A Couple of Surf Shots

[FootLoose]

First attempt at action shots with a new camera. I think the first two are probably beyond the limits of the lens' reach as far as picture quality goes, but I post them for the subject matter - particularly the first one where the surfer's body is perpendicular to the wave face as he goes into the turn - almost an "aerial" view. The 3rd is better quality because this guy was much closer to the shore, just riding the slop. C&C welcome.

#1.




#2.




#3.

[purplehaze]

They look pretty good to me, Greg. What is the new camera?

[William W]

. . . C&C welcome.

Good shots – 1 & 2.

***

I think the first two are probably beyond the limits of the lens' reach as far as picture quality goes

I disagree.

The EOS7DMkII can withstand a lot of cropping if the exposure is nailed.

They’d be fine cropped tighter for in line viewing or for 7” x 5”, maybe even 10” x 8” Prints.

Even the low res images posted here, can withstand some cropping and using the raw file would provide better results. Two very quick rough indicatives are here:




*




***

A few questions:

1. Why did you choose to use Spot Metering?

2. Why did you choose to use Tv Priority?

3. In consideration of Q2. (above): It appears that the lens you were using had a Maximum Aperture F/5.6. Do you know the specific functionality of the EOS 7DMkII when it is in Tv Priority Mode and the Camera’s TTL Light Meter computes that the Aperture required is larger than the Maximum Aperture which is available?


WW

[FootLoose]

They look pretty good to me, Greg. What is the new camera?

Thanks, Janis. It's a Canon 7D MkII. I picked it up about a month ago in a stock-take sale but haven't had enough free time to get out become really familiar with it.

[FootLoose]

Good shots – 1 & 2.

***

I disagree.

The EOS7DMkII can withstand a lot of cropping if the exposure is nailed.

They’d be fine cropped tighter for in line viewing or for 7” x 5”, maybe even 10” x 8” Prints.

Even the low res images posted here, can withstand some cropping and using the raw file would provide better results. Two very quick rough indicatives are here:


*
...


***

A few questions:

1. Why did you choose to use Spot Metering?

2. Why did you choose to use Tv Priority?

3. In consideration of Q2. (above): It appears that the lens you were using had a Maximum Aperture F/5.6. Do you know the specific functionality of the EOS 7DMkII when it is in Tv Priority Mode and the Camera’s TTL Light Meter computes that the Aperture required is larger than the Maximum Aperture which is available?


WW

Hi William, thanks for commenting. I like your crops, I think they make more dramatic pictures. I was concerned to keep to enough of the wave in the frame to keep the action in context. I like to see the spray of the water that has been carved up by the trajectory of the board.

Re the settings: I didn't realise it was on Spot Metering. As I mentioned to Janis, I have only had the camera a short time and still haven't become familiar with all of the buttons, dials and menus. There are a lot more on the 7D than the old 600D and many more menus so scroll through to find things.

Shutter Priority so I could capture the action without too much blur in the surfers.

Q. 3 - no, I have no idea. Can you explain?

[gregj1763]

Great action shots Greg,
#1 is my pick, the angle of the guy on the wave looks awesome cropped or un-cropped

[William W]

. . . I think [the cropped versions] . . . make more dramatic pictures. I was concerned to keep to enough of the wave in the frame to keep the action in context I like to see the spray of the water that has been carved up by the trajectory of the board.

When cropping your two images I was careful to allow enough of the calm water behind the wave to allow for context of the wave’s height and also to leave enough of the board's 'carve' in the water behind it, but also I wanted to get in tight enough to see more of the expression on the Athlete's face and also (especially Frame 01) I re-framed to allow more negative space into which the Athlete could travel.

Cropping any Sports Images for publication usually relies on two main Rules of Thumb:

1. get in tight enough to see the expression on the face; or the blood; or both

2. allow the negative space in the direction of the movement, to give a more powerful illusion of that movement

*

Re the settings: I didn't realise it was on Spot Metering. As I mentioned to Janis, I have only had the camera a short time and still haven't become familiar with all of the buttons, dials and menus. There are a lot more on the 7D than the old 600D and many more menus so scroll through to find things.

Understood and totally understandable.

*

Shutter Priority so I could capture the action without too much blur in the surfers.

Understood. I thought so.


That’s a potentially dangerous choice, promulgated by much misinformation, especially on the internet.

