every 2-3 hours. You're GOING TO GET THE SHOT every day. It's not rocket science sports photography. </p> <p>Knowledge of the sport being played along with your top access and equipment makes this EASY to get the shizzle!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovcom_photo Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <p>I agree with Ken....sport shooting is perhaps one of the easiest genres in photography. If you got the pass, the equipment, the support staff, even an idiot can stand there with camera on tripod and wait for the action to start.....no director of photography needed...bang, bang, bang....done.</p> <p>What Woody Allen said about life can be applied to sport shooting: "...80% of it is just showing up...".</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenPapai Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <p>One example is the weekly listings on SI Online of the NFL Cheerleader. Super easy stuff to get if you already have the fast lenses and press pass. The girls will smile willingly, making it trivial to get publishing quality photos.<br> I would work for FREE if SI hired me for the NFL; only payment needed would be the field pass and access to some of their lens inventory. ;-)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <blockquote> <p>even an idiot can stand there with camera on tripod and wait for the action to start.....no director of photography needed...bang, bang, bang....done.</p> </blockquote> <p><br /> It's always obvious when someone says something like this that they have absolutely no clue what it takes. Unless you know what shots are going to work and look good, 8fps does nothing for you, in fact, many of the best shots are solo shots. It's about hair-trigger timing, knowing where the action is going to be, knowing how the light will affect the shots, and knowing what the editor or other client wants.</p> <p>So when someone says it's "easy," ask to see the shots that they bring back, get published, licensed, and sent out on the wire. That will tell you how "easy" it really is.</p> <p>In the quote, the comment about "luck" isn't about "easy," it's about the fact that with sports you often have no control over where something is going to happen and who is going to be in the way. For me, shooting boxing, it's often because the official is in the way or the action is too close. One shot, <a href="http://www.spirer.com/Punch/slides/IT6G0443.JPG">this one</a> , has done very well - it's been published numerous times, licensed out for clothing, etc. Why was it luck? If it hadn't happened across the ring, I couldn't have taken it. It's that simple. It's not that anyone with 8fps and a pass can get good photos, I've seen what a lot of people get sitting next to me. It's about real skill taking photos, understanding the sport, and knowing what to do.</p> Music and Portraits Blog: Life in Portugal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <blockquote> <p>I agree with Ken....sport shooting is perhaps one of the easiest genres in photography</p> </blockquote> <p>Sorry Dan/Ken, but you don't know what you are talking about as far as sports photography is concerned.</p> <p>Anyone who thinks sports photography is "easy" hasn't ever tried to do it on a professional level. It takes just as much work as any genre of photography. "Support staff"? What support staff? There are fewer assistants in sports photography than in just about any other photographic industry. Dental photography has more assistants. 8fps is no magic potion, the "moment" is often between those shutter clicks. You've got to know when to press the button. The pass? Have you ever tried to get one of those passes? They don't just let you waltz into an NFL locker room and insert yourself because you claim to be a professional photographer. You have got to be working for a serious organization or have a real name in the industry. Saying "all you need is the pass" is like saying "all you need to be a successful pro photographer is clients". Well yeah, but you have to get the clients, that doesn't just happen because you bought a 1dmkIII and a big ass lens.</p> <p>You think the offensive line coach cares if he steps in front of your touchdown shot? You think that just because you have <em>"the gear"</em> you are going to get "the shot"? That doesn't work for any other photographic genre, why would it work for this one? You think just because you <em>"stand there with camera on tripod and wait for the action to start"</em> that your images are somehow going to stand out from the 50 other guys doing the same thing? You think that a magazine press pass stops the ESPN guys (both still and video) from standing in your way in the prime spots all day long? You think that you get more than one chance to get a shot of a snowboarder backflipping off a cliff? Or of the winning three pointer?</p> <p>It's simple to stand there and deride something as "easy", but only if you don't know what you are talking about. Just like every genre sports has easy aspects and hard aspects. But there are no easy aspects when you are shooting for ESPN or SI or other top level outlets.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tholte Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <p>I hope Ken and Dan were kidding! Sports photography is as hard as any other kind of photography with the exception of war zone shooting.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sknowles Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <p>With all the technology, it's still about what always controls things, besides gravity which wins all bets (sorry, OT), location and timing. With the best equipment you still have to be there at the right time. Otherwise it's a missed or ordinary shot. It still does make me wonder if today's sports photographer could do as well as they did with the old Speed Graphics. But then I heard the same discussion nearly 40 years ago when they introduced the first motor drives. They're just faster these days.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k5083 Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 You guys in the sports-photography-is-hard camp realize, I hope, how it undercuts your argument when you talk about how one of the biggest problems you face is competition from the other photographers sitting next to or standing in front of you. That kind of underscores what an orchestrated photo op the whole thing is, how many creative degrees of freedom are simply a given. Contrast with, for example, a nature shot of a heron catching a fish, where all the same issues of knowledge and timing are present, but you have to make sure not just that you're on the right few yards of sideline, but whether you're even at the right lake on the right day. By coming out day after day to lake after lake... Still, what I've observed across genres of photography is a code of honor never to pick on another genre as easier than one's own, even if you are sure it is. And that code probably is a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <p>There is no undercutting at all The heron photo is the exact same thing, it's just that the 50 guys shooting a heron are all doing it in different places on the same day. The Giants don't play the Cowboys in 50 different places. You have to make sure your shot is better than the other guys. It doesn't matter if he's sitting next to you or 50 miles away. Yeah, you don't know if you are at the spot on the right day if you are a bird photographer. But neither does your competition. If everybody knew exactly where to find the bird every time, the scene would be exactly like a sports game, with everyone getting in everyone else's way.