Baseball Shots - DPChallenge Forums

06/22/2009 02:41:44 AM · #1

My first time covering a baseball game, other than as a fan at a MLB game. I don't want to upload so many into a portfolio here when I already have them online, so I'm posting the link.

BASEBALL PHOTO GALLERY

These are just from tonight's game and I would very much appreciate comments and/or critiques. I don't have the reach for outfield shots, and barely make second base acceptable. That's my one gripe.

Anyway...let me know if I'm on the right track. Thanks.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

06/22/2009 09:23:19 AM · #2

If you want I can do a complete run down with a critique on each one and post here, or I can send you a PM, will do this later. But I have one question. Where did you find a 456MM F2.8 lens? Or does PBase have the exif all screwed up?

Matt

LoudDog

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

06/22/2009 09:28:38 AM · #3

NICE! Great job on catching the action shots. One suggestion, try getting some of the non action shots as well. Infielders taking a stance just as a pitch is thrown, base runners dusting off after a slide. If/when you can get to the outfielders, catch an outfielder lining up to catch a flyball... Maybe sit on the 3B line? My favorite shots are the 3B or the SS making that long rushed throw to 1B or leaping to catch a line drive.

06/22/2009 02:13:07 PM · #4

Originally posted by MattO:

Probably would do best to leave a comment with each photo you want to critique / comment on right in the gallery. Any comments are greatly appreciated. I have another game there Wednesday.

Not sure why the exif would show that number. The only lens I used all night for the action was a Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO EX. I think the lens is a little older, so it may just be a miscommunication between lens and camera. It's not Pbase, as the same number shows up in my exif on the original file as well.

06/22/2009 02:50:48 PM · #5

Originally posted by jpochard:

Originally posted by MattO:
If you want I can do a complete run down with a critique on each one and post here, or I can send you a PM, will do this later. But I have one question. Where did you find a 456MM F2.8 lens? Or does PBase have the exif all screwed up?

Matt

Probably would do best to leave a comment with each photo you want to critique / comment on right in the gallery. Any comments are greatly appreciated. I have another game there Wednesday.

Not sure why the exif would show that number. The only lens I used all night for the action was a Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO EX. I think the lens is a little older, so it may just be a miscommunication between lens and camera. It's not Pbase, as the same number shows up in my exif on the original file as well.

I'll do that if you want me too, just wasn't sure if the comments are available for everyone to read, if that is the case you may not want a true critique to show up if everyone is able to read them. Not that I would be harsh, but if the general public were to read critiques on your shots I'm not sure how it would be perceived by non-photographers/potential buyers of the photos. And I don't want to discourage anyone from purchasing your photos and hurt some income you would be getting. Just let me know.

Matt

Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AF

06/22/2009 04:18:08 PM · #6

Originally posted by MattO:

Originally posted by jpochard:

Originally posted by MattO:
If you want I can do a complete run down with a critique on each one and post here, or I can send you a PM, will do this later. But I have one question. Where did you find a 456MM F2.8 lens? Or does PBase have the exif all screwed up?

Matt

Probably would do best to leave a comment with each photo you want to critique / comment on right in the gallery. Any comments are greatly appreciated. I have another game there Wednesday.

Not sure why the exif would show that number. The only lens I used all night for the action was a Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO EX. I think the lens is a little older, so it may just be a miscommunication between lens and camera. It's not Pbase, as the same number shows up in my exif on the original file as well.

I'll do that if you want me too, just wasn't sure if the comments are available for everyone to read, if that is the case you may not want a true critique to show up if everyone is able to read them. Not that I would be harsh, but if the general public were to read critiques on your shots I'm not sure how it would be perceived by non-photographers/potential buyers of the photos. And I don't want to discourage anyone from purchasing your photos and hurt some income you would be getting. Just let me know.

Matt

Ah...gotcha. Makes sense. Thanks for thinking about that. Just shoot me a pm with comments as you see them. Course you can leave all the good comments there that you want :)

Don't have to critique all of them, but any you do are appreciated. Thanks!

Judy

faidoi

Pentax K10D

06/22/2009 06:30:01 PM · #7

Originally posted by jpochard:

Originally posted by MattO:
If you want I can do a complete run down with a critique on each one and post here, or I can send you a PM, will do this later. But I have one question. Where did you find a 456MM F2.8 lens? Or does PBase have the exif all screwed up?

Matt

Not sure why the exif would show that number. The only lens I used all night for the action was a Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO EX. I think the lens is a little older, so it may just be a miscommunication between lens and camera. It's not Pbase, as the same number shows up in my exif on the original file as well.

