Who mentioned Cricket?

[Stagecoach]

Here's a few from a first try at cricket, some learning to do as far as positioning and deciding if I focus on the bowler or batsman (don't suggest the ball) but fun.

All images have had about a 15% crop, sharpened in my standard procedure of LAB mode and again after downsizing. No noise reduction was undertaken.

No 1 - 1/800, f/5.6, ISO360, 400mm


No 2 - 1/1000, f6.3, ISO200, 400mm


No 3 - 1/1000, f7.1, ISO200, 390mm


No 4 - 1/1250, f/7.1, ISO360, 340mm


These were all taken handheld but I'll have a go with the tripod next time.

Grahame

[Rebel]

Nice shots Grahame, you definitely achieved to freeze the action with these and retained good focus on the batter.

Maybe you should clone out the balls and we can all have a go at guessing where it should be

[deetheturk]

All look good to me Grahame, the new glass certainly looks up to the task

Being Scottish, what are they doing?

Cheers David

[IzzieK]

It is good that you have focus on just one guy in all your shots because he is doing the batting anyway...I am confused about #1 though -- you lost a good part of the handle of the bat. I'll have another look...

[John 2]

Nice set Grahame.

[FootLoose]

I like the 2nd and 3rd, Graham - particularly the 3rd as it has the batsman in a good action pose, and has also captured the strain on the bowler's face. I think you might get some good shots, if you focus on the bowler's face from the start of the run-up to the end of the follow through. But that isn't to say ignore the batsman.

[Stagecoach]

Nice shots Grahame, you definitely achieved to freeze the action with these and retained good focus on the batter.

Maybe you should clone out the balls and we can all have a go at guessing where it should be

Thanks Matt, that's a good idea doing a 'spot the ball' competition

Do they still have those in the papers back in the UK?

[Stagecoach]

All look good to me Grahame, the new glass certainly looks up to the task

Being Scottish, what are they doing?

Cheers David

Thanks David, I was quite pleased with these results from the distance I was at.

As for what they are doing, they call it cricket here but likely use different rules

Cheers Grahame

[Stagecoach]

It is good that you have focus on just one guy in all your shots because he is doing the batting anyway...I am confused about #1 though -- you lost a good part of the handle of the bat. I'll have another look...

Hi Izzie,

I simply pre focused on the stumps by the batsman for all of these, it made it very easy. For No 1 it almost looks as if his hands half way along the bat but interesting that the bat has so much motion blur but the ball is frozen.

[Stagecoach]

Nice set Grahame.

Thanks John

[Stagecoach]

I like the 2nd and 3rd, Graham - particularly the 3rd as it has the batsman in a good action pose, and has also captured the strain on the bowler's face. I think you might get some good shots, if you focus on the bowler's face from the start of the run-up to the end of the follow through. But that isn't to say ignore the batsman.

No 3 is my favourite also Greg because of the action but what surprises me is the shape of the ball, the motion blur is to be expected but it's oval. Is this due to the distortion of the ball when whacked?

Not sure I would be able to follow focus on the bowlers face too easily but I could pre focus where I anticipate him letting go.

I have had a look through Google images and have some ideas now of different shots to go for.

[AlwaysOnAuto]

Who's on first?




Sorry, don't know a thing about cricket, but my son did play baseball in college and was drafted by a major league team out of high school as a pitcher, so I can appreciate your action shots as I've tried many a time to get some. Didn't have the equipment I have now though so my attempts were just that, attempts. Yours, on the other hand, are really nice. I'm almost becoming jealous of your new lens.

[FootLoose]

No 3 is my favourite also Greg because of the action but what surprises me is the shape of the ball, the motion blur is to be expected but it's oval. Is this due to the distortion of the ball when whacked?

I wouldn't be at all surprised, Grahame. ( http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/bats/impulse.htm )
The bowling side has the option of taking a new ball after 80 overs in test matches, but otherwise if a ball is damaged or lost it has to be replaced with a used ball of similar condition. One of the criteria is the shape of the old ball and its replacement. The umpire has to pass them through a metal ring to assess their roundness / distortion.

[Stagecoach]

Who's on first?

No idea Alan, I did not even know who was playing

Sorry, don't know a thing about cricket, but my son did play baseball in college and was drafted by a major league team out of high school as a pitcher, so I can appreciate your action shots as I've tried many a time to get some. Didn't have the equipment I have now though so my attempts were just that, attempts. Yours, on the other hand, are really nice. I'm almost becoming jealous of your new lens.

It certainly opens up the scope for shooting some new things Alan.

