PDA

View Full Version : Taking pictures at gigs!



Vibrant Sounds
18-10-2007, 02:44 PM
I posted the following suggestions to someone requesting help (on another forum) with taking pictures at gigs and how to get reasonable results of both lighting and dancers. i then remembered that I had offerred to do similar on this forum. If anyone wants a further explanation or additional help, please feel free to ask, as it seems a lot easier to me to actually do it than it did to write it all out. I may also have not explained the relationships between certain parts as well as I could as they are second nature to me and I do not really know to what level I am aiming this at.

One of the main things that occurred to me though, is to do this properly, you would need to have a backup DJ/roadie as it would not be so easy to concentrate on both things at once and pull of a good performance with both.

Here goes then:


If you want really good pictures with a good balance of lighting and flash then you really need a camera with full manual control, you also need a decent off-camera flashgun (or one that will swivel/tilt) that has a range of power settings that can then be balanced to give a result comparable with the ambient light. An automatic camera with on camera flash cannot do this easily regardless of how many pixels, or even whether it is digital or film.

Firstly, you need to do some test shots to establish the best EV (exposure value) for your ambient (disco) lighting. That will then give you a range of shutter speed/aperture combinations for that value i.e. 1/15 @ f8, 1/30 @ f5.6, 1/60 @ f4, 1/125 @ f2.8 all of those have the same EV.

Next choose a setting that you think will give you a good balance between some motion and depth of field (depth of field 'dof' is the range of the subject that will seem to be sharp in front and behind of the point of focus, typically 1/3 in front and 2/3 behind). The depth of field range also reduces with proximity so it is important to choose an area to focus on that is towards the middle/rear of your subject matter (subjects close to you may well be blurred anyway as the relationship of speed to distance is similar to that of dof as, as the subject becomes closer to you, you need a higher shutter speed to freeze the movement). The dof is controlled by the aperture value (f2.8 has a little depth of field, f16 would have very much more for the same lens and distance to subject matter). The larger the f number the smaller the aperture, the less light it lets through and the greater the dof.

We will use as an example 1/30 sec shutter speed with an aperture of f5.6. We will focus on an area about 10ft away which should for a 50mm lens (standard on a 35mm SLR) give us a depth of field between 7ft and 16ft (as we move away from these distances the subjects will become less sharp).

Now comes the tricky part.

We now need to set the flash to give us a burst of light for an aperture setting of between f8 and f11 (yes I know this is between two and four times less light than we really need) so as to give us a slight fill light and to freeze the movement of the dancers (flash durations are typically 1/500 sec to 1/10.000 sec so will stop pretty much all movement), but allow a little bit of blurring on the closest dancers to give some sense of atmosphere. Next, we have to aim the flash head at either, a white wall, the ceiling or bounce it off of a bit of card or mini umbrella type device (this is so as to diffuse the flash burst to prevent white-out and harsh shadows forming) but whilst keeping the flashguns sensor pointed at the subject matter (really need an off camera flashgun or one with a swing & pivot head for this).

Up to now I have only offered some suggestions to get you to the starting point, from this point on, you then get into the trial and error mode. Take some shots, see how they come out, adjust settings to suit.
Each venue will be different as they will be bigger, smaller, lit differently, decorated differently and so on.

Best cameras for doing this are either digital SLRs (preferably) or the digital hybrids, they are really the only cameras that will allow full manual override along with using off camera flash and let you instantly see your results to enable adjustments to be made as required.

Oh, and if you have only got a automatic camera with an on camera flash, stick some bits of white tissue paper over the flash lens (try one bit first then two or more) this will soften the flash and help reduce the white-out from the subjects closer to you, won't be great, but will help a lot.

Good luck, I'm looking forward to seeing the results.

Shaun
18-10-2007, 03:01 PM
Excellent information, Eddie. Thanks for taking the time to post it. :approve:

Have a disco
18-10-2007, 07:19 PM
Have to agree with most of the things said here well done mate

Flash should be OFF at all times unless you have other lighting to deal with Mobile disco shots of customers

Please be reminded you have to ask permission to use all photo's for any promotional purposes off the disco hirer

Solitaire Events Ltd
18-10-2007, 08:01 PM
Thanks Eddie, much appreciated. I have stuck the thread for future reference.

Have a disco
19-10-2007, 12:04 AM
could we move the thread to technical advice please ??? rather than clogging up this section?????

Solitaire Events Ltd
19-10-2007, 12:05 AM
Of course I forgot you ran the forum...

Larry B Entertainment
21-10-2007, 07:43 PM
thats those admin wannabes for you lol

Spirits High
09-11-2007, 11:30 AM
Please be reminded you have to ask permission to use all photo's for any promotional purposes off the disco hirer


Get round this one by putting it in your T&C's like I have

• During the event there is a strong likelihood that photos and or videos will be taken for publicity purposes on our website. If you do not wish for photos to be published you must inform us in writing at least 7 days before the event.

