Two rugby images from the weekend

Paulw

Just two images I took over the weekend. Time to change sports now that the AIB League season is over.

These were taken at the final game of the season of the AIB League Division 2 between Suttonians and Bective Rangers. (7-15)


Handing off the tackle -



Not tackling low enough -

whyulittle

Buccaneers back up to Division 1 next season, must make a few games. Meant to this season, just never got around to it! 2:30pm is very early for me!

Nice sharp images Paul.

OnLooker

Nice images. Whats rugby like to shoot?

Paulw

I'm already looking forward to next season. Just have to find some other clubs to cover. Maybe Clontarf.

The 1d MkIII and the 300mm f/2.8 make for nice sharp images, even if they are heavily cropped down. :rolleyes:

Rugby is probably easier than hurling or gaelic, since it's not quite as fast. But, you still need to know what's going to happen and where the action might be.

I'm looking forward to trying some football (soccer and gaelic football) in the coming weeks, just to broaden my horizons and experience.

thebaz

Paul , i'm no expert at rugby photography , but used to play a bit , and the schools cup, can be quite entertaining if your looking for new ideas

This kind of thing

http://www.flickr.com/photos/thebaz/2337722057/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/thebaz/2242130371/

Paulw

I used to play a bit too ... long long time ago. :eek:

Schools rugby is just too hard to photograph. Not as many clear shots, and the play tends to be a lot more ragged. At the higher end of the game you tend to get better running lines, better clear tackles and it's a lot easier to photograph. Just something I've found from experience.

Cheers for the thought though.

mikeanywhere

Nice shots Paul, crisp as always!!

Great action shots again,in the first shot it kind of looks like the runner is biting the tacklers hand.I guess the hand off wasn't enough :eek: I'd probably crop them a tiny bit tighter though.There's a bit of an expanse above the players especially in the second one.

Trojan911

Paulw wrote: »

Just two images I took over the weekend. Time to change sports now that the AIB League season is over.

These were taken at the final game of the season of the AIB League Division 2 between Suttonians and Bective Rangers. (7-15)

Nice images. Just out of curiosity, what settings did you use? i.e. portrait or action, what ISO? I'm new to SLR photography & am learning with a Canon D400. Thanks.

melekalikimaka

i love the first, tho i wouldnt mind seeing it with maybe a closer crop around the faces/hands. just a thought

Paulw

Trojan911 wrote: »

Nice images. Just out of curiosity, what settings did you use? i.e. portrait or action, what ISO? I'm new to SLR photography & am learning with a Canon D400. Thanks.

Settings (all listed on my website for photography).

ISO 800 (some are ISO 400)
Tv (shutter priority) mode
1/1600 shutter speed
giving f/2.8

The second image was 1/5000 shutter speed (the clouds cleared a bit)

Borderfox

Lovely shots, the first one is superb.

Overdraft

You need to work on your exposure and composition Paulw, you loosely have the right idea in your photos but technically they are weak and look more like the work of an enthusiastic amateur than a professional. The colours need to be much more vibrant (Photoshop should rescue you here), the subjects much more the central focus of the photos, and you need to work on originality - average sports photographers, who pick out the obvious, are ten-a-penny, the great ones have an eye for the unique.

Paulw

Overdraft, care to share your sports images that are vibrant and unique?

None of what you've posted makes sense. These images are vibrant, especially when printed. The colours are exactly as was seen on the day. Maybe you just need to have your monitor calibrated?

As for the subject being the main focus, can you show me anything else in the images that is a point of focus?

Thanks for your comment though.

Overdraft

Paulw wrote: »

Overdraft, care to share your sports images that are vibrant and unique?

None of what you've posted makes sense. These images are vibrant, especially when printed. The colours are exactly as was seen on the day. Maybe you just need to have your monitor calibrated?

As for the subject being the main focus, can you show me anything else in the images that is a point of focus?

Thanks for your comment though.

That's a pity, you don't take constructive criticism well. Such defensiveness is not an indication of someone willing to learn, so you never will. I was actually being kind, your photos aren't unlike those that might be taken by the outhalf's mother with her Cybershot from the touchline. Although in the second photo she might have succeeded in capturing the left foot of the player on the left. :rolleyes:

Composition my dear boy, composition.

kensutz

I don't think you're doing yourself any favours Overdraft. Pauls work is very good and obviously you're not backing up your statements with any conclusive proof as to how he should "better" his shots.

Overdraft

kensutz wrote: »

I don't think you're doing yourself any favours Overdraft. Pauls work is very good and obviously you're not backing up your statements with any conclusive proof as to how he should "better" his shots.

