Is this okay V2?

Hi folks, you were right - ISO 3200 helped - all hand-held and under available

lights in a big hall in London today - used Canon 24-105mm on 5DII!<div></div>

Same location!<div></div>

<p>This sort of event photography can always be difficult and your high ISO pictures might be worth a lot less had they not contained important folks. Are you marketing these?</p>

No, I don't sell my photos - they are part of my community work and hobby of course!

<p>I use ISO 3200 regularly on my 5D Mark II. When I get my Mark III, I expect ISO 6400 will become a staple in my shooting.</p>

<p>Maybe you should convert them to B&W...</p>

<p>The first one, in particular, against the black background is very nice. The pastel background of the second is odd. I'd convert that one to B&W and clone out the OOF gentleman in the BG, if you wanted to keep it. The gentleman in front looks very nice EXCEPT his glasses hide his eyes. I'd look for a slightly different angle where the viewers can see his eyes, or at least one eye.</p>

<p>Do you take tons of pix? For photojournalistic shooting I think that you should. For that second picture, it would have been nice to chose from several pix to get the eye and a head angle more toward the camera. There's no need to ration. Use 16GB and 32GB CF cards and shoot away. It's easy to review them as large icons on a large monitor and pick the best quickly.</p>

Thanks, David!

 

The pastel background of the second photo was due the rotating multicolour lights in the hall, and the OOF gentleman in the BG is our Prime Minister! The reason I have loaded these pictures here is that some folks in this forum suggested using ISO3200 for indoors. I thought I would acknowledge that they were right!

<blockquote>

<p>"clone out the OOF gentleman in the BG"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Love it :-)</p>

<p>Husain,</p>

<p>They are much better than V1, but both are a touch over exposed. I notice that the first has been lowered -0.55EV in post, that is typical for an auto exposure of such a dark scene, you should have either been in M mode or have dialed in negative exposure compensation at the time, this would have saved detail in his shirt and the back of the top of his head.</p>

<p>The second needs -0.3 - -0.5 compensation, but you have already brightened it +50 points in post, so the auto exposure was probably very close on this one. Having said that, even though you have upped the contrast on both, they could both do with more, in my opinion.</p>

<p>A much better second effort only really let down by random post work. Try spot metering and chimping the exposure and using M mode for things like the first image, or chimp and wind in exposure compensation on the fly as the scene dictates.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"clone out the OOF gentleman in the BG"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Maybe replace him with the photo of somebody famous - like David Beckham?!</p>

<p>Husain said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"the OOF gentleman in the BG is our Prime Minister!"</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br>

All the more reason to get rid of him... ;-)</p>

<p>I understand why you have posted the two pictures – this thread should be read in concert with your previous. I am glad to see that you are comfortable at ISO3200</p>

<p>Re feedback on these two images - Everything that Scott Ferris wrote.</p>

<p>I made reference to the in camera technique / mode selections in thread #1.<br /> In general terms, it occurs to me that you are relying too much of the camera’s automated modes and light meter and then you are attempting to remedy to make good in post production, rather than understanding the how and the what to meter at the scene.<br /> And it also occurs to me that you are not cognoscente apropos how each <strong>Light Meter MODE</strong> works in various lighting situations.</p>

<p>Expanding on Scott’s comments - one method is: Spot metering on a (known) skin tone (for example the PM’s) and adjusting (opening up 1 Stop) – the stage/forum (spot) lights will not change in a formal or speech giving situation, so Manual Mode is usually very safe: all which is left to do then, is, get to the best <strong>camera vantage point</strong>, and <strong>capture the moment</strong>. Getting the best angle is sometimes difficult – nowadays getting the moment is usually by shooting a spray, though some still use single shot.</p>

<p>There are many other metering techniques – I am not suggesting you use Spot Metering or that it is the best – merely expanding upon the mention of it and applying it to the first image, however, it would be very likely that I would have used Spot Metering and Manual Camera mode for both those images.</p>

<p>As another general comment I note you are still limited with that slow zoom lens - can’t get faster than 1/60s – (both these images are OK apropos Subject movement) . . . the EF 85/1.8 might factor into your “Present to Self” wish list if this type of Photography is a passion for you.</p>

<p>Also -<br>

Be brave and pump it to ISO 6400 – experiment! </p>

<p><br /> <br /> WW</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"I use ISO 3200 regularly on my 5D Mark II. <strong>When I get my Mark III, I expect ISO 6400 will become a staple in my shooting.</strong>"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I am looking foward to seeing your work at ISO6400.</p>

<p>WW</p>