Airshow Photos - Please critique and help me improve
Discussion
Hi all, not posted in the photography forum for a while. Started going back through the RAW shots I've yet to process over the last year or so and thought it might be nice to share. 
All shots taken with an EOS400D and 70-200L (f/4 non IS) in AI Servo mode.
My first airshow, it was a good experience. Initially made the mistake of shooting in Av (f/4) and as such ended up with a super quick shutter speed and frozen props. Later in the day switched to Tv with a shutter speed of 1/250 which was more effective.
The sky was frustrating, it's amazing what a difference some blue makes. Grey/overcast unfortunately prevailed. How does one combat that?
PP done in Lightroom, a touch of sharpening boosting the exposure a touch but otherwise minimal.
I've not included any ground shots and apologies for the compression in Photobucket. Also I know my sensor is on the dirty side!
Would appreciate comments/feedback.
Spitfire/Red Arrows flyby
Thanks
All shots taken with an EOS400D and 70-200L (f/4 non IS) in AI Servo mode.
My first airshow, it was a good experience. Initially made the mistake of shooting in Av (f/4) and as such ended up with a super quick shutter speed and frozen props. Later in the day switched to Tv with a shutter speed of 1/250 which was more effective.
The sky was frustrating, it's amazing what a difference some blue makes. Grey/overcast unfortunately prevailed. How does one combat that?
PP done in Lightroom, a touch of sharpening boosting the exposure a touch but otherwise minimal.
I've not included any ground shots and apologies for the compression in Photobucket. Also I know my sensor is on the dirty side!
Would appreciate comments/feedback.
Spitfire/Red Arrows flyby
Thanks
Simpo Two said:
Only one word - exposure (and its friend the histogram). About +2 EV should get most of them about right
What he said.Your camera is exposing for the sky, so the little buzzy things come out underexposed.
Don't forget that if you dial in extra EV you're shutter speed may drop so you may have to bump the iso or aperture up.
If you cant hold the exposure for the subject, there's too much going on. Compromise on what you want to actually take a photo of, in this case I think it's the planes, but I'm looking more at moody skies. If needs be, blast the s
t out of the sky to get the exposure right on the planes, which are (supposed to be) the focal point.
Change of metering from multi to spot or taking over the controls to dial in what was needed to expose for the subject would make better photos. As it is, you'll end up using a lot of fill light and exposure + in Lightroom to make this usable, and a fair amount of noise will pull up in the last couple too
I think #6 is the only one that works how you've shot it, because of distance, because of composition, because of exposure and because silhouetting them in that kind of shot is good for the mood of the photo
t out of the sky to get the exposure right on the planes, which are (supposed to be) the focal point. Change of metering from multi to spot or taking over the controls to dial in what was needed to expose for the subject would make better photos. As it is, you'll end up using a lot of fill light and exposure + in Lightroom to make this usable, and a fair amount of noise will pull up in the last couple too
I think #6 is the only one that works how you've shot it, because of distance, because of composition, because of exposure and because silhouetting them in that kind of shot is good for the mood of the photo
Edited by andy-xr on Tuesday 19th August 10:58
The problem with shooting aeroplanes is that you won't get a "spot" or even a centre point to meter off of.
So what the camera meters off is the sky, not the planes. So the planes end up too dark.
Simplest way to combat this is to set +2 EV compensation, and hope it doesn't blow the sky completely.
Or take some test shots, bright and overcast, and use manual mode to shoot, and quickly alter shutter speed to if the sun is out or not. Tends to blow the sky but gets much better looking planes.
If you are shooting a modern Nikon sensor, you can dial in less EV compensation, and this is not a problem was you have about 4 stops of noise free shadows in the RAW file to pull the detail out of the plane.
With a Canon, you have less strength in the shadows, and more banding, but it seems more details in the highlights to pull clipping out of, so +2 and maybe even +2.5. It is hard to estimate without experience how much detail you can recover.
So what the camera meters off is the sky, not the planes. So the planes end up too dark.
Simplest way to combat this is to set +2 EV compensation, and hope it doesn't blow the sky completely.
Or take some test shots, bright and overcast, and use manual mode to shoot, and quickly alter shutter speed to if the sun is out or not. Tends to blow the sky but gets much better looking planes.
If you are shooting a modern Nikon sensor, you can dial in less EV compensation, and this is not a problem was you have about 4 stops of noise free shadows in the RAW file to pull the detail out of the plane.
With a Canon, you have less strength in the shadows, and more banding, but it seems more details in the highlights to pull clipping out of, so +2 and maybe even +2.5. It is hard to estimate without experience how much detail you can recover.
As others have said the camera can't deal with high contrast situations, the human eye is much better under these conditions.
Taking the spitfire shot as an example :
f18 1/250th, ISO 200, EV -1 according to the exif.
Now take a look at this https://www.flickr.com/photos/hotrods/14758116568/...
f14, 1/160th, ISO 250 EV 0
If we ignore EV the exposure isn't too different, but the EV means the spitfire is a stop down.
But in the lancaster picture I had the benefit of the aircraft heading in to bright sunlight and as you see there is no cloud. Easily worth a stop, probably 2.
Even then the lancaster pic had a tweak to push the shadows up (+17). Its probably a bit under exposed still (opinions please!). Its not as sharp as it could be either.
I took the liberty of having a go with the spitfire pic, this was a very quick attempt and obviously quality is poor as the basis was the jpeg.
Exposure pushed 1 stop, shadows pushed + 80. It probably needs more but being jpeg the quality falls away.