How he should "better" his shots?

Did I not advise that he should try to capture the complete limbs of one of the players in his shot? Is that not a touch important in a sports/action photo? Do you need to be Annie Leibovitz to work that one out?

Come on, I know you're trying to be buddies with him, but be honest: his photos are amateurish, at best.

kensutz

Let's see yours then. Also you didn't advise him before your edit. :rolleyes:

Overdraft

Paulw wrote: »

As for the subject being the main focus, can you show me anything else in the images that is a point of focus?

How did your failure to zoom in tight on the players in the first photo (failing that - have you heard of cropping?) enhance the work?

And how did the inclusion of the 'netting' around the pitch enhance the photo?

It didn't. It's a snap taken from the touchline, no more than that.

If you want to see real sports photography click here Do you seriously think they would be impressed with the two images above?

Overdraft

kensutz wrote: »

Let's see yours then.

Honestly, mine's bigger than yours.

Unlike Paulw I don't claim to be a 'photographer' - I just take photographs.

Neither do I have a website offering 'expert' advice on taking sports photographs.

I know a good photograph when I see one, which is just as well: a big chunk of my media career was taken up by hiring and not hiring photographers.

If Paulw can't take constructive criticism then perhaps he's in the wrong business?

This is how it should be done.

And here. Funny, the colours are vibrant on my monitor for this photo - maybe it doesn't need calibrating after all? Note the composition, the dynamism of the shot, the exclusion of irrelevant images, the focus on the main characters, the vibrancy and passion of it all! Wonderful.

Dodgykeeper

Overdraft,

I dont really think that Paulw was claiming that the pics were award winning material, he was just posting up two images which he believed people may enjoy, and from the comments before your rant some people did.

Paulw is a regular poster here and is always willing to offer his advice (some of which I have taken) and comments on peoples pictures in a constructive manner.

I would suggest you put up (some pictures) or shut up, posting links to Sportsfile is not making a point

DK

Paulw

Overdraft wrote: »

Unlike Paulw I don't claim to be a 'photographer' - I just take photographs.

Neither do I have a website offering 'expert' advice on taking sports photographs.

From the Cambridge English Dictionary -
photographer
noun [C]
a person who takes photographs, either as a job or hobby:

Hence my claim to be a photographer. Nothing more than that.

Can you show me where I claim to offer "expert" advice? I do offer personal advice, from my experience.

As for your link to Sportsfile images - it is a lot easier to take high quality images at higher level games, where the background is crowd. I've been on the sideline of many games with the photographers from Sportsfile, and Inpho, who I have great respect for. I can also show images from such games where are of comparitive quality to the ones that you have highlighted.

Again, if you want to give constructive criticism, please feel free, but also, can you show us any examples of your own photographs, rather than linking to full time professional photographers?

OnLooker

Paul & Peadar have helped most people here & I have benefited greatly from their advance.

Overdraft, we enjoy sports photograhpy & like sharing our work. We don't claim to be pro's but alot of the people on here make some money from their hobby.

Can you show me some of your work?

If I want advice on taking photos & hiring photogrpahers I can ask plenty of people I know who work professionally in the area & are only too eager to help unlike you who can't back up their work.

Ricky91t

Overdraft wrote: »

Honestly, mine's bigger than yours.

Unlike Paulw I don't claim to be a 'photographer' - I just take photographs.

Neither do I have a website offering 'expert' advice on taking sports photographs.

I know a good photograph when I see one, which is just as well: a big chunk of my media career was taken up by hiring and not hiring photographers.

If Paulw can't take constructive criticism then perhaps he's in the wrong business?

This is how it should be done.

And here. Funny, the colours are vibrant on my monitor for this photo - maybe it doesn't need calibrating after all? Note the composition, the dynamism of the shot, the exclusion of irrelevant images, the focus on the main characters, the vibrancy and passion of it all! Wonderful.

Paul's been here alot longer than you have he offered great advice to many of us starting out in sports and if he was'nt here maybe the ones starting out in sports photography would'nt of got any good photos at all.I dont know why you had to start saying they lack exposure.They are much better than the "mother shots from the sideline"as her shots probably be out of focus,blury and noisy.When i look at Paul's photos i get a sense of action from the photo's so what if he missed a tiny bit of a persons foot.Sports photographers capture the action which i think paul has captured perfectly

Dink

Is that the best you can do? Mock someone who you deem to be your intellectual inferior? Honestly, it took me back to the days when I witnessed bullying in the schoolyard! You are someone so in awe of your own articulacy, as you regard it, you choose to spew smart ar$ed bile all over anyone you stumble upon when you’re in the mood. May I humbly suggest that you grow up?

