Shooting a science conference... first time!

[rob_malkin]

<p>Hello everyone,</p>

<p>Long time no posts from me. Some of you may remember ( I would be impressed if you did ) that a few years ago I asked about what I should do with myself after leaving school. It was a toss up between Physics and Photography. Well Physics won, and I am now doing my PhD in Engineering. But it has all come around and I have been asked to photograph a science conference.... and well, I would like a few tips.</p>

<p>Location: http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=assembly+rooms+bath&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi&biw=1280&bih=889</p>

<p>Kit: Nikon D3, 70-200mm Mk I, 17-35mm, 50mm, 85mm. And a SB-600.</p>

<p>I have spend 90% of my time using a F100, D100, D70, so this is a bit of a step up for me. But I am confident that it will not take me long to get used to it. I have a few days before the conference to get used to it anyway.</p>

<p>So what I was hoping to get a little help with was this...<br>

1) Have any of you photographed a conference before?<br>

2) Any tips regarding position, angle from the stage.<br>

3) Camera specific tips?</p>

<p>I would really appreciate some help with this. My boss has spend a lot of time and money on this, and I really want it to look great for him.</p>

<p>Thanks for reading, sorry for rambling on sometimes!</p>

<p>Rob</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Hi Rob. Specific to your kit, if you're new to it, be wary that the 70-200 mk 1 used at 200mm is a bit soft in the corners of the frame, and the same is true of the 50mm and 85mm used at wide apertures unless you've got the latest AF-S versions (I'm assuming 85mm f/1.4 - the 85mm f/1.8 is relatively sharp). This probably won't matter if your subject is vaguely central, but I bring it to your attention if you've been used to a crop sensor, in case you like putting detail at the edges. They're sharp stopped down.<br />

<br />

I'd hope you'd get away without the flash most of the time (at least during talks - not so much if you just want social images of people gathering); my limited experience of conferences is that there's usually a spotlight on the person on the stage. The usual advice to the speaker about not wearing a black top (floating head syndrome), not using a laser pointer (which only works on one screen and annoys everyone with a replicated image) applies, but that's kind of out of your control. :-)<br />

<br />

Good luck. Disclaimer: this is hypothesis; I have absolutely no experience in this, because the conferences I've been to have generally had "no photographs" clauses - which hasn't stopped a couple of snaps for posterity with a cell phone, but kind of rules out my D700 and 150-500. :-)</p>

[chris_letts]

<p>Not equipment related, but something to watch out for ?<br>

I've done the photography for many University conferences, for many years. Last year for the first time ever I got arguments from 2 of the attendees who both said that I should not be taking photos without their express permission - i.e. they virtually suggested I needed to get a release form from everyone. I politely agreed not to include them in any photos and I now have the conference organiser tell everyone in the opening speech that a photographer will be in action, and that if they object to their photos being taken they should indicate that.</p>

[Hector Javkin]

<p>1) I've been photographing a writer's conference the last few years. I have attended, but not photographed, many many science and other academic conferences since the 1970s (some under IEEE, which I assume you belong to.)<br /> <br /> 2) You'll want to shoot from different angles. It's often less intrusive to move along the sides but you'll want some shots from the center as well. Some shots from the sides that include the speaker and whatever she/he is projecting on the screen will be important. You may want to bracket exposure for these, so that you can blend the exposure for the speaker with the expousre for the screen in case they are very different. For such shots, get on the side closest to the speaker. If you capture them pointing to something on the screen it makes a nice shot. The dots on the screen from laser pointers will probably be a pain to capture. Make sure to get some audience shots as well.<br /> <br /> I imagine that aside from lectures there might be poster sessions, which can produce the most visually interesting interactions between participants, along with the receptions. Get in close for poster sessions, with your 17-35mm and 50mm -- if you rely on your 70-200mm, it is likely that there will be too many people in the way. If you find opportunities to shoot from above, they might yield some good images.<br /> <br /> Do the best you can with the photography, of course, but remember that your longer term purpose is to succeed in your chosen field -- don't get so exuberant about your photography that everyone at the conference hates you. Important advice from Chris about participants who don't want to be photographed. They may be particularly skittish about screen displays. If you are also presenting a paper at the conference make sure you give that task all the attention it deserves.<br /> <br /> 3) Your equipment is fantastic, and more than up to the job. Participants don't move fast, and conferences have bright enough light, although you are likely to encounter mixed lighting. Unless you have some overriding reason not to, shoot in raw. You should not need flash very much, or may not be permitted to use it, possibly only when a small group takes you aside for a quick photo. Ceilings are likely to be too high for bouncing in the large meeting halls.<br /> <br /> My only concern about your equipment is back-up. What if that lovely D3 stops working? What if you need the SB600 more than expected and you wind up cooking it?<br /> <br /> Good luck, and enjoy the experience.</p>