No complaints so far!

thex-faders
12-11-2007, 08:23 AM
We found doing a Year 7 & 8 school disco a long time ago some schools would have to send a letter out to all parents before any pictures were even taken, let alone be put ona website or published because of some childrens protection act as they are under 16. Another legal issue to consider, dont publish pictures of children without some form of permission from an adult.

Took the flash off for this picture while the laser was going, thought it loooked pretty cool:

rob1963
19-12-2007, 01:39 AM
I've only had a digital camera for a year or two and have not taken many pics at gigs, but there is one thing I've learned through trial & error.

If you take pics with the flash on, it wipes out your lighting effects & completely kills the atmosphere...

...but If you take pics with the flash off, they come out too dark.

I've discovered the answer is to take pics with the flash off, and to then lighten them afterwards with some software. That way they are light enough to see, but you don't lose any of the atmosphere.

Job done!

:D

DazzyD
08-02-2008, 10:12 PM
Paul, thanks for that tip about putting a disclaimer in the contract. Been wondering about taking pics for our website but was thinking that we might have to announce it at the gig and that someone's bound to object (out of about 250-300 people). If we put the responsibility on to the client to let the guests know then it gets us off the hook. Anyone else had legal issues with photos before?

By the way - Hello everyone. Been off the site for nearly a year so it's good it be back. We had our daughter born prematurely and family obviously comes first. All's well now so I'm getting back in to the swing of things

Andy Westcott
17-05-2008, 11:37 AM
Quote rob:
"I've discovered the answer is to take pics with the flash off, and to then lighten them afterwards with some software."

That's one way of doing it and as you said it works for you, although you will be operating with long exposure times which will cause considerable blurring of the subject. (May actually be a desirable effect.) Also, there's a limit to what software can do; You can't generate information which wasn't recorded in the first place, so if the original is very under-exposed, you may have trouble getting a decent result without excessive loss of contrast or creating graininess.

I agree with Ed in that you need to partially illuminate the scene with off-camera flash to freeze some detail to avoid getting a mass of blurred images, and let the disco lighting create the interesting colours.

Don't forget that you can increase the gain of the amplifier attached to the CCD which has the effect of increasing the sensitivity of the camera in much the same way as you can choose high speed film - in fact the control is usually labelled 'ISO' on digital cameras. This allows the use of faster shutter speeds but has the trade-off of creating additional noise on the picture.

rob1963
17-05-2008, 12:50 PM
Quote rob:
"I've discovered the answer is to take pics with the flash off, and to then lighten them afterwards with some software."

That's one way of doing it and as you said it works for you, although you will be operating with long exposure times which will cause considerable blurring of the subject. (May actually be a desirable effect.)

Indeed it works fine for me, and I have no problem with the blurring effect.


Also, there's a limit to what software can do; You can't generate information which wasn't recorded in the first place, so if the original is very under-exposed, you may have trouble getting a decent result without excessive loss of contrast or creating graininess.


This is one thing which really surprised me.

I have disco photos with areas that are so dark they're virtually black, and yet lightening the photos with software brings out all the detail not in the original photo, so the camera obviously recorded the information in the first place, even though you can't see it...which I don't really understand, although I'm not very technical!

Andy Westcott
25-05-2008, 03:04 PM
It's possible, especially if the camera records at 48-bit depth. I have taken photographs of old mine workings (don't even ask!) where, as you said, there is little visible on the original, but with a bit of software 'pushing' you can resolve a surprising amount of detail. It will, however, lose some detail as compared to a correctly exposed original, and if a particular region has recorded at zero level, no amount of tweaking will produce anything but that.

But I agree - this is a good way of obtaining useable images in low light condtions.

markthedoc
22-07-2008, 01:10 PM
Some useful information there. Cheers :thumbs_up:

rob1963
22-07-2008, 04:26 PM
Really useful thread. Cheers.


Really useful guide. Cheers. :)


Some useful information there. Cheers :thumbs_up:

Trying to get your post count up, Mark?

:rolleyes: :D :D

markthedoc
22-07-2008, 04:40 PM
I had a problem with my posts not appearing last night when I was posting them!
I'd just started using a new browser and thought it was a problem my end, but it was an anti-spam thing cos I'm new.

Sorry :o

Solitaire Events Ltd
22-07-2008, 04:47 PM
I had a problem with my posts not appearing last night when I was posting them!
I'd just started using a new browser and thought it was a problem my end, but it was an anti-spam thing cos I'm new.

Sorry :o

It's a moderation queue and I'm not quite sure why no-one saw it last night! Bizarre.

Dillmiester
25-08-2008, 03:01 PM
Ive found turning off the flash, using a tripod and upping the exposure times creates some great effects...

Totally Plucked
27-11-2008, 11:17 PM
I have been experimenting with a Kodak c913 9.1 mega pixel camera (Argos £49.99) and with the flash off and manually set the iso to 800 you can get some pretty decent results.

nigelwright7557
28-11-2008, 01:03 AM
I have been experimenting with a Kodak c913 9.1 mega pixel camera (Argos £49.99) and with the flash off and manually set the iso to 800 you can get some pretty decent results.

