photography in a dark theater

[ariel_s1]

<p>Use aperture priority over shutter priority. If you use aperture priority and open up the aperture up the largest that it will go (smallest number), then the camera will choose the fastest shutter speed you have possible for the correct exposure. If you choose shutter priority mode, then while you can adjust faster shutter speeds, those shutter speeds will lead to underexposure. Aperture priority keeps you within your camera's and your lens' limits. You don't have to check for any underexposure, unlike with shutter speed priority, unless the lighting is tricking your camera in some way (which it would also be doing for shutter priority, and would require going into manual to override regardless). If in aperture mode, at the largest aperture, and your shutter speeds are still slower than 1/60 second, all you can do is turn up your ISO, and past that, you can either use flash or a faster lens.</p>

<p>Joel, yes, that is exactly what I'm recommending. I am also a member on a micro 4/3 forum, and you wouldn't believe the number of "newbies" that have never even used an SLR or any kind of camera that allows them manual control before, but choose to buy older manual focus lenses to adapt to their cameras and are shooting like pros in no time. At least with the Samyang, she'll have SOME keepers (since her viewfinder can't show greater-than-f/2.8 DOF), or can even stop down to "just" f/2.8 and have mostly all keepers, whereas with her current gear, it is impossible to get a proper exposure with the shutter speeds that she likely requires. But, I don't understand why you think she would compose any worse with an 85mm lens than she would with an 18-200mm lens? Also, how would she mis-expose? Aperture priority chooses the correct exposure, and would no more likely mis-expose than with any other lens. There's no other way for her to get f/1.4 so cheaply as with that Samyang/Rokinon lens, and it's a bonus that unlike those crappy supertelephoto lenses of the 70's and 80's, the current Samyang lenses compare rather favorably to the Nikon versions.</p>

[martynas_photo]

<p>Ariel,<br /> I would disagree with your suggestion that the OP used Aperture priority instead of SP in this case. When we are talking about dance (and especially ballet) photography, you have to either freeze the moment or intentionally extend it, by deliberately slowing shutter speed (but you should have good knowledge of dance movements and specific choreography, to achieve good results using the latter technique). Variants in between simply don't work most of the time and the pictures look, well, not really good. So, I would think that having the correct shutter speed is critical here along with the ability to anticipate the peak moment of a pose/movement. I'd rather have an underexposed but well focused picture that I can work on afterwards instead of a well exposed but blurred one.<br /> uh... too many words, here are the pictures:)<br /> Spanish dancer (Nutcracker) - Good old Nikon d100, F4, 1/200 ISO~640</p>

<p><img src="http://mphoto.lt/photo/091206nutcracker013.jpg" alt="" width="428" height="600" /><br /> Giselle (poor Hilarion danced to death by the Wilis) - D200, F5, 1/25, ISO800. Note to the OP - D80 and D200 share the same sensor.<br /> <img src="http://mphoto.lt/photo/Giselle_121102_087.jpg" alt="" width="600" height="389" /></p>

[jriherd]

<p>Sometimes the camera's computer solutions just don't work. This may be late for this time around, but what I suggest is this: Try some shots by setting your camera on manual. Put the shutter speed on whatever speed is necessary for you to hold the camera steady in your shooting situation. If your lens will not open wide enough to show proper exposure, then open it as wide as possible. Often in a dark dance theater situation your camera will not be able to focus quick enough. If that's true, then pre-focus on a point on the stage and let the action come to you. Make sure your camera is set to release without waiting for proper exposure, then take the shot. You will likely have to push it in post processing and clean up some noise, but at least you'll have the shot. Another thing to do if the light level is fluctuating, then try to catch your scene when the lights are brightest or your subject is hit by a spot. I don't have time to go pull dance photos out of storage, but I have some images on Facebook taken at a music showcase at SXSW a couple of years ago. You cannot tell it from the shots, but the venue was very dark. All of my shooting followed the techniques described above. I don't think I used my 1.4 on any of these. Most all were made with a 70-200 shooting at 2.8. The initial images appear badly underexposed, but the final pics turned out better than I'd hoped. Oh, and the ISO was set anywhere from 800 to probably 2400. A D 80 ought to work nicely at 800 and maybe 1200. Bottom line is whatever it takes is better than missing the shot.<br />Here's a link to the album with those shots on Facebook: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.190733107629448.40470.176361989066560&type=3">https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.190733107629448.40470.176361989066560&type=3</a></p>

 

[lex_jenkins]

