Advice with event photography - Urgent! -

[jdengo]

<p>Dear friends,<br>

I appreciate your time and advice. On Thursday <strong>of this week</strong> I have to take pictures of my wife's annual dance recital. The location is a theater, no flash allowed or tripods...Lightning, obviously will be set at the main stage. I have freedom to move, as I have been appointed as the "official" photographer of the event...<br>

I would like your technical advice with this (i.e. lens, ISO, mode (A,M, S), /f, shooter speed, etc) or any other advice that you could give me. <br>

Thank you very much!!!!!</p>

<p> </p>

[keithdunlop]

<p>I little more information about your current gear would assist in answering your question. In the meantime, it is highly recommended that you go to the venue tomorrow or Wednesday and check out the lighting and take some test shots. You can't be prepared unless you know what to expect. See if you can get the stage manager to turn on the stage lights that will be used for the performance so you can get some accurate meter readings. You'll need this information to determine if your current lenses are fast enough (again, your equipment info would be helpful here), or whether you need to rent something. And by the way, if you were hired as the "official" event photographer, this planning should have occured a long time ago, not two days before the event.</p>

[vlad khavin]

<p>Jorge,<br>

For a lot of the questions you are asking, there are no absolute answers. There is no way that I, or anyone, can tell you what lens to use; the answer is "It depends. What kind of pictures would you like to make?" My guess is that you will want to use something on the wider end of the spectrum if you can be up close to the stage.</p>

<p>I can tell you this. It's going to be tough without a flash because you can not rely on it to freeze motion. Stage lights are continuous, obviously, so motion blur becomes a problem. (Assuming you don't want motion blur, of course. There are some spectacular pictures of dancers that have the stage sharp and the dancer is all motion.) If you are hand-holding your camera, and you can not use flash, you are going to have to shoot with the fastest shutter speed that you can use and still get a decent exposure. This means that you are going to need a fast lens, but the tradeoff is that you then have to be spot-on with focusing since you lose depth of field by shooting wide open.</p>

<p>There are folks here that have a lot more experience photographing theater and performances, I'm sure... but what I would do is set the camera to M, and the metering mode to Spot. I would meter on the brightest side of a dancer's face, (open up my lens as much as possible, and adjust the shutter speed accordingly) so that the brightest part is 1 stop over. If that made the shutter speed too slow (say... below 1/60 with no flash) I would bump up the ISO. I'm purposely not giving you concrete numbers. Since I have not seen the venue and don't know how bright their lights will be, I can't tell you what combination of f/stop + shutter speed + ISO to use.</p>

<p>I hope what I just said makes sense? Good luck!</p>

[savagesax]

<p>Shooting a dance recital without the use of flash would scare even the best photographers. Stage lights are all over the place, as far as dimming, color, and so forth, trying to stop motion in dim light is close to impossible, although movement can make an interesting image.</p>

<p>Try to shoot with an ISO around 800, if your camera can handle it. Rent a real fast lens such as an 85mm 1.4 or a 50mm 1.2, or both. Be sure to shoot RAW for color corrections and F-stop latitude. Over shoot and use a camera which allows at least 3 frames per second or faster. You may wish to rent a camera that can shoot 5 to 6 fps. Concentrate of posed shots, avoid the jumps, unless you can use a shutter speed of 125th or greater. Good luck and post some of your images.</p>

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

<p>Why don't you shoot a rehearsal first, followed by the dress rehearsal? Less pressure, and you'll be free to move about.</p>

[ronald_moravec1]

<p>A good low noise camera like a Nikon or Canon high end model with a fast lens. Anticipate the peaks of action and take the pic when dancers are as motionless as possible. Use daylight WB for the lighting if it is same as what I have encountered in the past. RAW is best as you can adjust it later if you have to do so.<br>

You should have attended a dress rehersal so you know the flow of things. That is also the best time to do pictures.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Jorge -</p>

<p>I've done recitals before with the following setups:<br>

Nikon D40 70-200 f2.8 zoom<br>

Nikon D200 18-70 f3.6 / 4.5<br>

Nikon D300 17-50 (Tamron) f2.8 zoom and 70-200 f2.8.</p>

<p>All have provided images that I would put my name on and offer for display / sale.</p>

<p>Not knowing what flavor of camera you use - here's the settings I use:<br>

Auto ISO - Set to max (HI 1)<br>

Shutter speed priority - 1/250 min<br>

Shoot in raw<br>

WB - Auto</p>

<p>Without trying to sound like a Nikon sales rep - the auto ISO feature is a savior doing this type of shooting. I set it and forget it.</p>

<p>By the way - All hand held - no tripods allowed.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

<p> </p>

[manuel barrera houston,]

<p>what kind of camera and lens do you have?</p>

[wedding-photography-denver]

<p>Firstly, if you use manual settings, your consistency will be better. However, the subdued versus spot light will mess you up. Therefore, Tv would be my choice for this, depending on the choice of camera body.<br>

Many here will likely disagree with this approach, but my reasons are these. You will need to maintain a SS of at least about 1/80th to get sharp images that reasonably freeze your subjects. 1/125th would be better depending on your ISO/F-stop ability.<br>

I like to use Nikon's auto ISO feature for this purpose as it allows for setting the lowest SS and highest ISO as a range. So, if using Nikon, Av will be a better bet with the Auto iso enabled.</p>

<p>My choice if you have it, would be the D700/D3 or 5D/5D2 for a body. If in the Canon or Nikon camps, the 85/1.8 is the lens I would be selecting for FF to get most of the shots. I would also have a wide 2.8 lens to get the environment now and then.</p>

