Concert photo ? for Steve

[floating minnow]

Steve,

It looks like I will be shooting a show by my favorite reggae artist,Toots and the Maytals tomorrow at the Fine Line here in Mpls. I know you shoot concerts and was wondering what you use for lenses. I can rent lenses here in town and would like to get the best images possible. This is not a paying gig,more of a " you scratch my back,I'll scratch yours" type of thing. I will be delivering some of the images to Jamaica this weekend.

Thanks

Bruce

[Steve Foss]

Bruce, I need to know some basics on lighting conditions before I can give you stronger advice, and I need to know what lenses you already have, including their apertures. I don't know the venue, so my question to you is: Do they have supplemental lighting so the artists are nicely lit, or is is a dark cave?

I've shot more than 20 bands inside and out, and can give you some good advice based on experience if I have just a little more info.

That advice will be how to get the best and sharpest images without using flash, because garish flash is a BAD thing, a thing to be avoided, when shooting indoor performances, and even fill flash in those situations cuts off a lot of the pretty colors of many stage light systems.

And the "you-scratch-my-back-I-scratch-yours" thing can quickly turn into a paying gig and future source of more income, so getting the best possible images won't just make you and the band feel good about the whole thing, it'll mean they may start to spread the word, beginning with posting your images on their Web site or using them for posters and CDs.

[Steve Foss]

OK, I just got off the band's Web site, and I'm going to assume from their popularity and the size and sophistication of the venues they play that they won't be booked into a dark cave.

So, assuming there's good lighting, here goes.

You'll need a wide angle so you can capture things from right in front of the stage, including mutiple band members at one time. A wide angle zoom that opens at least to f4 will be needed for best performance, either the 17-40 f4L or 16-35 f2.8L. If you can shoot from a little further back, as well, the 70-200 f2.8L IS is a great second lens to have. And the 70-200 will be your tight portrait lens from up close. You don't need more lenses than these two, and if you're only renting them for one day it shouldn't be too steep. If you're limited to one camera body, you might consider renting a second body of the same type, since it'll only be for the one day. Lens switching in the middle of performances can be a frustrating business. The best image always comes and goes while you're in the middle of a lens change.

I've had fantastic luck with the 85 f1.2L version II, which is fairly slow focusing but quite fast enough for performance images and is sharp and sweet. Razor thin DOF at 1.2, but you can stop down a bit and still be VERY wide open. Right close to the stage, it's a great lens for tight singing/playing portraits of individuals. So that's an option.

Notes:

1. When shooting wide angle with back and side lights, watch for flare. Flare in these cases isn't necessarily a bad thing. I've gotten images where there's a red or blue light behind the singer and it throws a circle of light all around him/her, and those are very cool effects.

2. While you may have to ramp iso to 1600, the wider your lenses and the better the lighting, the more likely you are to keep your iso down. I've shot the 85 f1.2 at iso400 for indoor bands and gotten great sharp images, with little of the noise that accompanies any sensor at 1600. Especially with dark faces, since in the tighter portraits you'll be exposing for the faces, you may have to reef up your iso, so it's good to have those wide lenses.

3. Take the time to study the band members for the first few numbers before lifting a camera. How does the lead singer hold his face? How does he emphasize parts of the song with body language? The more familiar you are with the habitual movements of each performer, the more likely you'll know just when they're going to strike a great pose, and you'll be ready. You can't see those things as well with the camera to your eye, so I always spend 15 minutes or so just watching before I shoot. This is especially important with bands who bob and move and rock a lot, and it looks like this one does. You'll also learn just where band members tend to pause in their movements, and often when shooting indoors, even with good lighting, the shutter speeds are low enough that you really want to time the pause for sharp images, except for those times you are after shutter-drag blur motions.

4. Don't forget the audience. If you can shoot from right in front of the stage, or even backstage or stage-right or -left, you can get band members facing away in the foreground with audience members rocking away facing the camera, or reaching for a band member.

5. I always make it a point to get as many nice images of each band member as I can. You never know who eventually will split off and form his/her own band and want images, and everybody in the band like to see his/her own images anyway, not just the lead folks. Some backstage shots of family/friends of the band also can be way cool.