....Your own words Overdraft in another thread......

Paul has taken the time to constructivley help lots of here in our first forays into sports photography. I for one thank him for it.

City-Exile

In fairness, Paulw has taken much better pictures than the two above & I think, if he's honest, he'd admit that these are weak by comparison.
He has put a lot of effort into photographing sport recently &, like most of us, he's still refining his style.
Paulw & I have different views on cropping, but if we were all the same, life would be boring.
Overdraft is entitled to his opinion & a lot of what he said is valid.

The last thing we want is people falling out over a difference of opinion though.

whyulittle

Overdraft

Paulw wrote: »

it is a lot easier to take high quality images at higher level games, where the background is crowd.

Absolute nonsense! Just an excuse. The greatest of all sports photos capture the moment, the intensity, the brilliance, the agony, the excitement and/or the passion, etc, etc - the crowd rarely has much to do with that.

Some of the greatest of photos have been taken at events watched by one man and a dog - are you seriously saying you have a better chance of taking a great photo at a full Croke Park than an almost empty Parnell Park?? Why? The sport, the match, the players, the officials - they are the central characters, a bunch of terrace flag wavers blurred in the background do not a great photo make.

Where is the crowd in one of the greatest and most celebrated of all sports photos? If you don't understand why it was so great (and it's certainly not due to any technical brilliance) maybe you don't comprehend sport?

Paulw wrote: »

Again, if you want to give constructive criticism, please feel free, but also, can you show us any examples of your own photographs, rather than linking to full time professional photographers?

Again, you are being terribly defensive. I repeat: I take photographs, you call yourself a photographer. If you don't understand the difference (and a dictionary won't enlighten you) then, well, I'm bemused.

I love my photographs, I have a good eye and I know instinctively what makes a great photo, but I don't have the technical ability to match. In fact my technical ability hovers between woeful and average. But I can view a photograph and know what it lacks - you would make progress if you too could do this.

So not in my most deluded state do I believe my photos to be of a sufficiently high standard to be worthy of display on a website. In other words, I make no claims about my ability, you do.

If you would like anyone prepared to offer you constructive criticism on your work to desist then you should say so, you are evidently highly sensitive. Perhaps you are not used to criticism?

Overdraft

City-Exile wrote: »

In fairness, Paulw has taken much better pictures than the two above & I think, if he's honest, he'd admit that these are weak by comparison.

Overdraft is entitled to his opinion & a lot of what he said is valid.

The last thing we want is people falling out over a difference of opinion though.

Thank you City-Exile - you're clearly not yet a fully paid up member of the whatever-you-do-don't-criticise-Paulw's-work club.

Overdraft

Dink wrote: »

Paul has taken the time to constructivley help lots of here in our first forays into sports photography. I for one thank him for it.

Okay, let me get this right: absolutely no one, under any circumstances at all, is allowed offer an honest opinion on Paulw's work if it is less than glowing? Gosh, it's the Polit Bureau of photography.

Paulw

Overdraft wrote: »

Thank you City-Exile - you're clearly not yet a fully paid up member of the whatever-you-do-don't-criticise-Paulw's-work club.

City-Exile would qualify as a very good sports photographer, and I'd even say a friend.

Calina

Drat. It's 1am which is maybe not the best time to do this but I have been too busy all afternoon.

I'd like to comment on a couple of things:

1) the photographs.

Paul, I am not entirely sure why you posted these. Was it for C&C? Because if it is, I have the following to say. You have taken far better photographs than these.

I have some technical issues and some emotive issues which you may or may not take on board as you wish.

Technically I would say that the images are rather flat and under-vibrant. I know you see the prints are excellent but I've spent rather an amount of time looking at them on two different monitors at this stage and even on this superbright one I am finding them somewhat flat. Obviously I am not going to tell you what to do with them in Photoshop. The other issue I have with them is that I find them a little flat from a - how am I going to explain this - dimensional point of view. Your players are also flat. Yes they are in focus, but they just don't seem to fit into the field of focus. I can't explain it any better than that.

The one thing which I do feel would greatly benefit both photographs is a 1:1 crop.

From an emotive point of view, I'm just not getting enough personality out of them either. This I suspect is linked to the camera angle vis-a-vis the players. Not enough face which is a pity given the expressions in both cases.

I realise that this seems to be quite harsh but you really have to remember that actually you have posted much better in the past and you're being judged against your own standards too.

I'd be interested to know, however, how big you printed them because I suspect that might make a major difference in how they punch.

