Coalville v Stamford Rugby union

Kiet is right in saying shooting lot`s of film does not necessary get you the shot, i only used one roll of 36ex at this game which last 80min`s mainly because a 70-210mm will not get you far in to the field of play so i wait for them to come my way so i can fill the frame.Kyle said why didn`t i go to the other side of the rugby field, this was due to the fact heavy rain had flooded that side,normally i would always shoot with the sun behind me.As for flash i was once warned if i use flash my camera would be handed back to me in piece`s so that was out.i Can only put the quality of this print down to a poor scan as the print is very good.Brent i mainly work from f4--to--f2.8 and may be f8 would to distracting to much back ground in focus. Thankyou all for your comment`s Ian.

I don't think there's a lot of sports photogs on the elf staff at Photo.net; this pic isn't stimulating anything special in my photo cortex.

 

Yes, it's sharp. Yes, it's the peak of action. But I see some variation of this shot every day in the newspaper. I would flip past it after a glance.

 

To get special recognition today, I think sports shots need to be have a certain edginess that put them above the common pool of sharp, peak-of-action photos. I would argue that this photo lacks such edginess.

Nostalgic memories of school here, Ian. I like the bloke in the middle right looking straight at the camera. I like the central group, and the narrow field depth.

 

Not so keen on the geezer with the headgear, but that is the way things go.

This is more of a question for my own curiosity, do model releases apply in a situation such as this? (at first the idea of the model release seemed ridiculous, but then i've never been sued or had the film extracted from my camera spaghetti style by a security gaurd, as yet) - anyone who has definitve knowledge or facts on this (not just " well i don't think its important", i'd rather skip those, thank you), thanks in advance.

The quality of scans after loading to the PHOTO.NET worry me a bit. Ian's photo is exellent example. It looks grainy but as a matter of fact

oryginal print isn't such. It's due to high compresion ratio of bit images aplied by PHOTO.NET sofware and limited number of colours. In addiition to that some kind of photos have got disturbing 'ghosts' because of this.

In my opinion beauty is always subtle and we're losing it in this way. On the other hand PHOTO.NET is the best serwer and the best service for the photographers I've ever seen. My point is that sometimes it's difficult to judge a photo properly examining only a rough scan, as it turned out in case of Ian Francis POW.

It looks like a nice photo. Knowing that the scan possibly caused the graininess is important. I agree that this picture lacks some of the punch of what is expected today in sports photography. Some of that is simply economics. If this had been shot with a 600 f4 it could have isolated the background sufficiently to key in on the action at hand; however, one does the best they can with what they have.

Excellent skin tones; superb background action; perfect crop on the right.

 

 

I love it. Enough said.

I can appreciate the issue of shooting sport/action photos. Although I think its a 'good' photo, I don't really see what all the hoop-la is about. People mention the color and detail being, per se, better than average. I just don't think it's to hard to shoot anything with action in daylight and have it come out well. Perhaps that's my arrogance. I have to agree with one specific comment. You see this in newspapers everyday. It's exactly what I thought of when I saw it.

While I agree with all the positive feedback this photo has received about compositoin and technical merrit, I find that it lacks context. I can see that this is the peak of action, mid-tackle, but what is really going on? Is it a goal-line stand? A possible breakaway by the wing? Where on the field are we?

 

I remember seeing an old Allblacks poster where the entire New Zealand pack, with the ball, was running full steam at the opposing number 15 standing all on his own, ready to do his best, but sure to be mowed down. The immage was technically perfect, and it roused emotions by telling the whole story.

 

Dwight

 

To me it is about the "moment." You can take 200 shots at a sporting event, and be lucky to catch one great moment. This is a very good one. There are lots of other pluses with the background characters, color, etc. Not highly Original, but this is what you are shooting for in an action sports shot. I find it Aesthetically strong. Good work

"If" is a newly discovered cardiac receptor capable of regulating the number of heart beats, while increasing the cardiac ejection fraction, which will play a key role in the treatment of cardiac insufficiency. What does this have to do with your photo - nothing - it's your initials and the way you wrote them! Excellent action picture, though the cropping may be a little tight? Some of the bad ratings are incomprehensible to me.