At ISO 6400

I rarely talk about what I do for entertainment in this course work log, but this is too entertaining to pass. 


I bought the D7000 about a year ago. I abused it in many ways, but not once I have ever tested its ISO performance. It wasn't what I am interested in anyway. I can't tell what is a tolerable noise level. I have no way to measure it, and I was taught to keep the ISO as low as possible. 


Due to the weather condition in February, some matches have to be rescheduled. Several matches from the FA Premier League Cup ended up in conflict with other league, cup or whatever on Sunday, so they move their fixtures to Wednesday evening. Although the very first football game I have ever photographed was a night game, I have no confidence to shoot another one (can you believe it? I actually posted those photographs in exercise 8!). After some procrastinations, I contact my not-so-local team (never once have I though one day I might be rich enough to live in Camden Town) and see if they let me do test shot during their practice. They kindly let me to tag along, so I have some interesting test result :D

First question, what setting do I get away with? 


Basically maxed out everything I have on hand. To get any reasonable actions, I was working at 1/640s, at ISO 6400, f/2.8. When the lens is at 200mm, the depth of field is about 4cm for a subject who is 4m away from me. It sounds horrible, but the fact is Bigma (my usual lens for football) at maximum focal length at f/8 has roughly the same depth of field for somebody 10m away from me. The 1/640s is slightly worrying, but I don't feel I can push the ISO any further. In fact, even at this setting, the built-in meter indicated that I underexposed the screen. Exposure is for a night football game is a bigger issue that I will discuss it later. 


Next, how much noise am I looking at?


I don't have a systematic way to compare noise given that there is never two totally identical situations in sport. Hand-waving analysis compares image sharpness, so I pick somebody who has light colour hair, zoom in at 100% crop (big enough to print a 2 meter long poster) and check if their hair is sharp!


Image 1: This is taken at the practice at night with ISO 6400, at 145mm, 1/640s, f2.8 using the 70-200mm lens.

Image 2: This is taken last Sunday during the KIKK vs Brentford match. It was raining, and I took this at ISO 2000, 420mm, f/6.3 (also wide open), 1/800s with Bigma

Looking at just one example (see, this is so un-scientific), it is tempted to say that the noise level at ISO 6400 is acceptable (ie, I get the same crap in other game under bad weather anyway, what more can I ask for?). However, it just make me wonder if the performance is lens specifc, or weather, or something else? So I dig up some old shots.

Image 3: This is taken during Tottenham 3rd vs Barnet reserves. ISO 200, 320mm, f/7.1, 1/1000s, with Bigma

Guess what? I actually can't tell. Is there any reason why it is not totally convincing that the shot is cleaner at ISO 200? 

To be honest, everything should be like the image below.

Image 4: Taken during KIKK vs Luton Town Reserves. ISO 200, 160m , 1/500s, f5.6, using the 70-200mm lens.

Pin sharp :)

Anyway, back to exposure. Let's start with these two images.

I don't usually like the burst mode because it is not a healthy tool in an education stand point. The best sport photographer should have the ability to predict what is going to happen next and position him/herself to capture just that moment but not anything more. Since I am not that good (yet?), so I did have the burst mode enabled to get ready to cheat :). The two images above are taken 0.2 second apart from each other, and notice the difference between the brightness on the two images. The electric power in UK is running at a 50Hz A/C, which means the power will go from peak to zero at 1/50/4 = 1/200 second. Since my shutter speed is at 1/640s, I can (by chance) get near the peak power, or near the lowest power of the flood light above! The question is, which one should I meter? It is not predictable (without a spectrometer) which power signal am I getting the moment I hit the shutter, and the light meter is probably telling me the average incoming flux instead of what I will get when I hit the shutter. So? It may worth using the brust mode in a night match and throw away half of the images that is less exposed. It is much easier to fix a slightly over-exposed image than an under-exposed one at post processing stage.

What else? Well, the lighting is not uniform through out the whole pitch. Some spots are definitely brighter. And depending on which direction the players are facing, they face may be under exposed (back-lighted). As a result, there are only few spots I can realistically stand and only certain direction I should be photographing, but not more. Having the flood light coming from the top also given a shadow around the eye area. The depth of the shadow depends on the actual shape of the skull of the individuals. However, most indigenous European (the politically incorrect term is white people), their bond structure will almost always guarantee a deep shadow around the eye (panda eyes if you ask me) in this situation.