<p>I have shot stage with 800iso; 1/40th; F2; 135mm, before now, and it was fine but needed good timing and a steady hand. That was in the days before 3200iso was so good.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>I shoot dance-type events every week, most are probably a bit more casual than what you are talking about. Based on my experience, Keith Dunlop's comments are dead-on. There is no way to know what to do without a lot more information, including how many performers will be on stage at one time, your distance to the performers, the physical layout of the venue. And the best way to prepare for this is to be a versatile photographer, prepared for whatever you have to do.<br /> <br /> The recommendation to shoot at a rehearsal is a good one, but sometimes the lighting used isn't the final lighting, you have to be ready for some variance. You will get a good idea of where you can position yourself.<br /> Speaking of position, depending on where you have to shoot from in order not to annoy paying patrons, it can help to have a stepladder. I sometimes carry a small folding metal one that gives me three steps and puts me up high enough to get over the audience heads. At some venues, I can stand far enough to the right or left to be outside the audience interference area, but the ladder (or even a chair if I haven't brought it) can help.<br /> In order to have consistent photos, I pick the lowest ISO that will work, almost always 1600, and then shoot on Av as wide open as practical. If the lighting isn't going to change, and the performers aren't going to wander into different lighting across the stage, then manual will work. Otherwise, manual requires you to be as fast as the moves on stage.<br /> I have an article here on photo.net that is about post-processing for stage events, and it carries some shooting tips also. You can find it <a href="../learn/digital-photography-workflow/overview/event-photography/">here.</a></p>

[mgk1966]

<p>Try timing your shots for the brief moments when the dancers are still. They should occasionally pause in an interesting pose that will allow you to use a slower shutter speed and still get sharp results.<br>

Also, continuous servo will help your focus tracking of moving objects.</p>

[dan_tripp]

<p>Shoot in RAW....that is always the answer everyone puts, so I thought I would add it.<br>

I did my son's recital last weekend, usually the stage lights are enough, especially if they have a spot light. I used my Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6 at ISO 800 and 1600 and my pics were good. Shoot manual mode with your F/stop wide open (low as it can go) and adjust your shutter speed to 40-100 depending on movement.<br>

Good luck.</p>

[heathorchard]

<p>Jorge,<br>

I shoot quite a bit of dance myself - just shot a dress rehearsal of the Nutcracker last week. I would highly recommend Dave Haas's D300 set up with both lenses. The 70-200 has VR which helps a lot. You can crank the ISO to max, though I still usually try to keep it around 1600. But don't hesitate to raise it if you need to. Shoot a lot and bring plenty of CF cards. You'll burn through them pretty quick, especially if it's your first time and your worried about getting the shot. Keep your framing a little wide and crop in later to avoid cutting off hands and feet. Not too much of course or you'll get noise. Good luck! <br>

-Heath</p>

[rayt]

<p>All good advice from the others, RAW, manual exposure, wide aperture, high iso, etc. Establish the correct light color by having the light person turn on the white lights before the event so you can photograph a digital target for later use when you process the images and white balance the images.</p>

[KenPapai]

<p>I am going to guess that Jorge only has a Nikon D60 and a slow zoom lens. Upgrade time ASAP, Jorge if you are the pro they hired.</p>

[William Michael]

<p><strong><em>"I am going to guess that Jorge only has a Nikon D60 and a slow zoom lens."</em></strong><br>

<br>

Hello Ken, I too guessed that, back on the 16th, but I waited for a reply to Keith's request as I had little to add to the general comments already made.<br>

As it is Thursday (or Friday) as I write, Keith Dunlop's original request is rapidly becoming irrelevant.<br>

Sometimes I just do not get it.<br>

<br>

WW </p>

 

[jdengo]

<p>Hey everyone!!!! After an hectic year's end I have finally the opportunity to thank each one of you for your excellent advice. I took your recommendations seriously and liked the outcome. My wife, certainly loved her shots.<br>

Hey guys, just for the record...I don't want to mislead anyone, I've never claimed to be a pro, in fact I am an attorney who recently started to develop a passion for photography....So, Ken and William, I know my camera is slow and neither of my lenses are the best out there, but I am learning...And, what better way to learn than from the best, the experienced photographers...So once I start to get better, I will upgrade!!!! :)<br>

Thanks guys, I posted my request and you'all came to the rescue...I am posting a sample of the pictures taken that night in my portfolio.<br>

Best regards,</p><div></div>

[William Michael]

<p>I am sincerely glad it worked out for you. And I think you did very well to make that shot at 1/50s hand held (I assume) using a zoom at 170mm on a Nikon D60, also your exposure is spot on IMO.</p>

<p>***</p>

<p>Just for the record, to follow up on your specific comment addressed to me:</p>

<p>My comment was not about suggesting you were professional or not . . . or whether your gear was suitable or not.</p>

<p>I was referring to the fact that your initial request was labeled <strong>URGENT.</strong></p>

<p>Note that only a few minutes had passed when Keith Dunlop asked for details of your gear.</p>

<p>That was a reasonable request, IMO, as with details of the equipment you would be using for this URGENT request, quite specific advice could be given - more specific than the very good advice given in the thread, which was useful to you.</p>

<p>I read that request of Keith's about two minutes after he posted it - and I followed the thread waiting for you to respond.</p>

<p>After Ken replied, I made my comment, after having had watched the thread and reading all the answers.</p>

<p>At that time I had little practical advice to add, which I stated.</p>

<p>Also I was just stating : "I did not get it" –</p>

<p>What I was meaning there was: I did not understand your actions (or lack of them) as it was very urgent for you, but you failed to follow up with the additional information, when a request for that information, was so quick, after your initial post.</p>

<p>WW</p>

<p> </p>