Badminton photos are BORING!!!

[chris-ccc]

Out of 10 shots, reject 9 and keep 1?

...anything can happen, and will happen. so you've got to follow the action..
so perhaps tuning your anticipation of where and when something exciting is going to happen is the key...

.
Isn't that what most photographers do...... out of 10 shots, reject 9 and keep 1?
.

 

[jhirata]

I think.. images/photos which conveys/displays the *atmosphere* in the scene is a good photo..

Like this:

Edit: A highly contrasted photo looks better also..

 

[red00ecstrat]

any suggestions for improvement?

i don't know if it works for your kwun! anyway, try changing your mindset of shooting next time. i mean why not treating it like shooting portrait shots? also, u can treat it as a news event rather than a sports event! those are just two examples and there should be more. just free your mind!

 

[Cheung]

i don't know if it works for your kwun! anyway, try changing your mindset of shooting next time. i mean why not treating it like shooting portrait shots? also, u can treat it as a news event rather than a sports event! those are just two examples and there should be more. just free your mind!

Learn from the master himself!

On another note, I met an associate of Red recently. It seems Red also has very good reputation amongst the photography fraternity here in HK.

 

[kwun]

hmmmm. i think if you try to set yourself up for shots tho and it never appears you could be more disappointed when you miss a shot somewhere else because you were focused on something else..

agree. so don't concentrate on one. but a few. better than just go by luck..

anything can happen, and will happen.. so you've got to follow the action..
so perhaps tuning your anticipation of where and when something exciting is going to happen is the key...

that's what we have been doing...

however.. in my experience learning something like that is about practice and can't be pinned down to improving technique or skill..

practice is certainly part of it. there is also evaluating the results and getting feedback and tip from other people... which is what i am trying to do here.

 

[kwun]

i don't know if it works for your kwun! anyway, try changing your mindset of shooting next time. i mean why not treating it like shooting portrait shots? also, u can treat it as a news event rather than a sports event! those are just two examples and there should be more. just free your mind!

thanks red! i was waiting for your reply.

that's good suggestion. let me digest that a bit more...

 

[AChan]

Good! This question is stimulating.
One thing I learnt from you during CO last year was to continue to shoot facial expression after action, some sort like shooting portrait. I like the images expressing how serious, tense and excite of the players.

 

[red00ecstrat]

On another note, I met an associate of Red recently. It seems Red also has very good reputation amongst the photography fraternity here in HK.

an associate? who was that???
you know, i treat everyone well as long as he/she is good-hearted.

 

[Dummey]

Yeah, I agree. This very much depends on the local conditions. All England is very good because they darken the audience. If the audience is going wild, that can add greatly to a photo.

I need a 200/f2.0....

Well, this could be an area for a bit of experimenting. I don't have the equipment for fast shooting so I'm usually forced to shoot at f/1.8-f2.4 which makes for some nice bokeh. Flip side of this is that I'm also forced to manual focus a lot of shots to catch action. Upside to this is that There are some nice dramatic pictures even with a crowded background. Downside #2, you'll rip all your hair out trying to get that balance between bokeh and focus.

Another thing that I've found very enjoyable to photograph is the intermission between games. The whole interaction between players and friends when they are not playing.

 

[Dummey]

I think.. images/photos which conveys/displays the *atmosphere* in the scene is a good photo..

Like this:

Edit: A highly contrasted photo looks better also..

This seems to come up a lot. Many non photographer friends have pointed out that high contrasted pictures are "better" while photographer friends hold the opposite opinion. What do you guys think about it?

"better" in this case being the more visually appealing.

 

[ants]

Actually.. too much badminton photos is actually boring.. there are so many things in the world that we can shoot besides badminton.

 

[jhirata]

This seems to come up a lot. Many non photographer friends have pointed out that high contrasted pictures are "better" while photographer friends hold the opposite opinion. What do you guys think about it?

"better" in this case being the more visually appealing.