[rob_malkin]

<p>Hi Andrew,</p>

<p>Thanks for your input. I didnt know that the MK I was a little soft wide open, but I guess given the D3 ISO performance I could probably get away with shooting f5.6 or so.<br>

I must say that I am really looking forward to using the kit. I know that I am going to come away with a very expensive NAS problem.</p>

<p>Rob</p>

[dwight200]

<p>Indoors, even the D3 can occasionally have problems with light, particularly using long lenses. Particularly when there's fluorescent lighting. As noted above, flash can be disruptive to a conference, so it's generally frowned upon. In a large social gathering it's generally OK.</p>

<p>Plan on using a tripod occasionally. If that's not practical, a monopod will help.</p>

<p>I use the 70-200 a lot for people speaking at a podium. Softness in the corners doesn't generally matter for photos like that. Depending on the size of the room, you might have to crop a bit even then.</p>

<p>Shoot RAW always. That will allow you the most latitude for postprocessing the pix. It allows you to compensate the white balance when you have odd lighting. RAW+jpg is OK if you need to publish some of the pix immediately, but it takes about 30% more card space.</p>

<p>For group shots requiring flash: someone is sure to blink from the flash. Plan on taking several shots. What I do is set the ISO up a bit (maybe 1600). That allows the flash to loaf, so it won't dump all the charge in one shot. Then I set the camera to continuous high speed release and take a burst of 3 or 4 shots. That way the blinkers have generally recovered by the third shot. If you get late blinkers by then, well the background doesn't change much at Ch, so you can swap heads in Photoshop. Try this out beforehand so you can get the camera and flash settings down.</p>

<p>When you're using flash, remember that pointing the flash directly at the subject will produce shadows behind it. If you keep the ISO fairly high you can bounce the flash by pointing it at the ceiling or a nearby wall. If the ceilings are too high, you can use something like this:<br>

This is similar to pointing the flash at the subject, but since it's a larger light source the shadows are softened a bit. Again, a bit of experimentation beforehand might help.</p>

[bruce_brown]

<p>Rob: You have the gear ... some generic advice ... shoot without being part of the show. It is very easy to get wrapped up in the shooting ... pods, flashes, and 'stuff' ... participants can very quickly start paying attention to YOU instead of the conference. LOW KEY is the mission ... move slowly, subdued actions ... no participants should be really be noticing your presence at all. Also ditto Dwight's comment about shooting raw ... the lighting (WB) is ALWAYS a nightmare, and there will be 'fixes' in post. You might also think a little about captions ... how to put names with faces AFTER. A photo challenge is always fun ... best of success.</p>

[Mattman944]

<p>I shoot a conference every year similar to your situation. I am a participant and the "official" (unpaid) photographer.</p>

<p>Know what their expectations are. Presenters, poster sessions, candids, posed shots, etc.</p>

<p>You probably won't know about the lighting until you get there. At mine, the light level is low, no spotlight. It is at the edge of existing-light with my equipment. Some years I do existing-light with a tripod, other years I use flash, depending on my mood. Your equipment is better and it is unlikely your light level will be less. You should be able to use existing-light.</p>