*

Q.3 - no, I have no idea. Can you explain?

Glad that you asked and yes I shall.

I have not extensively used an EOS 7D MkII to test this exact function, but I am quite sure that in this regard the functionality would not differ from the standard of the Canon EOS Camera Series.

In that shooting scenario, the Canon EOS Camera will allow the shot to be taken, but with a warning of the Aperture blinking in the Viewfinder. This warning is to inform that, based upon the camera’s TTL Meter calculation, the Shutter Speed setting is faster than that which is necessary for the shot to be 'correctly exposed' BECAUSE there is no more aperture available that the camera can automatically open.

When I looked at your pictures I had a gut feeling that they were a bit UNDEREXPOSED. Too much detail to go into at this time as to why I thought that, but suffice to say that I’ve interrogated a lot of photos.

The EXIF reveals that both shots 1 & 2 where - Tv Mode and pulled at: F/5.6 @ 1/1000s @ ISO100.

These figures immediately confirmed my suspicions and confirmed that the images were underexposed, not by much, but definitively underexposed.

Let me explain why I concluded that.

1. As soon as I read in the EXIF ‘F/5.6 @ 1/1000s @ ISO100’ I knew that you were at least ⅓Stop under. That is because, for a Subject in full front sunlight we need – F/5.6 @ 1/800s @ ISO100. – so we know that we are at least ⅓Stop underexposed.

2.Considering that it was a new camera I expect that the shots were recently made (even if you didn’t set the time and the date, which it appears that you did), and you register that you live in AUS, so it is winter sun under which you made the shot, that means you are probably under by about ⅔Stop.

3. (Picking Nits and more detail) Considering that there is hard shadow and sunlight from camera left (see image 01 - the face) we have a Subject in Side-light. The EOS 7D MkII can be extended by at least ⅔Stop and the highlights can be recovered in Post Production. In the two rough and indicative PP that I did, I actually extended the DR of the images a little bit. The lack of Adequate Dynamic Range that should have been evident in a Full Sun Side-lit image was one of the tells that you were probably a bit underexposed for the shots.

In summary – if those shots 1 & 2 were in was full side-lit sun and I chose to use Tv = 1/1000s to freeze the action and I had Av = F/5.6 available as an Aperture: then I would have pulled at least: F/5.6 @ 1/1000s @ ISO160.

If I were using an EOS7D MkII – then: F/5.6 @ 1/1000s @ ISO250 would be not at all unreasonable.

If you are thinking that I would NEITHER be using Tv Mode NOR the Camera’s TTL Meter, then you are correct – that is if the sunlight and the Subject’s typical orientation to the Sunlight were both reasonably constant.

Notwithstanding the picking nits point 3 above, and irrespective of the Metering Mode that you chose, I expect that throughout the day there were times that Aperture Reading, was blinking at you.

*

There is a sound logic to chose Tv Mode to address a minimum Shutter Speed, I am not suggesting that you should never consider using Tv Mode - but it is a potentially dangerous choice to make and the two main traps to avoid when shooting SPORT or other MOTION Subjects in Tv Mode are:

1. Setting the ISO at TOO LOW a value, meaning you can run out of available Aperture to use.

2. NOT watching the TYPE OF LIGHTING on the Subject and not subsequently adjusting EC (Exposure Compensation), accordingly.

WW

Postscript: comments in thread might be useful reading apropos Sporting Photography in Constant Light - (esp. Post #13; #17and #18)

[FootLoose]

Thank you for explaining that William. You are right: it was shot yesterday (Friday) afternoon and I am in the 'gong. The southerly wind was damned cold on the shore, so I wasn't there too long at all. I wasn't aware of the aperture warning light blinking at, and I wonder if that was because of the bright light reflected off the white water (but then again, I was focusing on keeping the subject in the frame). The lens is the Canon 70-300 F4-5.6, so I wonder why Tv priority didn't open the aperture a bit more?

[Donald]

The lens is the Canon 70-300 F4-5.6, so I wonder why Tv priority didn't open the aperture a bit more?

Because, Greg, you must have been shooting at or near the 300mm end of the range rather than the 70mm. The aperture will open up to f4 when you're at the wider end, but as you get to the longer end it will close down to f5.6. That's why it's described as a f4-f5.6 lens. If it stayed open at f4 throughout the range, it would be described as an f4 lens.