If the weather is perfect, usually over 90% of the image I take are acceptable, with about 10% are decent. If the weather is bad, the acceptable figure drops to 70-80%. From this practice, if I takes out the stationary images, the hit rate goes down to something like 5%....

I need couple days to think about the match next week. At the moment, the best solution seems to be emailing Watford and tell them that I got hit by a bus...

Comment: Alejandro Chaskielberg's works on Oxfam

I was looking at the online gallery from Alejandro Chaskielberg on Africa. The link of his web site can be found here:

http://www.chaskielberg.com/

The very interesting part of his photographs is he uses moonlight to illuminate the subject, and his subjects contain people. Given the level of illumination at night, his models have to remain still for a long time.

To be honest, I have never thought of night photography involving people. Long exposure at night is quite standard, but asking people for stand still is definitely new. I guess in my experience with photography, I always feel intimidated to ask people to pose for me, let along having them to do something difficult (such as stand still!). As a result, there are certain thing I will never bother to try.

His work is indeed interesting, and it provides something I can reflect on technique wise. 

Exercise 26: Colour Relationships

This exercise has two parts. The first part requires me to take three photographs of each pairs of complementary colours with the given proportion. That is 1:1 for red/green, 1:2 for orange/blue, and 1:3 for yellow/violet.

Here is the 1:1 for red and green.

The next one is 1:2 in orange/blue:

Then 1:3 for yellow/violet

The second part of the exercise requires me to shoot 3-4 photographs of the colour combinations that appeal to me. 

Here is red/green in roughly 1:2 ratio. In addition, there are small portion of yellow in the screen.

Here is yellow/violet/green in roughly 1:1:1 ratio

Here is blue has much larger proportion than orange (only the tiny area near the centre of the flower). On top of it, there are as much yellow as orange, and as much blue as green.

To be honest, I cannot sense the tension for putting a different proportion of colour on an image at all. It is true that we tend to draw our attention to the brightest object on an image. As a result, a large amount of lighter colour can in theory distract us from looking at other objects less. However, I don't feel any particular issue unless the brightness is extremely different that the other colour looks dark. For example, take the 1:2 red/green image as example. I crop it into the two versions below, one is roughly 1:1 ratio, and the next one is 1:3 ratio. 

Can you feel the tension? Personally, I can't feel it. Will I adjust the composition just to make sure the colour balance is exact at 1:1 ratio? I just don't see myself doing that. In fact, for the very first image in this exercise, I prefer the composition by moving the frame slightly to the right, so it will be less red.

Comment: What Price Your Dream?

I have come across a very interesting article written by Neil Turner about the job perpect for photography student. The article can be viewed in this link:

http://www.epuk.org/Opinion/989/what-price-your-dream


Anyway, time has changed. In the past there are only few people going into university. If you have the talent and effort to get it, the chance is you will be standing above the crowd in getting a job. Now anyone can get into university, get a degree, and they expect the same thing. I wonder if somebody bother to explain to young people that while university is a good life experience, they have better chance to get into debt than getting a job? It is great that young people want to spend three years for something they fascinated about, but does that worth getting £30k debt with no job perspective? What is the point of higher education for students from poorer background if all it only gets you overdraft and headache further down the line? In that perspective, isn't getting higher education the same doing drugs? It does give you pleasure for a moment then trouble later on.

It is true that I did this course as a hobby, but I have never forgot about my fellow students who hope/dream/wish they can one day go into this field as a professional. It is funny to note that layman/women called me and my fellow students a "professional photographer" because I have a DSLR and a telezoom, while all of them expect this "professional" works for free. So by the word "professional", it is actually volunteer. As always, I am spoiled and totally uninterested in behave professionally given that I don't think I want to be a pro. In fact, I feel insulted to be called a pro, given what those people are expecting from me.

In reality, I really don't have to photograph anyone or anything I don't like, regardless you pay me or not. This is totally unprofessional, but I am not a professional photographer from start to finish. I am not sure if one compensate their artistic vision by accepting money. One cannot survive in this world without money, but will your work skew toward how to please a client, instead of something that truly inspired?

Anyway, there is a quote from an article I have seen somewhere. I think I will use it as a yard stick for my work going future.

"Either your work is good enough to command a proper fee, or it’s not worth publishing."