<p>At mine, the portable stage is low and there are many VIP tables in the front. So, to get close, I would need to shoot from a poor angle, or crawl on the ground in front of the VIPs (not appropriate or necessary). Instead, I arrive early, pick a good seat, and then shoot from my seat.</p>

<p>Shooting speakers is difficult, most shots will have stupid expressions. Wait for a pause in their speech. For some speakers it can be difficult, some can talk almost continuously.</p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>When you photograph a person speaking, the best time to press the shutter is when the pause in their speaking. Otherwise, you get these weird facial expressions. And, for some fast talkers, that can be very frustrating. Try to grab a shot as they are introduced, and while they give a brief smile.</p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>Also, I would shoot around f4 and dial up the ISO until I could get handheld shutter speeds. Then run an on-camera flash at set it for fill at about -1 stops. That would let you shoot freely and pay most attention to the subjects and composition as opposed to exposure.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Interesting to hear everyone's suggestions on this. For what it's worth, I'd consider flash to be a last resort - as a conference attendee it's annoying, and as someone who hates public speaking I could do without anyone potentially blinding me from my notes. Still, rather you than every attendee. (My biggest flash irritation was at the 25th anniversary of Les Miserables last year, at which photos were banned - a slightly drunk couple sitting next to me kept taking flash photos with a compact, and we were tens of metres from the stage. I offered to turn the flash off for them, since it was clearly just illuminating everyone around them, but was told "it doesn't matter". Grr.)<br />

<br />

Rob: to be clear, the 70-200 mk1 is soft in the far corners at 200mm at pretty much <i>all</i> apertures - see <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_70-200_2p8_vr_n15/page5.asp">here</a>. It's only the far corners, though - otherwise it's a very good lens. It won't matter 99% of the time, I just wanted to warn you about the combination of this lens and an FX camera in case you happened to compose a shot that relied on corner detail. The f/1.4 AF-D lenses (50mm and 85mm) are a bit soft away from the centre used wide open, but sharpen up when stopped down. The AF-S versions are much sharper. Again, it may not matter if you centre your subject. Good luck!</p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>When you run fill flash at -1 stop, that means the brightness of the flash is dimmer than the ambient light. Not annoying. And the benefit of filling the shadows, especially in the face, far outweighs the negatives, IMHO.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Dan: That's true, but you also need to bear in mind that the ambient light is probably coming from a diffuse area. A single flash gun pointed at the speaker that "only" outputs half the light of everything else in the room combined is still pretty visible if it's in your line of sight. I'm not saying don't use flash if you need it, especially if you're the official photographer, but it's easy to think "nobody cares, nobody's noticing me" when you're actually annoying people who are trying to concentrate and don't care about your photos. Flash guns going off in public, at least at events, tend to annoy me - but then I'm sensitive and easily distracted. Nobody will mind a couple of times during a talk, but I'd be wary of doing it every few seconds. It also shows up on any video of proceedings.<br />

<br />

One problem with using flash is that you give tacit permission for everyone to do it. One photographer using a flash every now and then is no problem. A constant strobe from inconsiderate members of the audience using their pocket cameras is pretty annoying.<br />

<br />

If you're worried about fill lighting and you get a chance to scope the venue, how about putting a white cloth on the lecturn (or whatever they're standing behind)? You ought to get a bit of light reflecting up to the face. Just a thought.<br />

<br />

My $.02. Of course, when I claim that it's easy to assume nobody's bothered by flash, I'm equally assuming that I'm not the only one who <i>is</i> bothered by it...</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>The duration of a fill flash exposure in ambient light is something like 0.1ms whereas for ambient it's around 1/100s. So at -1 FEC the intensity of the flash light on the subject is about 50 times greater than the ambient light. </p>

<p>I never use a flash at academic events when a talk is going on, but I do use it when photographing posed portraits afterwards or sometimes during coffee and cake breaks.</p>

[rob_malkin]

