Hi /p/.This month I was attending two anime cons, as "officially approved" photog and I wanted to upload some of the photos I did for opinions and advices. I made similar threads in previous years and they were always very productive so I would like to hear your opinions about these as well. This was also some sort of "test run" for new camera (Nikon Z5 II, replacing D750), most of these shots were made with Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 G2 lens (via FTZ II adapter), only few with telephoto (Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VRII). Also newest version of Darktable, since old ones would not handle the new camera. There is always room for improvement and I genuinely want to get better so any kind of advice, critique or opinion is welcome.If you like, I can also try uploading RAW files for selected photos, on temporary catbox link or similar.
I was worried about autofocus performance but it handled low light rather well, slightly better than D750 but some shots were still slightly off-focus. I was using single area AF setting with continuous mode, however, instead of one of more automated settings since I noticed it tended to either switch AF target easily or focus on whatever was more "convenient" at the moment like clothes, instead of faces. There was also a thing about low angle so I assume it is possible that AF would catch whatever was closer, like clothes part, instead of faces. Disabled AF assist light since it produce very intense green light that would distract performances.
I recall that photo bump threads were okay before but if anything changed, please let me know.
I assume its okay to take audience shots like that.
I admit that this case defeated me - rather low, red light and very fast moving subject. In the end Im not sure if these are missed focus shots or simply appears so under the low light.
Similar shot.
Stage had audience sitting or standing behind so, similar to previous year, had to do most of shots from low angle to avoid obstructing the view (unless I could go to the side, where I had more space to do so) and performers were mostly looking straight ahead.
This is where I honestly had no idea what to do - very intense violet light would produce various problems like making blue parts of the dress here apparing almost like UV blue.
This was also my first time doing some actual concert shots - previously I was doing idol performances few times but these were different. Rock/metal as well. Im not sure what kind of shots are mostly expected in such cases, are these ones okay?One also had this constant fog effect and multi-colored LED lights, another "just" intense red LED. But it seems that Darktable handled these okay on default settings, sometimes attenuation was required.
Smokey.
By the way, are shots like this actually valuable, despite being technically incorrect? I mean, this one here misses a lot of details with momentary intense light.
Similar situation.
Back to cosplay.
I guess thats all for now. Again, any opinion is welcomed so I can improve.
Nice, more curvy Polish cosplayers.
>>4520872my 2 centsattend events with more attractive women, and get sharp images of their bodiesa lot of them are ugly, fat and some even look too old for thissad i like these the most>>4520908>>4520914>>4520915>>4520906because they look cool
>>4520998>"a lot of them are ugly, fat and some even look too old for this. sad">posted from his dorito crusted tendie lickersNigga you understand some people do shit for fun?
>>4520998Dude, that was just mean. You can't expect every cosplayer or performer to resemble PS touched Chinese models.
>>4520999yes, i still want to see attractive bitches
>>4521012All of Love Live performancers are attractive in my book, tho.
>>4520872Nice photos. I would say your main axis of improvement would be isolation of the subject.Good:>>4520886>>4520881The subject takes a lot of space, or separates clearly from background, and face is visible. This is great.Not so good:>>4520873You chose to give equal importance to both subjects and as a result none stand out. Left girl is half hidden. Right girl's face is barely distinguishable. Composition weakens the strength of right girl's stare. The subjects do not pop out off the background.>>4520887Right girls are morphed in 1 blob. Facial features are hard to discern. Left and right side of the photo are both highly distracting and empty, using sensor info for nothing when more is needed on the faces. >>4520914I think this shot is cool. It is not lacking detail. Notice how the face of the bassist is clear and compare to the previous shot with the group of 3 girls. What matter in these kind of context is to have the subjects isolated and the smoke and black and white works in your favor. I would have increased the contrasts of the blacks to make it even more impactful. The main issue is that the guy on the right is cut.
>>4521033Okay, thanks. I think I understand what you have in mind. I guess I stick too much to "guiding lines" for subject placement. There will be one more con this summer so I will have another opportunity for that.