In terms of what's good, yes, they are absolutely sharp and I like the vertical angle from which they are shot.

_______________________________

2) re C&C in general. My opinion - which may not be shared - is that C&C should, where possible, benefit the whole community. This means no handbags just because you don't agree with stuff. I'm disappointed that some valid points being raised on both sides are lost in argumentative noise as such an atmosphere benefits no-one.

Note to elven and Fajitas! if you want to ban me for backseat modding, I will accept it on the chin.

3) re sports photography in particular: there are no excuses. Sometimes the shots are there, sometimes they are not. Ultimately a lot depends on opportunity and I would have to say I strongly disagree that it is easier, per se, to shoot a big high level event than it is to shoot a local game. I realise I don't shoot field sports and so my comments need to be viewed in that respect: however my experience is that the big level events are only easy because you've put your time in on the local events. Moments can come out of anything and what makes the photographer is seeing them.

4) re comments and criticism - there is no price to be paid. I don't expect to vet the shots of everyone who comments on mine. However, I do understand that in posting mine for C&C, it is not in the expectation that everyone thinks they are brilliant but that I will be able to learn from the experience. IE, while it is fair to say that you can learn more if your mind is open to what people to say, it's fair to say you can learn nothing at all if you post nothing at all.

So what I would say is this:

PaulW - you take good photographs. These are not your best. Overdraft, you make valid points which I agree with but I don't think you deliver them very well.

I'd also add this - and as it is late and I am tired I apologise in advance if this is less diplomatic than it should be: C&C only works if it doesn't wind up in a bitchfight of some description. Too many them lately are winding up as such. I don't want to raise this as an issue again and again. Overdraft, while I appreciate you not wanting to post because you feel you're not technically good enough, the beauty about how C&C works in theory - and has in practice for me - is that from posting less than perfect images, you get to learn something. Yes, it takes swallowing some pride but we all had to go through it at some point and I got a lot out of it and continue, on occasion to do so.

It also only works if you don't get defensive and protective of your photographs if and when they generate less than positive feedback. This is a general comment which I am starting to feel that I should put in my signature.

I try - as far as possible - to find some balance between what I think is wrong with a photograph and what I think is right with a photograph. Some people I hold to higher standards than others for various reasons. I know I don't always succeed but fine. I'll take the hit for that.

Overdraft

Calina wrote: »

Overdraft, while I appreciate you not wanting to post because you feel you're not technically good enough.......

I'm glad you stayed awake to post Calina, a bit of balance and good sense on this thread was desperately needed - and you came up with the goods!

I haven't even thought about posting my photos here because I don't think they're good enough 'technically', simple as that! Of course I love them, they're of subjects and places close to my heart, but, unlike others, I have no aspirations to be a professional or semi-professional photographer, and have no overblown notions about my own ability - as I said before, I know a good photo when I see one (I had to as part of my job), it doesn't mean I know how to take a good photo, technically. So I'm not seeking praise for my photos - they're not worthy of it!

This, to remind the overly sensitive Paulw, was my first post:

You need to work on your exposure and composition Paulw, you loosely have the right idea in your photos but technically they are weak and look more like the work of an enthusiastic amateur than a professional. The colours need to be much more vibrant (Photoshop should rescue you here), the subjects much more the central focus of the photos, and you need to work on originality - average sports photographers, who pick out the obvious, are ten-a-penny, the great ones have an eye for the unique.

Harsh? Certainly. Honest? Absolutely. Nasty? No. Informed? I think so.

In return:

"Overdraft, care to share your sports images that are vibrant and unique? None of what you've posted makes sense. These images are vibrant, especially when printed. The colours are exactly as was seen on the day. Maybe you just need to have your monitor calibrated? As for the subject being the main focus, can you show me anything else in the images that is a point of focus? Thanks for your comment though."

If someone on this board, who is semi-professional (judging by their website), posts photos are we not allowed offer honest opinions? Must we all coo and say they're wonderful, even if we don't believe they are, just to massage their ego?

When I suggested (see above) Paulw work on his exposure because his colours weren't vibrant he advised me to check the calibration of my monitor. :rolleyes:

Seriously, if someone is that defensive and sensitive why do they post their photos and ask for opinions?

Thanks again Calina, a fair and balanced post, criticism taken on board!

Ricky91t

Overdraft wrote: »

If you would like anyone prepared to offer you constructive criticism on your work to desist then you should say so, you are evidently highly sensitive. Perhaps you are not used to criticism?