<br /> <br /> And I don't crap on bird photography because I know it's hard. The people crapping on sports photography here are just running their mouths. They have no idea what they are talking about.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <blockquote> <p>You guys in the sports-photography-is-hard camp realize, I hope, how it undercuts your argument when you talk about how one of the biggest problems you face is competition from the other photographers sitting next to or standing in front of you.</p> </blockquote> <p><br /> Can you point out where I said that? Can you point out how this undercuts any arguments made here? I'd bring up the heron thing, but Josh already put that to bed.</p> Music and Portraits Blog: Life in Portugal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenPapai Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <p>"Sorry Dan/Ken, but you don't know what you are talking about as far as sports photography is concerned." [ LOL ]<br> <br />I beg to differ. A lot. It's easy to me. I've covered pro Cycling and Basketball. It's not that hard when you have the access. If you do it as a fulltime job it's got to be routine. It's not rocket science by any means.<br />I am not kidding and not deriding anyone, so please quit reading between the lines.</p> <p><br />Same here -- I respect Pro Sports Shooter, a lot. I envy them too (unless it's cold, blustery, and wet). Give me a field pass and I'll guarantee the shots. Tomorrow. Call my bluff if you'd like. Happy to oblige.<br> W<br> hy the red herring of Bird Photography? Not the subject of this post.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovcom_photo Posted December 17, 2008 Share Posted December 17, 2008 <p>I've shot countless football, and basketball games. No, not professionaly, but to get an epic shot is 1/10th as hard as getting a keeper street photo.<br /><br />I stand by what I wrote.<br /><br />It. Is. Very. Easy....in comparison to other genres of photography.<br /><br />Been there. Many times. Done that. Many times.<br /><br />Lets stop the glorification, and adulation of something that is exceedingly easy to do, folks.<br /><br />Wedding photography?!? Now THAT is a challanging genre, and perhaps one of the hardest, to be sure. Wildlife photography is a challange too...genres in photography that demand a director of photography, often the photog himself, that demands direction of the subjects, now THAT is a challange because it means the photog has to arrange the shoot, the poses, he has to control to some extent the shoot. Sports, on the othe hand is out of your control...you catch the action...it is there for you to catch...it is layed out there for you...you just have to worry about position, angle, anticipate, get ready, get the money shot.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 <p>Well let's see those tearsheets then. Where are those national magazine full page shots? How come I'm not seeing any SI or AP credits by your names? Talk is cheap.<br /> <br /> Seriously, unless you have put a roof over your head and food on the table doing that kind of work, degrading another form of photography (and by extension those who do it) is silly and ignorant. If you haven't produced at the top level in a type of photography, you can't say that doing that photography is easy. Weddings, wildlife, documentary, street, sports, etc. Shooting your cousin's wedding or the local Jr college football team is a world away from being in the pages of national magazines or pulling $10k per wedding. In the same way that making good "street" photos of a neighborhood and community that has known you for 20 years is a world away from making good "street" photos in an unfamiliar foreign country for National Geographic.<br /> <br /> If it were so easy, everyone would do it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joshroot Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 <blockquote> <p>Seriously, unless you have put a roof over your head and food on the table doing that kind of work, degrading another form of photography (and by extension those who do it) is silly and ignorant.</p> </blockquote> <p>Allow me to quote myself here for a minute.<br /> <br /> I should clarify that I do not mean to make a blanket statement that only professional photographers can comment on photography. But in this instance, the skill required to be a professional sports shooter is being questioned. Therefore, making a statement that references working as a professional was logical for this debate.<br /> <br /> However, I by no means feel that being a professional makes you any "better" or "more knowledgeable" as a photographer by default. Some of the best photographers I know have never earned a single dollar with their images (though they absolutely could have) and some of the worst photographers I have ever met get paid every day.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luca_stramare2 Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 <p>Been there, done that. As per any genre of prhotography, it is easy to make snapshots, but it is dammn difficult to get the picture. I followed a volley team for years, had the pass and the gear. But my first roll (those were the 'ol film days) went directly from the lab into the trash bin. My shots started to improve when I learnt the tricks of the game and I started thinking like the athletes in the field. It was not that much different than being in the field playing. Sure, digital made things easier, no film to waste, just files to delete. But if somebody tells me that it is only a matter of being there and firing the button like hell, I won't believe him/her. The only sport photography I found reasonably easy is when I covered bike and car races, because here the main point was to scout the racing circuit and find a good spot, from where a sellable image can be taken. But, again, this requires some knowledge as well. And, when you have a biker passing in front of you, it takes nothing, a spectator or somebody of the race staff moving into your way, for example, to destroy even the best shot.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprouty Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 <p>Show us one epic shot Dan. Nothing in your portfolio backs up your talk.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
znabal Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 <p>Certain sports are easier than others. Basketball for instance has a very small goal...where the action is ultimately directed. As Jeff S. and Josh imply, other sports that have much more freedom of movement are much much tougher. I've shot some judo. It really really helps to know the sport, know the actual competitors and their tendencies and set-ups...8 fps just means you're going to miss a lot...and have a bunch of frames to prove it. And even being perfectly ready, grabbing the precise instant of the throw etc doesn't mean I got the shot...no one told the referee not to step in my way. (In judo, if helps to know the tendencies and styles of the particular ref too) -jeffl</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovcom_photo Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 <p>Sp, My portfolio here on this site is filled with just family snapshots ;-)<br />My comments were in regard to Football, specifically.<br />I never "degraded" the shooting of Football. I wrote that it is barely 1/10th as challanging as weddings, for example. There are far more challanging genres in photography then shooting football action.<br />All this idealization, romtantisation, and adulation for the shooting of a football game. Over the top, to be sure.<br> Josh Root, you metric for truth is off the charts. It is IRRELEVENT if I ever shot for SI, or have pro-grade tearsheets. Wrong metric man.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now