>>4521027BASEDASED
>>4520923> any opinion is welcomed so I can improve.Stop autofocus, put way less focus depht in to avoid the flatness i see. Learn to shoot what you want to tell. Just go out, shoot something and make a story out of it. All in a manual mode.That convention is hard to picture. Fog, coloured light amateurs on stage (nothing against it but they do not know how to look good and the costumes do not help either) and it looks you have only a few angles/places to take pics. >>4520914 A good one. the fog minimizes focus depht and scenery, the eye has something to snap on. Try that with your camera.
>>4521456>Just go out, shoot something and make a story out of it. All in a manual mode.Forgot: Then do it again using the same motifs.
>>4521458>>4521456Thank you. I guess my problem lies in similar to what other anon said, that good picture should have clearly defined subject and purpose, visible from the start, not just "here is performance, here is stage as background". Unfortunately I cannot reduce depth of field more - each of those photos were made with f/2.8, for lower I would need to use some prime but then I would be very restricted in types of shots to take, due to space limitations and this ability to "zoom with feet" as they say. I don't understand however suggestion to get away from using autofocus - why exactly? I won't be able to catch moving subjects precisely using just viewfinder and manual adjustments.As for available angles/spots, the situation overall was like on this pic - concert had smaller audience (or rather, more audience was gathered at longer distance, probably due to REALLY loud music - I was initially used those earplugs, quickly borrowed one of those safely noise-cancelling earmuffs and could still hear clearly) so I could move more freely but idols or cosplay/talent competitions had lots of people either standing or sitting somewhere around that safely net, leaving only this area under the stage to move around. So I could either crouch near the middle (with very high angle and requiring short focal length) or gradually straighten up while moving to the side (not completely at the side since gear, speakers and other stuff were blocking view). Next month's con will have even less space to move around, basically zero - stage itself won't be elevated but audience will, since it's typical theatre stage. Yet last year photogs were sitting right near, closely packed.Thanks again for opinion and suggestions. I don't really have other people than /p/ to show and rate photos I take.
>>4521535You do not have any problem imo. It's just skill aqure. Automode is camera decides, manual the opposite, your chouce. f2.8 consider a bigger lens, shooting from the pit a tele. Cheap one is ok. Askung for a ladder is free. give it a try.
>>4520872The clinical nature of your photos makes the subjects look ugly. Because they're nerds. I've had this issue at anime cons in the past. Took some very cool pictures but used my modern glass and mirrorless bodies, which did nothing to help the nerds in them. I always wish I'd bring my film setups but don't feel like spending the money on film for cons.
>>4521885So, you suggest intentionally introducing "flaws" to pictures to add some atmosphere? I admit I was using extra sharpening options with some of them but maybe I should go the opposite.>>4521865I guess that's an option but it would mean giving up close shots from under the stage. Ladder won't make it, safely regulations are quite strict.
Okay, using same thread since its still on. Another anime con, last one this summer, I hope I learned something from your advices.
Another audience shot, I wonder if those are actually interesting or boring subject.
Also have to admit that idea of "vtuber concert" was something odd for me but ended up fun for the audience so I guess it was okay.
Small question - does it actually make sense to make pictures of stuff from art corner like that? I usually do but maybe its pointless.
Cosplay contest part.Stage this time was theatre one, same ground level as first row so I had to sit on the floor nearly entire time and make sure I wont block view for anyone. But huge monitor on the front was blocking the view more than once, sadly.
In the meantime, I have to sadly admit that no matter what, every photo I get from Darktable is quite, to lack the better word, "raw" or "washed", not "warm" or "pleasant" as what I see from other photogs. Since Im kinda stuck with Darktable (no, I won't pay subs for hobby stuff), I have to finally figure that out but keep failing. Or I just feel that way.
Like here - isn't it too desaturated? At the other hand, trying to increase it often leads to odd results.
This one had a lot of smoke and very intense violet light.
Another question, sometimes I do desaturation like that, leaving only red shades. Again, does it make sense or should be rather avoided?