<p>I usually try to avoid seeming elitist in these types of discussions, but when it comes to performance art photography my advice is to heed the advice of those who can actually show you the results of their advice. We're fortunate to have four of those in this discussion, a much higher than usual number of qualified opinions on this familiar question.</p>

[bruce_brown]

<p>Martynas: In the spirit of an above post ... your image #2 especially ... BRAVO BRAVO :)</p>

[francisco_salaquanda]

<p>I don't think its acceptable to be firing off a DSLR and large lens from the audience. Where I come from photography is banned from performing arts as the event organisers always have an official photographer.<br>

If I were sitting beside someone doing that I would react badly as it would be stopping me from enjoying the show.</p>

<p>Also, there is a possible infringement of copyright as to choreography, music and costumes. It would be wise to get a clearance beforehand.</p>

[kelli_jackson]

<p>Francisco - This was only a dress rehearsals. The shows are this weekend and this was okayed by the directors of the show.....lots of "parent" photographers there.....more comments to come on the advice now that I'm back and took a bunch of pictures......ugh.....</p>

[rick_m.]

<p>I had to look for one of these from The Nutcracker. This one obviously hit the cutting room floor, has not been modified, was shot in jpeg on assignment for a newspaper and though I hope not indicative of my work, chosen to illustrate a point. </p>

<p>The shot was made with a 70-200 F/2.8 on a D300, half way back in the auditorium. Aperture Priority, 1600 ISO at 1/250 sec. The metering was spot. Spot metering and aperture priority allowed the subject which was, as is frequently the case, in the spotlight to be exposed more or less correctly while keeping the shutter speed where action can be captured fairly well. (Noise reduction off.)<br>

As you can see from this uncropped image, had I used a different metering method it is possible that the camera would have dropped the exposure in an attempt to put the whole scene in correct light. (especially the black in the foreground). That would have made it more difficult to stop action and blown out the subject of the shot. Yes I could have shot manual mode but that would have been a disadvantage in the rapidly changing light of a stage. Sometimes using this method when a spotlight is in use and the stage otherwise dimmer than usual will give you some nice surprises when the camera allows the spotlight to do its job. As a default setting it allows you to concentrate on the action and largely forget about the exposure. </p>

<p>I also chose this image to show that even when far back in an auditorium or perhaps using a lens that could not zoom in closer, there is plenty of room here to crop in and get a usefull image. This might make the 50 and 85 mm lenses look more attractive for this kind of work. The 70-200 AFS VR is IMO the goto lens for theater work. <br>

<a href="../photo/16664212" rel="nofollow">http://www.photo.net/photo/16664212</a></p>

[martynas_photo]

<p>Lex, Bruce - thank you.<br /> Rick - now let me comment on this image (just technical thoughts - i perfectly realise that you have put this image for illustration purposes only), but perhaps my notes will be of use to someone, especially when we have a visual sample. From the dance perspective - the girl on the left (foreground) ruins the generally nice shot. Either she was too slow or too fast, but her feet are unacceptable. Which leads me to believe that she also did another mistake and got into the line of spotlight, which was intended for the centre couple only. Or - it might be the lighting guy's mistake - I am seeing things like that way too often.<br /> more on theatre lighting - it is not as tricky as it seems, but poor execution of lightman's duties can cause hell to photographer. You were absolutely right, when you chose spot metering in this case, otherwise the centre would have gone to the far right in the histogram. However, I do feel that the WB settings are slightly up the Kelvin scale, although this may also be attributed to the lights/compensation thereof. generally speaking, the worst thing about theatre lights is the mixture of different temperature sources and the use of gels. this can be partly solved by compensating the temperatures, but it is the case with serious productions only, where the light guy is conscious about what he/she is doing.<br /> about the settings. You could have safely used shutter of 1/100 or even 1/80 here. This kind of situation on stage definitely lasts for at least a second (well, save for abovementioned dancer, who still could not catch up with that). if you used the slower shutter speed, you could have used a lower iso, resulting in better colour rendition and less noise and a stop or a half increased the aperture. and yes, i think you could have added one stop to the exposure, because it seems slightly underexposed (even based on the centre couple) OR you could have slightly lightened the shadows.<br /> just some thoughts from someone, who makes his living shooting theatre performances:)</p>

[steve_phillips3]