Comment: Essay from Linde Waidhofer: On The Color Landscape

As I am looking around for ideas for photographing colour, I come across an essay written by an American photographer Linde Waidhofer. The link of the essay is here:

http://www.westerneye.com/writing/essay3_color_landscape.html

Only recently, it occurs to me that it is difficult to look at colour. I am not colour blind or that sort, but when I pick up the camera, colour was never my subject. My subjects can be movement, shapes, lines, or family members/friends, but colour was never the main subject. When my assignment is asking for a particular combination of colour, I suddenly find it difficult to look at the world that way.


Living in the city of London, and with the gloomy British weather, most of the things are in grey colour (sky, road, modern building). There are orange/red bricks houses and tiles on the suburban side. There are green grass. However, as I walk in the city centre, grey is still dominate my slight. Colour exists. How to make them stand out is one issue. How to look at the world so that colour comes first while I am not dismissing the details of design is another issue. 


I was looking at several photograph galleries and I was surprised to find that people are photographing in black and white (or, convert photograph in black and white in post process). Maybe I can say to any of the pictures I have taken, that if the colour is not dominating the screen, I may as well convert it to B&W to emphasize the line and shape. In Linde Waidhofer's essay, she mentioned that loading her camera with black and white film is a big step away from reality: since the world is not in black and white. I think, maybe the lack of attention of strong colour make it easier to omit it from the shot altogether. Say, it is easier to shoot B&W to cover up the weak colour in the image.


There are something she mentioned at the end of the essay that I think it worth noting for my coming assignment on colour.


"A weak landscape photograph at best only reinforces the way we already look at the land. Whereas a strong landscape photo challenges the way we look at nature. But a great landscape photo can actually change the way we perceive the world around us, and our place in it."

Comment: Marie Colvin

This is not meant to be a journalism blog, but for press photograph, the line between journalist and photographer often mixed. In fact, in the 21st century, it is easier to sell a photograph if you are willing to write a story to go with it. It applies to travels photography (now travel or tourism recommendation), food, press, etc. 


There is an article I would like to share but it doesn't quite related to photography. Marie Colvin, a war journalist, was killed in Syria today. There are many news articles coming out on her past accomplishments and dedication in report stories from the war zone. There is an article on Guardian on a speech she gave on war reporting in 2010. Part of the speech can be used for reference for reportage photography, regardless it is on war, conflict, or social problems.


"Our mission is to report these horrors of war with accuracy and without prejudice. We always have to ask ourselves whether the level of risk is worth the story. What is bravery, and what is bravado?"


"Our mission is to speak the truth to power. We send home that first rough draft of history. We can and do make a difference in exposing the horrors of war and especially the atrocities that befall civilians."


"We do have that faith because we believe we do make a difference."


It might be wishful thinking at this stage. However, apart from learning how to create technically perfect photographs, I wonder if I can also create photographs that make a difference. It is not necessary on a national level, even at personal level. Does my work one day will also provide an inspiration?


The full text of the speech is in this link:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/feb/22/marie-colvin-our-mission-is-to-speak-truth

Comment: Work by Natasha Caruana

I happen to come across the work by Natasha Caruana by accident. She did a series of work on bride selling their wedding dress after the wedding (Fairytale for Sale), married man looking for affairs (The Married Man), and women who have affairs with married men (The other women). Her website can be found here:

http://natashacaruana.com/works/

The topics are very interesting, however, the photographs are not so. If I would skip the description/text/insert to find the background of the story and just look at the photographs, it will make very little sense to me. Of course, in description note on “Married Men”, the artist was using a cheap deposable camera to avoid the “date” to find out her intention. As a result, the images are all grainy and with weird composition. Very often I was looking at the images and wonder why it shows cash with a bill. Then the explanation is the “married man” paid in cash to avoid his wife to find out anything on the credit card bill.

In my photography class we talked about composition, light, and colour. Very often we were taught to compose a visually strong image that show a concept or a colour combination, but I never come across a tutorial of composing something that makes little sense and have the audience to find it in the description page. Natasha Caruana’s work is not the only one. Zarina Bhimji’s work from the OCA study day last time is very similar: many of her photographic work are not visually strong, one has to rely on reading the background of the story, watching the short film and see everything connect together. No doubt both of them was presenting a very interesting subject. However, for most of us as a student, how likely to have someone to spend time looking through our work and reflect on it? Compare it to press photography, in which you might have only one image that make it to the front page (if you are lucky), and that image has to obviously point to a story all by itself, visually I prefer the press photo style of work.

Last but not the least, it begs another interesting question: if you have an idea that worth exploring photographically, but it might not meet the mainstream commercial sense. For amateur, we can do it for fun. For professional, who is going to fund your work?