Ok one quick thing theres criticism and theres just taking pi$$

You said a mother in the crowd could of taken a better or as good as photo which IMO isnt on..Ok you have your right to an opinion and you've made your point but saying that is just bad.Im sure you would'nt like it if you had one of your pics as a desktop wallpeper and someone said to you"Did your mother take that?"
I think you should just go easy with your C & C as you're a newbie just try and get to know people and get on with them

Calina

ricky,

Overdraft raised valid points. Modus deliverandi not perfect, but valid points nonetheless and his initial post which drew a lot of ire I completely agreed with. Certain of his/her posts far from perfect too, I will admit however.

I'm not in the mood for telling people to go easy on their C&C just because they are new for one key reason - this reinforces the image of a cliquish group and whatever else the place is, or was, it is not and should not be that. If they can back up their comments I would say it's fair game. Others have gotten away with worse, or tried at least.

His key closing point is however highly valid in the context of this thread: are there sacred cows here you can't criticise no matter what? Paul has set some very high standards. I think realistically that the time for an easy pass on his photography is gone. He has the gear and the opportunity. I can't speak for anyone else but I have seen and expect a whole lot better at this stage (Paul, please don't take that the wrong way).

We need more people to come and do critical analysis on the photography here in a way. Not that we need a bunch of moaners per se - but if it is supposed to be a learning process, then generalised backslapping gets us nowhere.

I'd close by saying that if I were Overdraft I might be a good deal more reluctant to post up pictures under the circumstances now than I might have been yesterday. That is entirely down to some of the responses shipped out to him yesterday which I really was disappointed to read. I think that's sad.

Ricky91t

Calina wrote: »

ricky,

Overdraft raised valid points. Modus deliverandi not perfect, but valid points nonetheless and his initial post which drew a lot of ire I completely agreed with. Certain of his/her posts far from perfect too, I will admit however.

I'm not in the mood for telling people to go easy on their C&C just because they are new for one key reason - this reinforces the image of a cliquish group and whatever else the place is, or was, it is not and should not be that. If they can back up their comments I would say it's fair game. Others have gotten away with worse, or tried at least.

His key closing point is however highly valid in the context of this thread: are there sacred cows here you can't criticise no matter what? Paul has set some very high standards. I think realistically that the time for an easy pass on his photography is gone. He has the gear and the opportunity. I can't speak for anyone else but I have seen and expect a whole lot better at this stage (Paul, please don't take that the wrong way).

We need more people to come and do critical analysis on the photography here in a way. Not that we need a bunch of moaners per se - but if it is supposed to be a learning process, then generalised backslapping gets us nowhere.

I'd close by saying that if I were Overdraft I might be a good deal more reluctant to post up pictures under the circumstances now than I might have been yesterday. That is entirely down to some of the responses shipped out to him yesterday which I really was disappointed to read. I think that's sad.

Thanks Calina
I see where you're coming from
But i think im just going to leave this now,I just wanted to express my opinion to overdraft and i feel thats been made
So im happy now

Covey

e'm interesting thread;)

First to the photographs, which of course I saw prior to reading the rest of the stuff.

Well I actually thought they were interesting and quite good. Sure, they are not calender quality or competition winners, but then I doubt thats why they were posted.

My first reaction was these would be brilliant in a coaching book/site. i remember when I was young getting a gaa book about the skills (Joe Lennon/Down I think) and all the photos were posed (the pick-up etc) and these are better and more interesting than that.

There are a lot of different types of photos that serve different purposes. A little bit of context (such as the background here) can be interesting and these type of shots are very saleable to local newspapers etc. Certainly not what your mother would take.

Regarding the vividness or not, I don't really see that myself. We are generally been fed, in every genre, loads of oversatured shots that don't quite do it for me. These were taken in Irish weather, not in the Carribbean for god's sake.

I think they properly reflect that and are well exposed.

Regarding critique, I must say I don't find this forum very useful for that and rarely post photos here (something I think Sebzy said in another thread). I'd be inclined to agree with some of what Overdraft has to say and in particular agree that good and valid critique is not dependent on you being an excellent photographer yourself. A lot of what he said is valid (though I don't neccessarily agree that all sports shots should be fill the frame stuff) but the manner in which it was said would get most peoples back up.

I think we'd all benefit from critique from Overdraft, and I for one would post more if I thought I would get that. As much as I'd welcome that, and as thick skinned as I am, a different tone would be appreciated.

T.

magicbastarder

it's try converting the shots to b&w; they're not massively colourful, so you won't be losing any impact there, and then boost the contrast. and i'd crop out a lot of the top of the second shot, it doesn't add anything to the photo.

and what calina said.