I have always been impressed with the Kodak cameras.
Mine is just 5 megapixels but is good for still and video footage with sound.

Totally Plucked
28-11-2008, 07:56 AM
It's a cracking deal for less than £50 3 x Optical zoom and 5 x Digital zoom and anti blur protection.

rob1963
28-11-2008, 10:37 AM
I have been experimenting with a Kodak c913 9.1 mega pixel camera (Argos £49.99) and with the flash off and manually set the iso to 800 you can get some pretty decent results.


It's a cracking deal for less than £50 3 x Optical zoom and 5 x Digital zoom and anti blur protection.

The disco pics on MY website were taken with a 4 mega pixel camera.

I don't know how true it is, but I've heard there's not much point going over 5 mega pixels, as once you go higher than that there's not really any noticeable difference in the quality of the pics...but the DISADVANTAGE is that the pics take up tons of space, so your memory stick will hold loads less photos.

Totally Plucked
28-11-2008, 03:17 PM
yes thats partly right Rob, but the advantage of more megapixels is, if you have to crop pics the more megapixels you have you still maintain the quality of the pic, It's 'Swings & Roundabouts' really !

DeckstarDeluxe
22-12-2008, 10:03 PM
any particular camera you guys use that you would recommend?

Dynamic Entertainment
22-12-2008, 10:36 PM
any particular camera you guys use that you would recommend?

Ive not got one but a photograper friend recommended i get a SLR/DSLR as it takes photos as soon as you press the button (something to do with exposure or something, but the light beams are clearer), whereas a normal digital camera will over expose and you get blury shots. I havnt a clue what im talking about really:D , just trying to remember the conversation. He definately said SLR/DSLR though.

Wayno
23-12-2008, 06:53 AM
One thing that baffles me is how "DJ's" find the time to take photos during gigs...

I mean after all they should be playing the music not taking photos - No doubt if its a wedding, a photographer will already be employed to take photos and a quick word in his shell-like may result in some decent pics for a little bit of cash in his pocket.

Some DJ's could do with concentrating on what they are being employed to do.

Solitaire Events Ltd
23-12-2008, 09:30 AM
One thing that baffles me is how "DJ's" find the time to take photos during gigs...

I mean after all they should be playing the music not taking photos - No doubt if its a wedding, a photographer will already be employed to take photos and a quick word in his shell-like may result in some decent pics for a little bit of cash in his pocket.

Some DJ's could do with concentrating on what they are being employed to do.

And if there are two of you, or it is a dinner/dance where there isn't much to do for a couple of hours? Or perhaps they get to the gig early to take some promo shots. Or perhaps they take a roadie to take some photos?

The list is endless.

Wayno
23-12-2008, 05:34 PM
Ahh but that bit is different Darren - my bad...

To better explain my comment came of the back of a telephone conversation a had with another DJ yesterday who was moaning at my use of stock photos on my wedding website and he was banging on that he always took photos of first dances etc, I told him I couldn't think of a more tasteless thing to do during a first dance, well OK I can but you get my drift.....

Pre-event promo pics and the like are OK in my book but then again the host is paying you perform not take the time for rig piccies as I'm sure they would rather you did this on your own time :devil: :)

Anywho I digress and hopefully this will swing back on topic - good info there Eddie.

DeckstarDeluxe
23-12-2008, 09:12 PM
I employed this polish guy who came highly recommended to me. I offered him £80 to take some photos during the gig. 655 photos later and could not find one that i thought would be suitable for the site. Sometimes its easier for the dj to take photos at the gig because they are the ones who can spot the shot they want.

In all fairness only time ive taken photos is from the dj booth when theres a packed dance floor.

DeckstarDeluxe
13-01-2009, 07:47 PM
Anyone got any ideas on decent cameras for taking photos?

DJMaxG
07-04-2009, 12:39 PM
Simple Tips

- Digital SLR Camera is ideal
- Detatchable flash gun
- Manually adjustable lens

Basic editing can be done using Windows Vista.

Dynamic Entertainment
03-09-2009, 10:37 PM
Sorry to resurrect an old thread (again), but need some help as all the OP info is over my head.

Right,

Ive got my DSLR (Canon EOS 300D), tried to get some nice pictures and nothing was coming out right. Flash off, and it was too dark, flash on, and there was no atmosphere...and its one of the few Canon models to not have adjustable flash control :bang:

So.....i invested in an "add-on" variable swivel flash gun.

Nom, my guessing from having read this thread countless times, is to get half decent pictures i need....

1. A fairly quick shutter speed (to reduce blurring of dancers),
2. A fairly high ISO
3. The flash gun on medium intensity, with decent diffusion
4. It swivelled at approx 45 degrees, to light above people slightly (in the atmosphere so to speak) without washing out the lighting.

How does this sound? Am i on the right lines?