brian_bahn

June 9, 2009

Suprised this hasn't been starte yet. I'll give it a go.

U10 soccer.

June 5, 2009

Peter,

Good info, that's the kind of info I need to learn as I go. I will be ordering some to see the results, one's from different amounts of crops so I can see what is too much and what is good.

One more question though. Do you upsize the image? After I crop using PSE 7, I go into image size and if it falls below 300ppi for an 8x10 I've been using bicubic smoother to put it up to 300ppi at 8x10. Most of the crops I've done I'd say if it fell below it was usually right around 275ppi for 8x10. Should I not worry about upsizing it? Am I doing more harm?

Thanks

June 4, 2009

Shal,

Yes, I actually used bicubic smoother in PSE 7 for the one's that I cropped and dropped below 300 ppi for an 8x10. Most were falling right around 275 ppi so I didn't have to uprez them too much. I will be ordering soem myself to see hwo they look to make sure they are OK, they looked good on the screen so I'm sure printing will be fine.

Nathan,

One's I had of multiple players got slight cropping, individuals got more crop.

June 4, 2009

Mostly youth sports right now. That's why I figured I wouldn't be gettign much above 8x10 or so. I posted two games I did over the weekend last night going through and cropping as I saw fit(cropping a lot to 8x10 and 4x6 aspect). They definitely look better overall.

I noted in the galleries if a larger print is desired to contact me directly. That way I can review which one they want and see how large it can go.

June 3, 2009

LOL. Sorry Scott. I guess it could be confusing.

June 3, 2009

This question is for those that sell prints online of sporting events. I just started doing it this season and am feeling my way through what works and what doesn't. Currently I delete out the one's I definitely don't want to offer but still load some that could be better with cropping. I have been doing that in order to get them uploaded quickly so they are there within a day of the event. One thing I would like to do is to start going through my shots and cropping/adjusting to maximize the shot and offer more dynamic shots.

In order to do this though I will then need to limit the print sizes I offer. Say nothing more than 11x14, maybe even stop at 8x10. My question is for those that do this type of selling how much of your sales are actually prints above 11x14? Am I worried about somethign that barely exists anyhow? One way I could pull the time back in would be to set my galleries to offer only up to 11x14 and then note that larger sizes may be available depending the the individual image and I would need to be contacted before ordering. Using SmugMug BTW.

My plan would be to make sure that anything I crop could still be printed 8x10 at 300 dpi.

Thoughts? Thanks.

May 21, 2009

Jen,

Thanks, that's the type of info I need to learn more of as I go. I am comfortable with what to expect from 8x10 even 11x14 but once it gets to 16x20 I am not experienced enough yet to be able to guage an expected result quickly. Thank You.

Patrick,

One thing I am wrestling with so far(just started selling this season) is the balance between how quickly to put up the images to my site so parents can look at them within a day after the game and being able to take the time to go through them in detail and crop/manipulate as I want.

These are things I'll learn as I go through the process. Thank You much for the tips.

In the end it turns out his wife wants a different picture and wants it B&W. Still 16x20, and I'm goign to print it locally so I have some time.

May 20, 2009

LOL. Yeah I knew it wasn't staying at f/2.8, I just wasn't sure how the camera was handling it and what result I should shoot for/expect.

If it would have remained 2.8 I would have been sure to let folks know of the anomoly, and them promptly reversed engineered it and went from there. Haha

May 20, 2009

Thanks everyone. Good point about if he sees it that way then let it be.

Also good point about the "little kid" perspective. I will remember that one.

May 20, 2009

Shun sorry, yes it is the AF-D version.

So if I understand correctly I am OK, leaving ti at 2.8 and the meter is reading what I will actually get when I click the shutter, it's just that the display on the camera allows me to set it at 2.8 but it really is "seeing" f/4.

So in reality I'm not getting a different exposure than what I think I'm gettign when I set it to 2.8 and see the shutter speed it's reading?

May 20, 2009

Shun,

I can actually dial the value down to 2.8. Not sure if the camera reads the Nikon and Kenko differently or what. I realize it's still actually closing/exposing to f/4, it's more a question of what goes on with the meter. The lens is wide open when it meters rigth and calculates based on what I set the A value to right? So am I getting an accurate exposure if I have it metering at 2.8? It seems to come out accurately. Not sure what's going on.

