I 'ad a spot of trouble...

[Auwyn]

At the start of last season, I photographed Seaford v (a) Charlton (team) for the opening of Seaford's stand.

Right when I was about to take the team photo, a mofo of a downpour occurred, and this was the photo I was able to get:

So obviously that's all a bit rubbish and was v.disappointing, however I managed to get to this stage in PP, albeit a bit cartoony looking:

And subsequently, this:

.

So my question is, could I have taken the original photo in such a way that it was more useable from the outset and less cartoony by the time I had made it partially reasonable in photoshop?

 

[Gary Coyle]

Hi Emma, not really the right forum, get the mods to move it to the dedicated post processing and image editing forum where you will get more response

 

[Auwyn]

Hi Gary, the question was more about what could I have done differently in the taking rather than the post processing. Given there are experts here who will be highly talented in the taking of photographs under floodlights in the pi...pouring rain, that's why I asked here.

 

[phil8139]

Hi Emma, you have done an amazing job with those images

Although #1 is a different shot from 2+3

 

[Carbonangel]

I'd also say you've done a cracking job on the last image

 

[DemiLion]

Hi Gary, the question was more about what could I have done differently in the taking rather than the post processing. Given there are experts here who will be highly talented in the taking of photographs under floodlights in the pi...pouring rain, that's why I asked here.

Well an alternative method would have been to put a 70-200mm on, zoom in and then take groups of 5-8 or so, panning across the line up. It'd be fairly simple to stitch those into a panorama in photoshop.

If you put a decent flash into the equation to add some extra light, it should allow you to drop a stop or two to ISO3200 or possibly 1600 which means that you won't have to apply a massive amount of NR to get a usable pic and it will be less plastic/cartoonlike after post.

Edit:

Given that you are going to be shooting 1/80th at about 150mm or so, you'll either need a decent VR system, or use a monopd/tripod.

.... .... ....

Phil?

Those pics are all the same, apart from a slightly different crop in the first one.

 

[joescrivens]

Phil?

Those pics are all the same, apart from a slightly different crop in the first one.

no they are different shots

look at the guy clapping on the far left, 3 in from the end

 

[phil8139]

and the guy in the blue jacket walking along the back of the stand, 2+3 were taken a few seconds after the first shot

 

[DemiLion]

Yup you're both right, although I'd guess at less than a second between frames looking at the difference in movement!

 

[phil8139]

my wife wants all the extra seconds she can get

 

[joescrivens]

my wife wants all the extra seconds she can get

Mines lucky if she gets 1 second

 

[phil8139]

That's a shame Joe, I was referring to food though

 

[joescrivens]

That's a shame Joe, I was referring to food though

And I was referring to life outside of the cupboard under the stairs

 

[Auwyn]

Well an alternative method would have been to put a 70-200mm on, zoom in and then take groups of 5-8 or so, panning across the line up. It'd be fairly simple to stitch those into a panorama in photoshop.

If you put a decent flash into the equation to add some extra light, it should allow you to drop a stop or two to ISO3200 or possibly 1600 which means that you won't have to apply a massive amount of NR to get a usable pic and it will be less plastic/cartoonlike after post.

Edit:

Given that you are going to be shooting 1/80th at about 150mm or so, you'll either need a decent VR system, or use a monopd/tripod.

.... .... ....

Phil?

Those pics are all the same, apart from a slightly different crop in the first one.

Thanks Mark. Helpful advice.

And yeah, the first was a differnt one from the other two, as mentioned the correct one was slightly after the one I posted, but it was just as bad.

 

[joescrivens]

Thanks Mark. Helpful advice.

And yeah, the first was a differnt one from the other two, as mentioned the correct one was slightly after the one I posted, but it was just as bad.

Any reason you didn't post the actual one? Or was it just in error? Does the actual one you worked on have that big mark on the far right too?

 

[Auwyn]

It was an error Joe, I couldnt be bothered to go back and change it as there was no difference in the quality of the image, just in some of the positioning of the subjects. I still had the rain being lit by the floodlights and that big raindrop in the top right, etc.

I had been thinking that the rain played a part in the cartoonification, didnt cross my mind that the NR would have been more of an issue in that.