Using Lightroom or other Adobe RAW software? I tried one of my friends Sigma lens and the EXIF says I shot with a Pentax lens. My EXIF info doesn't register for the Tamron 70-200mm.

Message edited by author 2009-06-22 18:30:53.

06/22/2009 07:32:35 PM · #8

Originally posted by jpochard:

[

Ah...gotcha. Makes sense. Thanks for thinking about that. Just shoot me a pm with comments as you see them. Course you can leave all the good comments there that you want :)

Don't have to critique all of them, but any you do are appreciated. Thanks!

Judy

Check your PM's I sent you some thoughts on the shots you posted.

Matt

06/22/2009 10:17:45 PM · #9

Originally posted by faidoi:

Originally posted by jpochard:

Originally posted by MattO:
But I have one question. Where did you find a 456MM F2.8 lens? Or does PBase have the exif all screwed up?

Matt

Not sure why the exif would show that number. The only lens I used all night for the action was a Sigma 70-200 2.8 APO EX. I think the lens is a little older, so it may just be a miscommunication between lens and camera. It's not Pbase, as the same number shows up in my exif on the original file as well.

Using Lightroom or other Adobe RAW software? I tried one of my friends Sigma lens and the EXIF says I shot with a Pentax lens. My EXIF info doesn't register for the Tamron 70-200mm.

Nope...just used PS Elements 2.0 for cropping, resizing and posting for web.

Matt, thanks for taking the time to send the comments.

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

07/13/2009 03:42:20 AM · #10

My brother was passing through the area and got tickets to the Giants/Padres game today (Sunday), and while it wasn't a good day for the home team, and there wasn't really all that much action considering how many runs were scoring, but I got a couple of what I think are decent shots.

So, on the first one, I need suggestions as to how might I deal with the stupid legs of the player in the upper-right ruining what's otherwise a pretty good composition. Crop somehow, clone out, or just leave alone?

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

07/13/2009 02:16:34 PM · #11

Bump for those who prefer day games ...

Sony 24-70mm F4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

07/13/2009 02:32:28 PM · #12

Originally posted by GeneralE:

Bump for those who prefer day games ...

I will say it may be personal preference but none of those shots do anything for me, the angle is wrong, they are all too loose, and the one you have way more wall then anything and cut off the players foot. With seats like that its best to enjoy the game and leave the camera in the bag. Again its just my preference on how to shoot.

Matt

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra

07/13/2009 02:59:01 PM · #13

This crop works fine for me:

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

07/13/2009 03:32:56 PM · #14

Well, these days I take whatever seats I'm given. :-)

Mostly I was "practicing" -- given the location, I was concentrating on being able to capture an "action moment" while maintaining some degree of framing and focus. There wasn't much to enjoy about the game (for a Bay Area fan) anyway, so practicing my timing was as good a use of my time as any.

I'm shooting from the third deck, handheld 400mm (35mm equivalent) lens, non-dSLR (i.e. shutter-lag issues).

Here's a first look at a duotone version

07/13/2009 04:49:26 PM · #15

Originally posted by GeneralE:

That is a much closer better crop that works. Although I'm sure with the amount of crop it's probably only good at websize huh? I know my access is much different then the seats that you had. But this is what I prefer for 420MM handheld

This is full frame from a burst of 6 shots.

Matt

Canon 12x IS USM (S3 IS built-in Lens) -- 36-432mm (35mm EQ)

07/13/2009 07:03:27 PM · #16

Originally posted by MattO:

Although I'm sure with the amount of crop it's probably only good at websize huh? I know my access is much different then the seats that you had. But this is what I prefer for 420MM handheld ....

Matt

Thanks -- actually that image is 4x5 at 300 dpi, or 8x10 at a still-acceptable 150dpi, so it's not too bad. I keep forgetting to try out burst mode!

scooter97

Canon EOS-6D

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

07/13/2009 10:04:40 PM · #17

The Phillies against the Pirates on Sat. July 11. A ninth inning come from behind win! (for the Phillies) I used burst mode for these shots. I was not as close to the field as I would be later in the game. I still worried about blown highlights so I underexposed a bit and tried to correct in PS.

07/13/2009 11:39:04 PM · #18

Originally posted by scooter97:

IMHO you have to stop worrying about blowing highlights in sports photos. Lets be honest unless you are the manufacturer of that uniform and are going to use it for advertising do you really need perfect whites if you have to deal with underexposed faces? Uniforms don't sell photos, the people in them do. Get proper exposure on the faces and let the whites fall where they may. This is of course just my opinion.

Matt