May 20, 2009

I have a Kenko 300 Pro 1.4x tele. Using it on my D300 with 80-200 2.8. Since it is one stop difference it makes the 2.8 an f4.0 correct? So when shooting in Aperture priority mode do I set the Aperture to 4.0 or can I leave it at 2.8? I say this because when changing between the two values the meter does change. But it does seem to expose correctly at the 2.8.

Sorry if this seems simple I just can't get my head around the technical part of it, which I usually can.

Thanks

May 20, 2009

Here is full res file. D300.

May 20, 2009

Hi,

I am hoping to get a quick answer to this. I just started selling pics online thru SmugMug and I have a friend who wants to order this pic today and wants to do 16x20. Personally I would like to crop the empty space but then would that cause an issue with going 16x20?

I appreciate any replies. I have doen 16x20 before but hadn't from a cropped image.<div></div>

May 18, 2009

I'll get it started. A U10 soccer tourney and a U8 baseball game.

May 13, 2009

Thanks for the replies. Seems as though it's pretty much what I should expect using a TC. Can get decent results if I just pay attention. James, I hadn't noticed my SS dropped and didn't lok at the EXIF, you are probably right why they appear softer. It seemed bright enough out that I could leave it set on A mode and the shutter speed would be around 1/800 or so, silly of me to assume and not pay attention. LOL.

I do intend on buying a 300mm lens at some point, most likely my next lens purchase. I really want the 300 f/4 because it would be ideal for me. But since I just bought a new PC(well the parts to build one) the lens will have to wait. Darn.

May 12, 2009

I have had some mixed results using the 80-200 2.8 with the Kenko Pro 300 1.4x Tele on my D300. Not sure if there is anything I can do to get better results or if what I have gotten is pretty much par for the course with this combo.

I guess the biggest issue is I love shooting wide open. I like the subject is olation I get and also obviously with sports I need the shutter speed. I just really don't want to have to stop down to 5.6 or more. But I guess if I have to I have to. LOL.

W hat I have found so far though is the quality of the shots I get change, not quite consis tent and I'm not sure if it's me or the combo, or both. Anybody who use this combo or similar can g ive any tips I'd appreciate it. Or is it really just that I need to stop down? I know you'll ask if I gave it a try and I will say no because I just don't want to darn it. Haha But really I did get good results for the most part the first time out, but this time I didn't and conditions were pretty similar. Also I got some pretty bad CA around the uniform lettering.

I do have two questions:

1. I was shooting in Aperture mo de and had it dialed down to 2.8. Does this get me f4 automatically since that is the widest the te le will let it go?

2. Do you think the amount of red in the frame had anything to do with the results?

All in all I think the shots are soft, fairly flat for being a custom picture control I made from the vivid control. And agai n the CA was bad sometimes. But then other shots are pretty good.

Soft, flat with CA

Sharper, more p op

May 1, 2009

You mean like this? LOL

Seriously though, I like Steve's idea of the semi-circle on that part of the field. There's also the step ladder idea where you get up a step ladder and the team looks up to the camera, could still do the semi-circle idea with that.<div></div>

May 1, 2009

I too shoot through a fence a lot. In fact it seems nearly every LL field in my area is surrounded by them! I use a D300 with a 80-200 2.8 WITH the hood on. I change openings a lot but typically find one at the right height and sit the lens hood against it, center it up and shoot away. From time to time I get the edge of the fence in but after some practice it seems normal. Haha

A lot of my shots in the "Baseball" galleries are through a fence. One titled "York LL" was actually shot through a chain link fence with the thick black coating, a little more restricting but still worked.

<a href="http://dynamicsportsimages.com/Baseball">http://dynamicsportsimages.com/Baseball</a>

April 29, 2009

Laura,

I've seen your many postings in the Sports forum and I have to say I think you and I are on a parallel path. I see a lot of similarities in your questions and your photos to mine

That being said, get the D300. The AF is outstanding and being that the D90 doesn't have that same system then I don't think you would be as happy. That's really what it comes down to, the AF system and build. I looked at both before buying the D300 and the D300 is definitely a more substantial machine.

I recall you have issues with the football shooting at night, and although I haven't gotten to shoot football at night yet I have shot swimming indoors which can be nearly as horrid and as long as you get the exposure right, which isn't difficult you will be ecstatic over what you get now at high ISO.