Hmm, yes, that's what I mean. High-contrasted pictures are more appealing to the eye, but can act as a distraction also. A black and white/desaturated image however, doesnt have any distracting colours and focuses the attention to the composition, and err.. depicts the mood/atmosphere of the scene in a better way than a high-contrasted image.

But what about an image with a high-contrasted main focal, for example the player, and a black and white/desaturated background ?
eg:

(sorry for the bad image quality)
Pictures like these illustrate what's happening in the scene and the atmosphere/mood more, since it focuses the viewer's attention to the main focal, the player ( Shoji Sato ). Like.. in this picture, you can see how much effort Shoji Sato put into, to dive and retrieve the shuttle from his facial expression and so on..

Maybe I should edit the picture of Bao Chun Lai to see the effect and compare the original with the edited version.

But editing is like cheating.. is there such camera in the market yet, that makes the background black and white, and the main focal high-contrasted ? I dont think so.. so for now, we can simply use different types of lenses to make the background blur, so that the main focal, the player can stand out more..

So here's my conclusion that I figured out while typing this.. The less things that there is in the background, the better an image looks ?

Maybe I'm wrong.. because many people here are much older than me and should be smarter than me also.
But just my 2 cents..

 

[Cheung]

hmm, I think that picture of Sato isn't a good one to demonstrate because the background was already fairly dark from the lights. Can you use a different one with a more crowded background?

Such as http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showpost.php?p=758013&postcount=468

 

[red00ecstrat]

IMG]http://i4.bebo.com/043a/7/mediuml/2008/04/10/10/4165450615a7402591941ml.jpg[/IMG]
(sorry for the bad image quality)
Pictures like these illustrate what's happening in the scene and the atmosphere/mood more, since it focuses the viewer's attention to the main focal, the player ( Shoji Sato ). Like.. in this picture, you can see how much effort Shoji Sato put into, to dive and retrieve the shuttle from his facial expression and so on..

what's that for? may be i m too conservative in this particular topic. but i think photos shouldn't be altered in any way! just leave everything there. it isn't a painting.

So here's my conclusion that I figured out while typing this.. The less things that there is in the background, the better an image looks ?

Maybe I'm wrong.. because many people here are much older than me and should be smarter than me also.
But just my 2 cents..

sorry, i can't agree with u on this neither.

 

[Dummey]

sorry, i can't agree with u on this neither.

I think it'd be better to use a term other then better. For example, better for somebody aiming to take an action picture of a said player would probably prefer a plainer background so that the player, their ideal target, stands out more. On the other hand, the goal is to capture the atmosphere of badminton background would add greatly and make the picture "better".

So I think that that picture is a good example that capture the action of the player, but the lack of environment makes the picture look scripted.

 

[red00ecstrat]

dummey, we must accept that different tournaments were held in different venues with different shooting situations/spots. have u ever seen spectators sitting just few feet away form a player in all england or any other super series open tournaments?
to me, i can live with that sort of "imperfections"! beside, all shots with a plain background will turn badminton photos to become even more boring like products from a production line.

 

[jhirata]

dummey, we must accept that different tournaments were held in different venues with different shooting situations/spots. have u ever seen spectators sitting just few feet away form a player in all england or any other super series open tournaments?
to me, i can live with that sort of "imperfections"! beside, all shots with a plain background will turn badminton photos to become even more boring like products from a production line.

I see your point there. Hehe.. I still need to learn more. I'm quite keen on taking photography as a school subject next year because I'm often impressed by the photos in the National Geographic magazines, the TIME magazines and so on.. I need to know what makes them 'look so good'.