<p>Lex, thank you and I am humbled as a rank amateur to be considered "qualified" along with the likes of Michael, KJ, and especially Martynas - all clearly outstanding photographers. Rick also - if that's a shot that ended up on the cutting room floor I would enjoy seeing the "good" ones. We have probably gone a bit over the top with details in our advice to Kelli, a parent accustomed to shooting on "Auto" taking pictures of her daughter at a kids' dance recital with existing equipment. Hopefully she can post some pics so we can see the fruits of our discussion.</p>

[steve_phillips3]

<p>John, I like your performance shots as well.</p>

[martynas_photo]

<p>thanks to this thread, today I've had some great time looking through my archives:) enjoy.<br /> all images taken at the Lithuanian Opera and Ballet Theatre.<br /> a postcard for Christmas :) (scene from The <em>Nutcracker</em>)<br /> <img src="http://mphoto.lt/photo/081216_nutcracker104.jpg" alt="" width="600" height="400" /><br /> Stravinsky's <em>Firebird</em><br /> <img src="http://mphoto.lt/photo/DSC_7321.jpg" alt="" width="600" height="429" /><br /> Anastasia Tchumakova as Giselle <br /> <img src="http://mphoto.lt/photo/100226_giselle_034.jpg" alt="" width="400" height="600" /><br /> and Olga Konoshenko as Red Giselle in Boris Eifman's <em>Red Giselle</em> (an incredibly powerful production about the tragic life of the legendary dancer Olga Spetsivceva). There is a very good reason why the two pictures are similar:)<br /> <img src="http://mphoto.lt/photo/110609_RdZizel_040.jpg" alt="" width="428" height="600" /><br /> Eligijus Butkus, as The Teacher from the same performance <br /> <img src="http://mphoto.lt/photo/110609_RdZizel_024.jpg" alt="" width="384" height="600" /><br /> and both dancers in the scene where Juliet wakes up to find that Romeo is dead in Prokofiev's <em>Romeo and Juliet</em>. That night something interesting happened (like Huxley's shift of perception) - the dancers were so good that I completely forgot I was shooting a performance - the whole happening onstage seemed like a true story happening in real time. a true theatrical miracle :)<br /> <img src="http://mphoto.lt/photo/120307_romeo_107.jpg" alt="" width="445" height="600" /><br /> <br /><br /></p>

[rick_m.]

<p>Breathtaking shots. Bravo!!</p>

<p> </p>

[kj_thomas]

<p>Great shots Martynas! I agree, one can get some great shots while shooting at 1/100 or even a little faster (even with an older DX camera). I actually love shooting in these types of settings. The focus on technique is critical.</p>

<p>What lens and f-stop did you use for these?</p>

[martynas_photo]

<p>the lens was the same everywhere - 80-200 f2.8 af-d (the later version, not the push/pull). It is a brilliant lens and fast enough for my needs. In most cases I try to use F4, unless the iso/shutter combination demand a wider opening. My working camera is d700, but I also make use of the old d100 and d200, when high iso is not required and I need the benefits of a dx camera (for example, the last one was shot with a d200 and the Firebird was photographed with d300).</p>

<p> </p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>not sure i would set the ISO to 1600; i'd probably do auto-ISO with a 1600 limit. that way, if the stage lights vary, the camera might select a lower ISO value. from what i remember from when i had a d80, ISO 1600 shots were really pushing it. spot metering is also recommended with a d80 as the matrix meter can overexpose. you'll need a fairly fast shutter to freeze motion, which is the biggest factor in preventing blur. 1/125 may not be fast enough. you may find 1/250 works better. the problem there is that you would need a lower aperture number at that speed, and the 18-200 gets to 5.6 maximum aperture fairly quickly. so, shutter priority might be better than aperture priority with that particular lens.</p>

[sebastianmoran]

<p>Michael Chang:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Here's a shot I made using a Nikon D70 and 18-70 kit lens under very low light. I used Shutter Priority mode to make sure it won't be blurry (1/250 if memory serves), and open aperture at ISO-1600 shot in .NEF, and had to crank up luminance further in post with a fair bit of noise reduction but I got the shot I wanted, albeit imperfect.</p>

</blockquote>

 

 

So, I'll guess that's about ISO 3200 with a D70. That's pushing it! And, your shot it terrific!

 

But, I have the same experience as you: I started shooting indoors, in dining-room light and restaurant lighting with the D70 and was inspired. The D300 does better and later cameras will do even better. I think Michael is right: Get the shot, shoot raw for the best dynamic range you can, than then push it up in Lightroom as much as you need.

 

Yes, it's not perfect, but you'll get shots you can treasure.