I know you asked for power users, of which I am certainly not, but I thought since we are along a similar path it would help. D300 hands down.

April 21, 2009

Thanks for the replies.

Nathan - I did get some of the kids on the bench but probably not as many as I could have.

Raymond - I did get a lot of faces. But I took a lot of shots and I read from a few people to throw in some of just the number and some kids/parents like that. So I threw some in.

David - You are so right. That is probably the biggest thing I need to work on the next time out. I was concentrating on watching the batter and trying to anticipate where the play would be then getting it framed and shoot. Next time I will try vertical more.

Thanks All

April 20, 2009

This was the first weekend where I went to an event with the plan to shoot, hand out cards and see how it goes. Was my wife's nephew's baseball tourney. Four games total. Friday and Saturday I spent most of the time getting the kids at bat and at least throwing. Sunday I had two games to work on capturing action in the field, which is much more exciting as most of you know.

It was a good learning experience. To this point I have shot my wife's nephew's team and last season handed each a framed 5x7 at season's end. This time though I handed them a business card with my SmugMug site on it and asked them to have a look. I also handed cards to the opposing coaches and asked they hand them out to the parents of their team.

As for shooting I had to shoot through a chain link fence for some stuff but not for others. I had my D300 and Friday and Saturday used the 80-200 2.8 with Kenko 1.4 Tele wide open. Sunday was overcast and I wanted to use the 80-200 alone anyhow so that's what I did. I felt I did good with the standard batting and throwing shots. Tried to be creative on in game emotion shots with seriously tight framing. One thing I kept doing and seriously need to stop is cutting off feet. LOL. I tend to aim for the chest, well, that gets me no feet as tight as I was trying to get on the action shots anyhow. As for capturing in game action I am thinking I should have dropped to f4 instead of 2.8(w/o tele). There were some shots where focus was just off due to me trying to quickly compose and shoot. But I really like the subject isolation of the 2.8.

Got the pics posted each night. Made my first sale on Sunday morning from an opposing team. Two digital downloads. I am hoping for a little more but hey, the experience was worth it. I just love capturing the action and emotion and being able to share it with their parents and family.

Anyhow, here is a link to one of the galleries. Please feel free to check it out and give me any opinions you may have. Also feel more than free to check out the other games galleries as well.

<a href="http://dynamicsportsimages.com/gallery/7941188_4gcR3/1/515357273_FbuyT">http://dynamicsportsimages.com/gallery/7941188_4gcR3/1/515357273_FbuyT</a>

Thank You

Brian Bahn

March 20, 2009

Yes SmugMug allows to use a domain name. That's why I said in the original post I wanted to decide before I register with GoDaddy(who SmugMug uses).

I decided to go with DynamicSportsImages. I am just doing a few teams and clubs to start with, see how it goes so the hobbiest level is fine for now. I've heard a lot of good things about SmugMug so I am comfortable with it.

Sometimes I spend too much time and energy over-analyzing. Need to step into the stream if I want to get wet, so I stepped in.

March 18, 2009

I tried to avoid doing this because I know it's done a lot but I guess I came to the conclusion everyone else that did it did. I just can't decide and would like help from those that have been through it.

I need to pick the name I will use for my SmugMug site from which I will be selling sports action shots and also custom posters.

I am down to two choices and can't decide between them or just using my name which to me doesn't flow very well.

My two choices are:

Dynamic Sports Images.com

or

Still Motion Sports.com

Of course I run the risk someone sees one of these and likes it so they go take it. LOL.

Also Brian Bahn Photography. I mainly will be selling sports from the site that's why I went with a sports themed name but I also would not turn down any opportunity that arisesfrom it that is not sports(I was thinking band competitions, dance recitals, etc) and not sure if it would seem cheesy working through a site with a sports name to do other work. Thoughts on this aspect would be appreciated as well.

Here is my link. Obviously I have it named Dynamic right now but I'm not entirely sold and want to be before I register with GoDaddy

<a href="http://dynamicsportsimages.smugmug.com/">http://dynamicsportsimages.smugmug.com/</a>

Thanks.

February 18, 2009

Here is the 2nd.<div>

00SUlA-110371684.JPG.f32380c6835bd781cf7630a8833aa453.JPG

</div>

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by brian_bahn