[FootLoose]

Because, Greg, you must have been shooting at or near the 300mm end of the range rather than the 70mm. The aperture will open up to f4 when you're at the wider end, but as you get to the longer end it will close down to f5.6. That's why it's described as a f4-f5.6 lens. If it stayed open at f4 throughout the range, it would be described as an f4 lens.

Aha! Thanks, Donald. You're absolutely right, I was at the 300mm end because these guys were a couple of hundred metres off shore, at least.

[Shadowman]

Nice series.

[bnnrcn]

Very nice images Greg , enjoy your new camera

[IzzieK]

Welcome back to civilization, Greg...was wondering where you might have been...I believe you live somewhere between 30 or so minutes from the beach? Nice shots, mate! I do not know if I am the only one but in my laptop, there is a little EXIF button on the left side so I clicked on that and it said you shot the last image with a D90. New camera? but when I left-clicked on your images, all the three shots were shot with a Canon. I wonder what that hullabaloo was that? Anyway, I am glad you are shooting again...

It is early in the yawning here but it is about quarter to nine over there, so goodnight old son...I am going back to bed for a while...

[Mike Buckley]

Greg and William,

The discussion about what the camera would have done when the shutter speed is insufficient for the so-called correct exposure would depend on whether or not the camera was set to Auto ISO. This information isn't revealed in the EXIF data but it is perhaps a concern because Greg is new to the camera. If the Auto ISO was configured and if Canon's Auto ISO works the same as Nikon's, the ISO value would have been the first thing that would have been automatically adjusted by the camera. If after adjusting the ISO to the highest value configured in the Auto ISO the exposure is still not correct, the aperture would then be automatically adjusted.

My guess is that the Auto ISO was not configured in this situation. The shot was made at ISO 100, which indicates that either the Auto ISO was not configured or that it was configured using ISO 100 as the maximum ISO. It would have made no sense to configure Auto ISO at the base ISO 100. Last, it would have also made no sense to use Auto ISO in combination with shutter priority because the Auto ISO of modern DSLRs allows you to configure the minimum shutter speed. I mention the possibility of Auto ISO only because errant things like that can happen while Greg is still new to the camera.

Greg,

While I was viewing the EXIF data I noticed that the color space reported by my cataloging software is Adobe RGB. You're much safer posting images on the Internet using the sRGB color space for the people viewing your images using a browser that is not color-managed or a browser that is poorly color-managed.

[vaez]

1 is my fa

[William W]

Mike,

I concur that the possibility of Auto ISO being engaged should be considered.

However, before writing Post #7, I came to the same assumption as did you - i.e. in this situation I assumed that Auto ISO was not engaged and I based that assumption on the fact that the images were shot at ISO100, which would most likely mean that if Auto ISO were engaged the upper limit would be ISO100, which would then not make much sense.

However, there is still the possibility that Auto ISO was engaged and Greg might check that and let us know.

I did not mention Auto ISO simply to keep my previous post as simple as I could.

I think it is good that you mentioned Auto ISO in a different commentary, thank you - and yes, I have been caught with Auto ISO being engaged when I was using another persons camera to explain something to them; and it bewildered me for several minutes.

***

Yes, Canon's Auto ISO functionality when the Camera is in Tv Mode is, for all practical purposes is so similar to Nikon's functionality that they could be termed as 'the same'.

WW

[FootLoose]

William and Mike, the ISO was set to 100.

"errant things" have certainly happened - like inadvertently moving the quick control dial on the back and not realising that it adjusts exposure compensation when the camera is in Tv mode, and then wondering why everything is overexposed. All part of the fun of moving up to more sophisticated gear.

I do usually convert jpgs to sRGB for posting on the net, but it is something that I overlooked in this instance, probably because it has been a while since I posted an image. But thanks for the reminder.

[FootLoose]

Thank you to everyone who has commented. Izzie, it is a real pleasure to find a couple hours to get out with a camera again, even when the results are hit-and-miss.

[Mike Buckley]

the ISO was set to 100.

That's actually irrelevant, Greg. Your camera is always set to an ISO value whether or not you are using Auto ISO. In this case, your camera was apparently configured to ISO 100. When you are using Auto ISO, you also configure a second ISO value -- the maximum ISO that will be used.