<p>Hi guys,</p>

<p>My word! Quite the collection of advice! Where do I begin.....<br>

- I have told my boss to include a little note in the introduction email that there will be a photographer and that the conference will be photographed throughout. Also, all the presentations have been cleared for public presentation so it should all be legit. Also, its only about 200 people or so. Quite a small conference.</p>

<p>- During the presentations I do not want to use the flash at all. I think its too distracting and does not need to be done. I have seen some example shots of the D3 and I think I can get away with ambient only. Even if it means shooting wide open. I dont want to distract people.<br>

- After the presentations and the conference dinner I may use the flash for group pictures. Again, I would rather keep it as ambient as I can, and I think there should be enough light around to stop it from being too dark. I am taking a spare SB600 with me, just incase I have a meltdown!!<br>

- With regards to position, I think for the important presentation and introductory lecture I will shoot from the side and from the front side of the stage. With the 17mm I think I should be able to get some nice audience shots too. </p>

<p>In a way I am really looking forward to doing it as it will give me more experience, and should the aerospace industry collapse maybe I can make a few bucks out of events photography. </p>

<p>I really appreciate all your help and your tips. I will be sure to read them all again and take a few notes. And no doubt share a few with you to let you know how I got on. I also fully expect to get very tired carrying the D3 around, it looks like its going to be heavy. But then again, it going to be a lot of fun. </p>

<p>Anyway, again, thanks for the help. Sorry I could not answer each one of you directly but I am very hungry and need to eat something!!<br>

All the best from Bristol, England. </p>

<p>Rob</p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>Well, your pictures won't be very good. Conference light sucks, and so in being "polite" you'll deliver nothing better then the average schmuck out there will a P&S. If fact, there's will be better.</p>

<p>If you're there for the physics, that's fine, have fun playing with your camera. If your there to produce a quality photographic record, that strategy will fail you.</p>

<p>The key to not being annoying is to avoid repetitive actions. Know your gear, have it dialed in, and take one, maybe two shots of each presenter, with fill flash. No one will be annoyed and you'll produce a quality product.</p>

[dwight200]

<p>I believe that the D3 is capable of handling conference light much better than the "average schmuck"'s camera so your pix will be better. Even without flash. I'd recommend some prior experimentation with the camera to see what it will do. Get into an office and shoot a group in discussion. Get a feel for what shutter speeds you will need and what's possible. And what you have to do in post to get something good out of it.</p>

<p>Advice about facial expressions of people speaking is right on. When you get fast talkers, take lots of pictures. Digital pictures are free (neglecting the capital and printing costs). Bursts of 4-5 seem to help me in that situation. Make sure you have plenty of card space. I can take 50 pictures of some people and still be pressed to select a good one. Others will only need a couple of shots to get a good one. Do a lot of chimping to see if anything looks good. The center selector magnifier on playback is helpful here as long as the speaker is at or near the AF point. Try to get at least 3 shots that look good on playback. They don't always hold up in post.</p>

<p>You're not trying to take portraits of people. You're trying to document the conference. Two different things. If you don't use flash you can take as many pictures as you might want without being annoying. The camera sound is loud, but if you're not near a microphone or near the speaker you most likely don't have to worry. If you move around a bit you won't be annoying the people near you <strong>all </strong>the time.</p>

<p>PS: what is the ultimate use of the pix? A newsletter? A website? Those things generally don't need real high resolution, so you can get away with higher ISO and stronger noise reduction in post, as well as size reductions which average out noise. ISO 25000 is pretty noisy, but you can get a pretty good quarter size photo out of it. 12000 will make a third size photo and 6400 will make a half size photo. These are generalizations, and it should be noted that good exposure will go a long way toward getting a picture that you can reduce the noise on. Experiment.</p>

<p>PPS: Putting names with faces: Here the voice recorder in the D3 shines. You can press the button and softly say the name, not loud enough for anyone around to hear you, but it will be recorded in an audio (WAV) file with the same file name as the last photo. That will allow you to correlate things later.</p>

[dan_brown4]