[Stagecoach]

I wouldn't be at all surprised, Grahame. ( http://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/bats/impulse.htm )
The bowling side has the option of taking a new ball after 80 overs in test matches, but otherwise if a ball is damaged or lost it has to be replaced with a used ball of similar condition. One of the criteria is the shape of the old ball and its replacement. The umpire has to pass them through a metal ring to assess their roundness / distortion.

Thanks for that info Greg, but I'm not convinced that is what has made that ball appear oval

[bnnrcn]

They all look good Grahame May I ask what sharpening in LAB mode is?

[GBO25]

Great set, great shooting. World Cup quality (we won)

Now let's really get our American cousins confused...
In #1 it looks like a wide so there's a sundry for the team that's in. It's also interesting that the 400mm focal length has made his back foot look like it's behind the stumps.

#2 would have looked arguably better if the bowler had been the focus subject but it's good anyway.

#3 it's the movement of the ball that makes it look oval. During the time the shutter was opened the ball moved the distance that is solid red. As a result both the leading edge and trailing edge of the ball were not in one spot long enough to be exposed while the centre part always had some part of the passing ball in it so it got exposed. Hope that makes sense.

Was the batsman caught behind in #3?

Again a GREAT series. You've given me inspiration to go out and have a go myself.

[Stagecoach]

They all look good Grahame May I ask what sharpening in LAB mode is?

Binnur, this is where the sharpening is undertaken in the 'LAB Colour mode' using the 'Lightness Channel' that contains only the detail and not the colour in the image. I undertake the sharpening in this 'Lightness Channel' using the 'Unsharp Mask' which supposedly allows a greater degree of sharpening before reaching the 'halo' and 'artefacts' problems.

The Unsharp Mask settings I use are similar to what I would use if undertaking basic sharpening in 'RGB' mode but I find I can often undertake this process twice or at least once fully and again at 50% opacity. The Unsharp Mask settings I generally use are Threshold 4, Radius 1, Amount 85% but will vary depending upon the importance of the image.

For a long time I used the Colin Southern method religiously but now follow this one taken from a Scott Kelby book I have.

I'm absolutely no expert on sharpening but just seem to use what looks best to me without spending much time on it as all I'm producing is 1400px wide images for screen viewing.

[Stagecoach]

Great set, great shooting. World Cup quality (we won)

Not a good weekend for NZ, along with the 7s loss

Now let's really get our American cousins confused...

I think they will ignore this thread now

In #1 it looks like a wide so there's a sundry for the team that's in. It's also interesting that the 400mm focal length has made his back foot look like it's behind the stumps.

That focal length dose affect the perspective somewhat and I may consider moving position slightly more off centre to assess results next time.

#2 would have looked arguably better if the bowler had been the focus subject but it's good anyway.

Fully agree and had not considered this at all with this session. I'll concentrate on the bowler more next time.

#3 it's the movement of the ball that makes it look oval. During the time the shutter was opened the ball moved the distance that is solid red. As a result both the leading edge and trailing edge of the ball were not in one spot long enough to be exposed while the centre part always had some part of the passing ball in it so it got exposed. Hope that makes sense.

I believe you are right and that is the obvious explanation. So from the above shots I now have a good idea of what speeds will freeze a bowled ball and what will give me motion in a hit ball (for our players at least)

Was the batsman caught behind in #3 (4)?

Not a clue, I was more than likely too busy chimping and looking to see if I had managed to get a ball in the frame. Seriously, it was not until I got home that I realised I had captured so many with the ball because due to the bright light on the LCD it was very difficult to see clearly.

Again a GREAT series. You've given me inspiration to go out and have a go myself.

They have certainly given me the inspiration to have another go and these (and I have many more similar) have certainly taught me a lot. I'm also able to position myself with the wicket parallel to the camera so that will be another learning curve.

[bnnrcn]

Thanks for the info Grahame , I will give it a go in my next edit to see how it works

Binnur, this is where the sharpening is undertaken in the 'LAB Colour mode' using the 'Lightness Channel' that contains only the detail and not the colour in the image. I undertake the sharpening in this 'Lightness Channel' using the 'Unsharp Mask' which supposedly allows a greater degree of sharpening before reaching the 'halo' and 'artefacts' problems.

The Unsharp Mask settings I use are similar to what I would use if undertaking basic sharpening in 'RGB' mode but I find I can often undertake this process twice or at least once fully and again at 50% opacity. The Unsharp Mask settings I generally use are Threshold 4, Radius 1, Amount 85% but will vary depending upon the importance of the image.

For a long time I used the Colin Southern method religiously but now follow this one taken from a Scott Kelby book I have.

I'm absolutely no expert on sharpening but just seem to use what looks best to me without spending much time on it as all I'm producing is 1400px wide images for screen viewing.