Similar, but simply lowered overall saturation down to 50% or something around.
Does this photo make sense? Its pretty much all black and very noisy but I felt like it have some value. What do you think?
Now idol contest part. Technically I was even more confined to one spot but could still lean on the floor to shoot from very low so I think angles are more interesting here.
Added a bit of haze on my own.
I actually like this one. Overall Im not very proud of myself with photos I did this time but this one is easily the "good" in my opinion. Do you think so too?
I remember last advice about picking angles for subject separation, Im sorry that I couldn't do so in all cases.
I know it lacks the focus and light is odd but I think that how head is nearly at the center of this screen effect is funny.
Miku cosplayer was jumping so intense that her socks slided off. Cute.
Another case of wondering if I do something wrong with focus or simply combination of high ISO/low light and intense color LED (mainly blue/violet) is making camera a bit confused. Or I could and should correct this with editor.
Another focus issue.
Question about lens focal range - normally I take 24-70 for such stages as it alows me to quickly change between wide shoots covering whole stage, like here or close up. But close up is still usually covering half the body, not real close up. Do you think I should rather switch to something like 35-150? Have 24-120 lens but its f/4 so I would lose one step in terms of ISO. A lot of shoots here were done with 6400 already.
I like the moment.
Are shoots like this, where subject is only in small part f photo, which is dominated by stage, interesting or rather boring?
And my personal favorite part - rather unexpected intro into the performance, with most lights out and glowing umbrellas resembling jellyfishes. I got little surprised and forgot to change exposition time from 1/400 (due to previous dancing) to something closer to 1/200 or longer, so face details and such are mostly missing, plus it was all 6400 ISO. At one hand it adds to some charm but I wanted to hear your opinion.
And one shoot from said performance main part.
And I guess that would be all for now. As before, any kind of advice or opinion is welcomed.
>>4528582>>4528583> The audience is all chuds.Lol.
>>4528643They all look like normal guys to me.
>>4528645Can we just admit we are on 4chan and stop pretending to be normal?
>>4528611I think this is a very good photo. It also makes it look like you are on her level and not below the stage.
>>4528703>her
>>4528706My penis says it's her.
>>4528706I can assure you that every participant in this idol contest was female.
So, OP, did you have sex with any of them yet?
>>4528632i don't care about photos of performances but this is a good shot
>>4528703The stage was, in fact, on the ground level - this pic shows it a bit better, you can also see the "do not cross" line marked on the floor. In most cases performancers were located near the screen, which was a bit problematic for me, since 70mm was not enough for true closeups. That's why that picture was cropped and have more visible noise.>>4529055No, why would you ask that?>>4529062What exactly makes it good in your opinion? I want to improve my photography so such opinions are valuable, helps me figure out what is interesting for people outside usual audience (like performancers themselves or their friends).
>>4520872Dang it anon wheres the exif on these
>>4529181Since last year hacking, /p/ no longer shows EXIF data. This particular one was done with Z5 II and Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 G2 at 35mm, 1/320, ISO 800, f/2.8 (manual mode, auto ISO), point metering. If you need other info, let me know.
>>4529184Ah alright thank you for the information! Was looking for the lens and settings for those opening shots, was impressed
>>4529185Thanks. Sadly, this functionality had to be disabled since mentioned hacking utilized hole in files uploading and staff likely wanted to plug potential other attack vectors. This data is also stripped on uploading.Also, manual mode is a little bit odd solution but when I was using Nikon mirror cameras previously (D5300 and D750) I often would run into a problem where camera would block shooting at low light in exposure priority mode, apparentl trying to increase aperture past what lens actually allowed. At the same time, in aperture priority I had to constantly monitor exposure time and adjust it with ISO on the fly, potentially missing shoots (combination of auto ISO and A or S mode was not always what I wanted). Manual mode was foolproof and auto ISO was actually working quite nice (with reasonable upper limit), only getting wonky in certain unusual lightng conditions - but then I could simply and quickly switch it back to manual and set to 1600 or 3200 without a fuss.