<p>Sure, maybe the D3 can get some awesome shots like this:<br>

<img src="http://www.businesspundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/zzconference.jpg" alt="" width="358" height="300" /></p>

<p>What's not to love about eyeglasses shadows and a shiny nose :-/</p>

[bikealps]

<p>I photographed CES (Consumer Electronics Show) this past January. The keynotes were in huge auditoriums, but they were very well lit. I crawled up to the absolute front and sat on the floor in front of the first row. I was able to get some portraits of speakers.<br>

<br />Below is one example. This is Jeffrey Immelt, chairmain of GE. There was enough lighting to shoot at ISO 800. I used a D90 + 24-70 f2.8 with no flash and cropped a bit from the original. The pros were using better cameras and usually 70-200 f2.8s. Sadly, I left my 70-200 at home. The Bloomberg guy had a Canon 1D and both a 70-200 f2.8 and a 200 f2.<br>

<br />I shot JPG. With a D3, you get 1 stop better low-light performance. WIth RAW you should get additional advantages.<br />I'd say meter first and then figure out what you can do.</p>

<p>In the smaller sessions, I used flash. Everyone was more than happy to get their photo taken. The purpose of CES is to market products, so they are eager to be covered by the media. It's tech, just like a science conference, but the purpose is to get exposure.</p><div></div>

[Hector Javkin]

<blockquote>

<p>Well, your pictures won't be very good. Conference light sucks, and so in being "polite" you'll deliver nothing better then the average schmuck out there will a P&S.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is wrong, and uncalled for. The primary reason for a conference is not the photos. They are not like press briefings -- participants are there exchange ideas and develop new ones. Conferences also include students presenting for the first time in front of the the top people in their field. More than a few are scared and not at all prepared for distractions. Many conferences simply ban flash during the presentations. If not, participants, if bothered by flash, sometimes will make a stink and demand that the chair of a particular session put a stop to flash photography. It can get very uncomfortable for a photographer. Rob isn't merely being polite, as a student he is working to become part of his scientific/engineering community. And, with top-notch equipment, knowledge of and dedication to photography, he can get some good images, and others which will simply record the event.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>In fact, there's will be better.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I know of no reason why they should be. Are you saying that the people with point and shoot cameras will use flash? On a speaker maybe 50 feet away? And that the flash will help? Or that the red-eye they will get when they're closer, along with their cameras' automatic red-eye removal, produces great-looking eyes?</p>

<p>I know the lighting sucks at conferences. Most to the time, we just have to live with it and do the best we can. I'm attaching a shot that illustrates some of the problems, with window light mixing with light from chandeliers filled with an odd collection of incandescents and compact fluorescents. The image is of one-on-one meetings between aspiring writers and literary agents.</p><div></div>

[Karim Ghantous]

<blockquote>

<p>If your there to produce a quality photographic record, that strategy will fail you.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Dan, I disagree. I'm not sure why you say this.</p>

<p>Rob, I'm glad you chose physics. That, at least, is a meaningful degree. Too bad our society's science literacy seems a bit lacking (I include myself here!).</p>

<p>Anyway... I have shot one conference over two days. Let me say: I loved it. You will too, no doubt. It's less pressure than doing a wedding and probably as rewarding. You can pretty much be left alone to do your thing.</p>

<p>Here are most of the images I shot (posted on Flicker by the client):</p>

<p>http://www.flickr.com/photos/the_acu/sets/72157625673338141/</p>

<p>http://www.flickr.com/photos/the_acu/sets/72157625673170691/</p>

<p>If you like the way they turned out, that's a place for you to start. If you don't like them, then at least you know what <em>not</em> to do. ;-) FWIW I used two lenses most of the time: 70-200/2.8 and 300/4.0. I also used a 28-70/2.8.</p>

[rob_malkin]

<p>Hi everyone,</p>

<p>Firstly: Dan, I dont know if you got up on the wrong side of bed or what, but I will ignore you being a bit rude. And, well, wrong.<br>