I'd expect a similar edit on RAW come up with much better colours
As suggested, shoot manual or with high EV, don't worry about blowing out, you can pull it back in post process.
Composition I can't help with, as is evident from my stuff
Taking the spitfire shot as an example :
f18 1/250th, ISO 200, EV -1 according to the exif.
Now take a look at this https://www.flickr.com/photos/hotrods/14758116568/...
f14, 1/160th, ISO 250 EV 0
If we ignore EV the exposure isn't too different, but the EV means the spitfire is a stop down.
But in the lancaster picture I had the benefit of the aircraft heading in to bright sunlight and as you see there is no cloud. Easily worth a stop, probably 2.
Even then the lancaster pic had a tweak to push the shadows up (+17). Its probably a bit under exposed still (opinions please!). Its not as sharp as it could be either.
I took the liberty of having a go with the spitfire pic, this was a very quick attempt and obviously quality is poor as the basis was the jpeg.
Exposure pushed 1 stop, shadows pushed + 80. It probably needs more but being jpeg the quality falls away.
I'd expect a similar edit on RAW come up with much better colours
As suggested, shoot manual or with high EV, don't worry about blowing out, you can pull it back in post process.
Composition I can't help with, as is evident from my stuff
Airshows are always difficult to judge exposure, one second it against a blue sky, then white , then blue etc, I would try a few setting changes and see what works for you, in general as a beginning having spot metering is going to be a challenge to track the plane, so for starters, keep with evaluative, dial in +1/3 or +2/3 exposure as a starter, that helps give you more detail in the dark areas without burning out the sky too much.
Then as has been said use lightroom to bring up the dark areas and tone down the highlights. I found the youtube channel by Anthony Morganti useful to get more out of Lightroom.
Always use Tv, for old warbirds you need ideally 1/250, for the wingwalkers you can push that upto 1/400-500, and jets take it as high as you can 1/2000 or more if the light allows. At slower speeds you will suffer from some missed shots so if its important , ramp up the shutter speed and accept still props.
Also try to think where you are vs the sun, shooting into the sun makes it worse, and loses contrast, the worst planes to shoot are small warbirds and the vulcan and lancasters in my view due to the shadows / dark paint schemes. sample of one of mine below, when printed i think this is the right balance of plane brightness vs sky exposure, and shows a lot of detail in the plane skin, and the sky. Just keep practicing and adjusting until you learn what works for you. The bottom picture was taken this last weekend, much faster shutter speed, but again, it had detail in the sky and the plane.
Then as has been said use lightroom to bring up the dark areas and tone down the highlights. I found the youtube channel by Anthony Morganti useful to get more out of Lightroom.
Always use Tv, for old warbirds you need ideally 1/250, for the wingwalkers you can push that upto 1/400-500, and jets take it as high as you can 1/2000 or more if the light allows. At slower speeds you will suffer from some missed shots so if its important , ramp up the shutter speed and accept still props.
Also try to think where you are vs the sun, shooting into the sun makes it worse, and loses contrast, the worst planes to shoot are small warbirds and the vulcan and lancasters in my view due to the shadows / dark paint schemes. sample of one of mine below, when printed i think this is the right balance of plane brightness vs sky exposure, and shows a lot of detail in the plane skin, and the sky. Just keep practicing and adjusting until you learn what works for you. The bottom picture was taken this last weekend, much faster shutter speed, but again, it had detail in the sky and the plane.
Edited by SMB on Wednesday 20th August 11:27
Thanks for the feedback chaps, as I said it's my first airshow so just getting to grips with things. I'm more of a street photographer tbh. I suppose I was concerned about blowing out the sky but it seems that is a secondary concern versus the actual subject matter!
Will go back and re-edit/process.
Does anyone use a teleconverter? The Canon one isn't exactly cheap for only a moderate increase in range.
Will go back and re-edit/process.
Does anyone use a teleconverter? The Canon one isn't exactly cheap for only a moderate increase in range.
Simpo Two said:
g3org3y said:
Does anyone use a teleconverter? The Canon one isn't exactly cheap for only a moderate increase in range.
If yuo have enough pixels to spare it's probably easier to crop instead. A T/C will exacerbate camera shake and make framing harder.I was otherwise very impressed with the 70-200L (even with no IS). That super quick autofocus is a lifesaver.
g3org3y said:
Old 400D. Only 10 MP iirc. Shots are 3888x2592.
I was otherwise very impressed with the 70-200L (even with no IS). That super quick autofocus is a lifesaver.
If I have to travel light, i use a 7d with a 70-200L and a 1.5x converter, works fine, image quailty is ok ( i take the view, better to have the image than not), cropping is fine but it's not going to support printing to any size. But there is no substitute for a good lens.I was otherwise very impressed with the 70-200L (even with no IS). That super quick autofocus is a lifesaver.
In the old days of film. My exposure technique for airshows was to point the camera at the grass, see what aperture the camera recommended for my desired shutter speed, then leave the camera in manual on those settings. This generally worked well for side on shots with a touch more exposure for aircraft undersides.
Aside from exposure that others have covered they're a good 1st go. Certainly better than the attempt I made when I visited an airshow.
Regarding cropping or using a teleconverter I have a 2x one and for the money I'm massively disappointed with it. I now opt to just crop and it sees very little use.
You also look to have a few dust spots on your rear element or more likely your sensor. Have a google for some cleaning tips.
Regarding cropping or using a teleconverter I have a 2x one and for the money I'm massively disappointed with it. I now opt to just crop and it sees very little use.
You also look to have a few dust spots on your rear element or more likely your sensor. Have a google for some cleaning tips.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff