Advice needed for music photography

[jonathonmiller]

I have finally hit a point where I know what kind of photography I want to

pursue. I enjoy shooting live music and want to begin doing band promo shots. My

current equipment list, canon XT, 18-55mm canon (kit lens), 100-300mm tamron,

50mm f/1.8 canon. My question is what should be next on my list to purchase. I

am looking at the Canon speedlite 430 flash, and a canon 100mm f/2.0. Am I on

the right track?? I apologize if this is not in the right section.

[martijn_houtman]

<p>

Assuming you are doing photoshoots during live performances:

</p>

<p>

The flash is nice, but I would not use it with live music: it is very annoying for the

musicians and they will not appreciate it.

</p>

<p>

Forget anything above f/2.8, even at ISO 1600 this will be tough, you will have

shutter speeds above 1/50, which is almost guaranteed camera shake blur (let alone

object movement), even with the 50mm. The 50/1.8 and 100/2.0 will work great

though and I think will cover the range quite nicely. Something wider will also be

very helpful (remember, you have a crop camera). Besides, wide-angle bandphotos

look cool :-)

</p>

<p>

What I would do is pay attention to the lighting. Try to anticipate on when the spots

go on and off to get the most lighting out of it.

</p>

<p>

If you're talking about bandphotos with a posing band (i.e., a controlled

environment), I'd certainly invest in more flash equipment. I think for good lighting,

you will need at least two strobes. Read the <a

href='http://strobist.blogspot.com/2006/03/lighting-101.html'>Lighting 101</a> for

more info.

</p>

<p>

Anyhue, good luck and I would like to see the results!

</p>

[heather_bowes1]

I use a 70-200 VR 2.8 (nikkor) for most of my band work. And then a wide angle to

mix it up. I agree, unless you are doing set up/staged work then bag the flash, get the

fastest lenses you can afford.

Is it live or staged (thinking the later since you said promo shots) which you will do

mostly?

Check out the one light workshop, have heard good things about it.

H

[Spearhead]

When you say promo shots, are you talking about live performance shots or set-ups? There's a huge difference, but let me correct something above.<p><i>I would not use (flash) with live music: it is very annoying for the musicians and they will not appreciate it. </i><p>I use flash quite a bit. I've never had a musician object, ever, from big name bands to locals in a small club. Every fan on earth is out there snapping away with a point and shoot with flash, why do they care what I do. Also,musicians generally ignore what goes on in the audience.<p>Here's an example:<p><center><img src="http://www.spirer.com/faunavaletta/slides/357P7334.jpg"><br><i>Fauna Valetta, Copyright 2008 Jeff Spirer</i></center><p>Bounced flash off the wall. Without flash, around 1/8 at f2. Band was fine with it. <p>If you're talking about set-up shots, you may or may not need lighting, depending on what kind of light you can shoot in. You should think about it carefully, but it's no different than any other group shot.

[roger krueger]

I've never had a band complain about flash either. BUT I shoot punk, and I think Jeff

shoots some rougher punk and metal shows too. Start banging away with a flash at

some shoegazer show, or guy-on-a-stool-with-an-acoustic, and yeah, you'll be a royal

pain in the ass.

<br><br>

I generally prefer venue lighting when it's usable, but a lot of times it just plain isn't.

I don't much care for direct on-camera flash, except for fairly subtle fill; it looks a lot

nicer if you bounce it, or use an off-camera cord. If you absolutely must use on-camera

flash it usually works better in b&w.

<br><br>

If you're doing posed promo shots, you first need to first think through what you want,

and only then figure out the equipment to get there. Promo shots seem to run the

gamut from intentionally ugly noonday sun to serious pack-and-multiple-head pro

lighting. A cheapo flash or two and the means to trigger them remotely (probably a radio

slave, but get an off-camera cord too) is a better use of money than a nice full-TTL

flash.

<br><br>

My preference is always wider and closer, a 100/2.0 is not remotely what I'd want for a

second fast lens, especially on a crop body. In a small venue all it's going to be good

for is headshots, and there a real limit to how many of those can be interesting per

show. If you've got the stomach for Sigma roulette the 20/1.8 or 18-50/2.8 might be a

place to start.

<br><br>

<a href=" title="Germs Pat

Smear gets his guitar licked"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3027/

2567444232_9cf0eaf632_b.jpg" width="639" height="426" alt="Germs Pat Smear gets

his guitar licked" /></a>

<br><br>

Pat Smear's guitar takes a lickin' (Germs show).

<br><br>

FF, 19/2.8, f8, scale focused, Sunpak 322 on a PC cord, 1/2 power, gelled 1/2 CTO

from a Roscoe sample book (free from a theatrical supply house, swatches are just the

right size to tape over a flash head), diffused with a Dilbert desk calendar page.

 

Scale focus + flash was the only reason I got this one. I saw it happening, and was just

barely able to thrust my camera in the right direction and fire before it was over a half-

second later. No way I'd have got this futzing around trying to get my AF to lock. Pretty

lucky composition (this isn't cropped) for an away-from-the-eye Hail Mary.

[Spearhead]

<i>Start banging away with a flash at some shoegazer show, or guy-on-a-stool-with-an-acoustic, and yeah, you'll be a royal pain in the ass. </i><p>Roger makes a good point that I forget about sometimes. I shot bluesman John Hammond in a solo acoustic show and he asked me not to use flash.<p><i>My preference is always wider and closer, a 100/2.0 is not remotely what I'd want for a second fast lens</i><P>Roger makes another good point. I almost always shoot with a 35/2 and 50/2 in this environment. Sometimes a 50/1.4. I used to carry the 85, it never came out of the bag.

[jonathonmiller]

All excellent advice. Thank you all. I did have a chance to shoot a show about a year back, I will try and post some pics to get some feedback in the next few days. I am interested in both promo shots and live coverage. Any suggestions on technique.

[mohir_ali]

In 1979 I went to a Fleetwood Mac concert held in a basketball arena with about 15,000 other fans. Our seats were in the upper deck. I approached the stage with my Nikon F2 and an 80-200 (f4?) contempoary lens. Security actually let me burn a couple of rolls of color. I just recently reviewed the album I made. I have some good shots of Lindsey Buckingham during a solo. I didn't use a flash, as the spot lighting was pretty good. The mixed lighting not nearly so. Those were the days. Try that today.

[heather_bowes1]

For stage at large venues you want 2 camera bodies, one with a wide lens and

another to zoom in. I use my Leica and 35mm 1.4 and my digi full frame with a

70-200mm 2.8

Many times you are restricted and you need the longer lens, it is good to get some

up close head and shoulders as well as capture the whole stage.

I tend to shoot in manual mode, in camera metering. The stage lights change so

quick you often think you have it and then wham...the spotlight or brightlight shoots

right on the subject, or the lights quick fade. Either way you start to get a feel for it,

you should do your research and know the music to be able to anticipate the

musicians moves.

Last night I shot REM and Modest Mouse. For REM we were restricted to just a few

feet off to the side of th stage because they were filming. Without my 70-200 I would

have not gotten much.

As Mohir stated, things have changed! He would have been kicked out by a few

security guards the minute he pulled out his camera. Actually he wouldn't have

gotten past the front gate with it!

Here is one I pulled off my card from last night as I archived. Will be editing the

batch this weekend.

Good luck!

It is SUCH fun!

[heather_bowes1]

here is Micheal Stipe<div></div>

[my photography blog]

Get a telephoto zoom such as 70-200mm 2.8 or a fast prime such as the 85mm or 100mm 2.0...usually you can't get toohappy with external flashes so I would save that cash.

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tallchocolateguy/2539921688/in/set-72157605356634656/

[keaton_andrew]

If you're doing promos, I'd say get the 35mm f/2. solid lens, it's just too bad that you're shooting on a crop body. You might want to look into something even wider than the 35 then for lenses. Stay away from fish eye or anything super wide, but you can go pretty wide with band promos.

 

Another thing that makes the BIGGEST difference is lighting gear. One alien bee light and a softbox, umbrella or beauty dish would make the biggest difference in the world. For promos, if you want to be serious at all, you almost HAVE to get lighting gear.

[nick_stern]

<p>An 80-200 f2.8 is ideal... depending which body you are using, it quite possible to shoot at very high ISO, which cameras like the Nikon D3 and Canon 5D Mk11.<br>

Learn to predict the light, you'll find which colours work best and shoot as that colour wash comes up.<br>

Forget wide shots, generally their a waste of time, you'll find you get too much 'empty space'.<br>

Tight 3/4 and 1/2 lengths work best.<br>

I use to shoot a lot of festivals for national newspapers.<br>

<b>Signature URL deleted. Not allowed per photo.net Terms of Use.</b></p>