It's good that you're shooting a band whose music you like. It's great fun getting into a shooting groove while one of your favorite bands is in a playing groove. The images always seem a little better at times like that.

Hope this helps, and have a blast!

[polarsusd81]

If I can pipe in, I have rented a lens previously and got the 24-70 2.8L and I would think that lens would be pretty good for concerts. I know of a place that has reasonable rates to rent and the 24-70 is the cheapest to rent from what I remember. It was $25 for the weekend. I think the 16-35 was more like $50 when I checked.

Tom

[Steve Foss]

Nothing wrong with that lens at all. Great glass, and great for concerts. If a person is limited to two lenses in the situation Bruce described, both the 85 f1.2 L and 24-70 f2.8L fall off the radar, however. When close, you'll need truly wide angle at times, and the 24-70 doesn't quite offer the muscle for good tight portraiture. There's definitely a gap between 35 and 70 if you go with the first two I mentioned. That gap hasn't bothered me, but for someone with a different shooting style than mine it might be a big deal. If the $25 difference in rental costs speaks loud to you, though, and you get the 24-70 instead of the 70-200, you could be OK for tight shots if you can get right to the front of the stage and lean in.

[floating minnow]

Steve,thank you very much for taking the time to give me the information. Sorry it took me so long to get back here,but this opportunity and the trip to Jamaica all came up 3 days ago and I have much to do before I leave Saturday morning. The camera shop carrys both the 17-40 and 70-200IS so I will call in the morning. The lighting in the club is good so that shouldn't be too much of an issue with these lenses. I'm going to have to skip the second body though because while the lenses are reasonable ,the bodies are quite spendy.I will take all your advice to heart tomorrow night. This will be something new to me so I am just going to enjoy it because there is no real pressure on me.

I have seen your concert images and they are really nice.I kick myself quite often for not picking up this photo hobby earlier,I was a promotion man for a major label thru the 70's and spent quite a bit of time with major acts such as Fleetwood Mac,Eric Clapton,The Doobies and Rod Stewart. If I had only carried a camera around with me. Thanks again.

Polar,was that West Photo?

[polarsusd81]

Bingo. If you pick the lens up there after 3 on Friday, and bring it back before noon on Monday, they only charge you the daily rental fee. Very nice group of people.

Yeah, the only reason I spoke up about the 24-70 is because I didn't think they had the 16-35 for rental at the time I rented one. Maybe they do now. I thought the extra stop would help in a concert situation, but if the lighting is good, (haven't been to that venue) than you might not need it. I would like to try out the 17-40 sometime, but I just got my new baby to play with for a while. Picked up a used copy of the 70-200 f4L. I am hoping to get some good shots of fishin buddies this weekend on LOTW.

Tom

[Steve Foss]

Tom, good luck at LOW with your new baby, and share some pics with us.

Bruce, thanks, and the best of luck to you, too, and show us some sample of what you get. Good lighting, as Tom mentioned, will put you over the top with the 17-40. Sounds like you'll have a great time with no pressure on you, and in an environment you're well familiar with.

All those concert shots on my Web site are from 2004 and 2005 and are tight portraits. I'll have to get my Web designer (Mrs. Catfish) to throw in a bunch of more recent, and varied, work.

I've actually taken indoor concert shots at iso3200 using the 20D and 100-400L IS and a monopod at 1/40 sec that were sharp and nice. You'll really like that 70-200 with its two extra stops of aperture. The poor 100-400, a great performer in its element, is just tooooo slowwwww indoors. I envy you! Here's one of the shots taken at the aforementioned settings. It was a case of very poor lighting and timing it for his pause in singing, and in situations at that low a shutter speed, there are plenty of discarded images in order to get some decent ones.

This is bluesman Big Walter Smith indoors (no sharpening or any other adjustments in pp, except for noise ninja applied to everything but Walter's face and hat).

[floating minnow]

Steve,If I were to get an image like that I would be in heaven. That's not going to happen but this is a great opportunity for me. Thanks.

Polar,you are right that is a great deal on the weekends. Have a great time at LOTW.