Aussie John V wrote
> I spent a great weekend photographing my son's cricket team
And I spent a great 10 minutes reading about it - thanks John. And
being a Brit I understood the stuff about bowlers and overs. It all
sounds a bit tense for you "oldies" outside the boundary rope!
At last we've got a subject where I can share some experience with the
list instead of just reading and learning from it all the time. I've
done a fair bit of cricket, if it ever stops raining. And sometimes
when it doesn't. So apologies to anyone who's not interested for the
length of this posting, and there is some Oly content further
down.....
Congratulations on getting some catches. Apart from the odd one by the
wicket-keeper, I don't think I've ever snapped a catch. I normally use
a single camera on a tripod, which makes it difficult to move far
enough to follow the ball into the outfield.
One of the things you mention is not getting wickets, and the amount
of film that the pros burn. If I'm only shooting for one side in a
game, I find it quite good discipline to try and ration it to 1 36exp
film (with another in the bag as insurance, of course). Split 2 to 1
between batting and bowling, that gives you a couple of shots each of
the batsmen, and the bowlers from the far end, plus a few in reserve.
Golden rule for photographing batsmen - shoot the first ball they
face, unless they are obviously going to leave it AND it's going wide.
That's the one that gets them out more than any other. And it makes
sure you've got one of him in the bag. Then watch every ball very
carefully - if you're well tuned in you can just about see a wicket go
and get it on film. I've got shots to emabarrass batsmen with from
loads of games, and my reaction time is like that of a sloth on
Mogadon.
For "my" batting innings I will usually try to set up camp (heavy
tripod, camping stool, bottle of water and Guardian crossword) at
about 30 degrees to the line between the wickets. Sun behind me, chose
the side and spot which gives an uncluttered background. