Track meet, exceeded the limits of the camera

Well, haven't posted much lately. I think I exceeded my camera capability on this field that is horrible for night shots. So I switched it to black and white. Yes I could play with it for a while longer but after switching to black and white it just worked so did some specific BW tweaking and it just worked for me.

I will have better conditions next week so back to color for those.

But I really liked the nostalgic look here.


Sorry if my original post was confusing, maybe I shouldn't post and drink.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Kevin, looks good in B&W, nice job!


Pat in GA

So I have to ask, what was it about the color that a) didn't work, and b) "exceeded the limits of your camera"?

I do like the B&W.... The OOF background and the runners expression shows a determination and loneliness as a sole runner in the lead. It is all on his ability to win, no one else's!
That is what this says to me....... A great metaphor on each of our lives and the goals we have!

Sometimes color can be a distraction from the subject AND the emotion the subjects expression creates for the viewers..
which is why the photo was taken to begin with. The emotional impact for the viewers.

So, Choosing Color or B&W is just as important as other editing settings.

Not to be anal but everything but the runner is out of level.

BackdoorHippie said:

So I have to ask, what was it about the color that a) didn't work, and b) "exceeded the limits of your camera"?

Click to expand...

This field is so dark, I mean dark for starters. Unlike most other fields, had the same issues with football here last year so.

Limits being ISO, yes I can crank it up and use editing to decrease the noise but it makes the photo to soft. So that's why I switched to BW, and stuck with it. They just looked better.

Yes, you can slow the shutter speed, crank the ISO and get useable picks but I don't like motion blur.

I need to fix the main post, it appears I left the field comments off. So I'll fix that to be more clear.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

J-see said:

Not to be anal but everything but the runner is out of level.

Click to expand...

I think you are right, just corrected on my iPad so it may not be perfect.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Can you list any EXIF? It doesn't show up because the photo is an attachment. Thanks.

hark said:

Can you list any EXIF? It doesn't show up because the photo is an attachment. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Ok this is not fun from my phone, but should have what you want to Hark. Had find an application for my phone but now I am glad I did, cool application.

I like the one that is NOT level.. adds more speed allusion to the runner

Krs_2007 said:

Ok this is not fun from my phone, but should have what you want to Hark. Had find an application for my phone but now I am glad I did, cool application.

View attachment 201485

Click to expand...

Thanks, Kevin. Wasn't there a way in LR to remove noise with a brush everywhere with the exception of the runner? Then the softness wouldn't matter so much. Nice photo in B&W. Definitely adds character to the image.

hark said:

Thanks, Kevin. Wasn't there a way in LR to remove noise with a brush everywhere with the exception of the runner? Then the softness wouldn't matter so much. Nice photo in B&W. Definitely adds character to the image.

Click to expand...

You know, I forgot about the brush. I will remember next time. I did take one into Nik, but when I have so many photos it's really time consuming. I was trying to talk my wife into a 750, but she told not with my daughter getting married this year. At least I tried. In all honesty this field is the worst and it came across wrong in my original post, but the other fields have newer lights and are so much better.

It's funny how my brain works and will except noise in BW, but it won't with color.


Thanks


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Krs_2007 said:

It's funny how my brain works and will except noise in BW, but it won't with color.

Click to expand...

The same here. It probably has to do with the fact that noise in B&W somewhat reminds me of the grain during the days of film. I loved shooting Ilford 3200 if not only for the grain in its print.

When I process B&W I regularly push it towards a more grainy structure while in color I often do all I can to be as clean as possible.

ISO 3200 should be more than usable with the D600. I understand the desire to keep the amount of work down with NR in post, but it's fairly straight forward to get a set of presets done for a body at various ISO levels, the key would be then be getting the proper exposure since messing with exposure adds noise. I also think we can excess over noise a little too much when a good shot is really the most important thing.

Not that I don't think this works well in B&W, I was just curious as to what you found to be shortcomings of the camera.

Very nostalgic.

BackdoorHippie said:

ISO 3200 should be more than usable with the D600. I understand the desire to keep the amount of work down with NR in post, but it's fairly straight forward to get a set of presets done for a body at various ISO levels, the key would be then be getting the proper exposure since messing with exposure adds noise. I also think we can excess over noise a little too much when a good shot is really the most important thing.

Not that I don't think this works well in B&W, I was just curious as to what you found to be shortcomings of the camera.

Click to expand...

Short comings again was really for the low light field and the author of the original post. I have no fears at 3200 for the most part but this field eats my lunch every time. If I remember on Monday I will post the original in color to show the weird light color. But for me and the 600, 3200 is the highest I will push it for sports and low light. I think we all have something that plagues us and this field is like zombie lighting.