 

[kwun]

some food for thoughts. not directly in topic, but related:

from this link:

http://www.astropix.com/SPORTSPIX/NSC/TIPS04.HTM
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Sports Photography Tips[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Eight Elements Necessary for Success[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] Talent - Natural talent is something you are born with. You either have it or you don't. If you don't have it, you can still go a long way on the other six elements.
Skill - This is something you can learn, like hitting a baseball. Or photography.
Knowledge - You need knowledge both of your craft and of the game you are photographing. You must know how your camera works inside and out. You must be able to control it to get it to do what you want it to do without thinking about it or having to refer to the manual. You must also know the sport you are going to shoot. Study the game. For instance, in baseball, if there is a runner on first base and the ball is hit in the gap, where will the play be? Hint - not at second base!
Practice - Photography is a physical as well as a mental skill. Practice will make you better at both. Skills improve dramatically with practice and atrophy with disuse.
Desire - Your philosophy and attitude will affect your work. When I go out to shoot a game, I want the great peak action moments, the ones with great content, and the ones with great emotion. I expect to get them. I get really mad when I don't. I'm greedy. I want it all and I expect to get it all. My goal is to combine a great moment, with great content and great emotion in a single picture in every game I cover.
Work - Make a commitment to excellence. Don't stand around picking your nose just because baseball is mostly boring. Shoot it like you would if you were playing the game. Concentrate on every pitch. Figure out the situation beforehand. If you are in left field and there is a runner on second, and the ball is hit to you, where are you supposed to throw it? Be in a "zone of your own" of concentration. Know the game situation and what's going to happen.
Opportunity - You can't always control what opportunities you have, but you have to seize them when then come along. I was in my last semester in college with only 11 credits left to graduate when I quit school to take a job as a photographer at a small suburban newspaper just outside of New Orleans. It was not even a job shooting sports full time, but it was a job that would not have been there when I graduated, and it was in a city where I wanted to live and work. It allowed me to get a start in the newspaper business, and opened up further opportunities for me once I had more experience. I finally went back to college about a decade later and finished up my degree.
Luck - Some say you can't control it, but it favors the prepared. On the other hand, sometimes being in the right place to get the best picture is strictly a matter of chance, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. For example, consider this picture of Muhammad Ali standing over Sonny Liston after he knocked him out. It is one of the most famous images in the history of sports photography. It was taken by Neil Leifer of Sports Illustrated. But look closer. In between Ali's legs is Herb Scharfman, the other Sports Illustrated photographer covering the fight. All he got a picture of was Ali's butt. It didn't work out this way because Leifer knew which side of the ring to be on. It was strictly chance and pure luck. Scharfman, however, was certainly in the right place at the right time for this photo of Rocky Marciano knocking out "Jersey" Joe Walcott.
Note that Leifer was not the only one to get the picture of Ali standing over Liston, even though it made him famous. Here is another version shot by an Associated Press photographer right next to Leifer. Actually, I even think this version is a little bit better than Leifer's photo because Ali's expression is better. Here is a video of the knockout. Notice how Ali did not stand over Liston and strike this pose. It was over in the blink of an eye.
[/FONT]

 

[Dummey]

dummey, we must accept that different tournaments were held in different venues with different shooting situations/spots. have u ever seen spectators sitting just few feet away form a player in all england or any other super series open tournaments?
to me, i can live with that sort of "imperfections"! beside, all shots with a plain background will turn badminton photos to become even more boring like products from a production line.

It is exactly because we have to accept the variance in venue that a more robust system of badminton photograph evaluation has to be created. Does a background signify a good or bad picture? Of course not, but is there an underlying rubric that constricts the pictures printed in sports magazines? I would like to believe so.

So what I propose is the development of a means to judge one another's photos aside from speculation and personal feelings. Subjective reactions to photos can be enlightening and promote learning and advancement on the photographers part, but what prevents regression from this speculation.

Tying this back to my last post, the term "better" is superficial and doesn't provide real feedback since it's entirely subjective both from the responder and the reader. It would be nice if we could get into the habit of giving more descriptive responses or start using a rating system for photos because being told that my photos are "good" isn't going to lead to improvement.

 

[kwun]

Dummey, an objective rating for art? is that possible?