If you even bothered to have a look at the pictures at the start of my post you would see that there is more than enough natural light coming in to negate the need for a flash.</p>

<p>Dwight: Now that is a very handy bit of advice. I was wondering how I was going to match the names to the images. I was thinking I might have to keep a note pad with me. Also, good to know about the facial expressions and the number of images to take. The use of these images is for a website, possible univeristy publications as well as general use around the univeristy.</p>

<p>Hector: I think you are right on the money. Over 50% of the people presenting their work are PhD students in their mid 20's and many will never have presented to an audience of world experts. I know just how hard it is to do this without voice wobble, so a flash popping off all the time will really not help. The idea is to document the event, and not get images of the people for some big press-release. I mean, its hardly a news conference.</p>

<p>Karim: Thank you for the links, and thank your for the encouraging words. It means a lot. I think I will be ok, and at the end of the day, my boss knows that I am not a pro, so even if it all goes very badly I am sure he will understand.And anyway, its not like I have never taken pictures under a bit of pressure.</p>

<p>The only problem I can see is the free-bar my boss has insisted upon.....</p>

<p>Thank you all for your help (Minus a grumpy Dan)</p>

 

[dwight200]

<p>As far as the voice recorder goes, remember that the file name goes with the last picture. So since the speaker's name is generally announced at the beginning, you might have to take a nothing picture of the person walking up to the podium so you can get the name associated with a face. Or just remember the name and record it in the middle of the talk occasionally. I assume there will be a program with a schedule. Take a picture of it. That gives you a record of the sequence that carries along with all your photos (although sometimes the sequence gets broken). At least that's a good starting point. If you make sure to take a photo of everyone who speaks, the photo sequence will be a good clue if you miss a voice record.</p>

<p>You have to set up the voice recorder in the setup menu. First you have to enable it. Then you have to choose whether to allow overwriting of old voice records. Then you have to choose whether the recorder is push-on/release-off, or push-on/push-off (how the button works). You can set it to record a particular length record (5 sec, 10 sec,..., 60 sec) or just to turn off when you're done (e.g. by releasing the button).</p>

<p>To record a voice memo, you have to have the photo showing on the monitor. I'm not sure whether you can select a previous photo or whether it has to be the last one taken (I don't have my camera right here with my laptop). If you're using slot 2 overflow mode, the WAV file goes with the photo file in whichever card is currently recording. If you're using slot 2 backup mode or slot 2 for jpeg mode, the WAV file is recorded on the card in slot 1.</p>

<p>The monitor will show a small musical note image on photos with a voice record.</p>

<p>If you change the file names on download, make sure the WAV files are also changed to match the photo file. Many download programs will do this automatically, but make sure it happens and the voice record is still associated with the right photo.</p>

<p>PS: you can probably use your flash when taking photos at the free bar.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>My only experience of a <i>large</i> conference was that everything is recorded on video, or at least being simulcast in a second venue, anyway. If the lighting is bad for photography, it's also going to be bad for the video - so if you get the metering right I'm surprised lighting is as awful as some suggest; my idea of making sure the lecturn is covered in something white to provide fill still stands if needed. People sitting around a wooden table for a panel, or scenarios without official lighting are another matter - if photos and/or video are being taken, perhaps the lighting situation should be discussed with the conference organiser. If the camera can't see people properly, neither can the audience.<br />

<br />

That's not to say that there aren't conferences with poor lighting, or that a flash might not help, or even that a couple of flashes during a talk might be unreasonable. But I'd like to think there's more that can be done than turning up with a flash and hoping for the best.<br />

<br />

If all else fails, you can bump shadows a lot from a raw file (or rely on d-lighting). Good luck!</p>.

[dan_brown4]

<p>Yes, I meant that the P&S pics would be better because the flash would fire by default.</p>

<p>I thought this was a thread about taking quality photographs with a purpose? Now it's seems to be a thread about being polite at a conference and being considerate of any possible negative of bad feelings. Therefore, I will change my recommendation.</p>

<p>New recommendation: Leave your camera at home.</p>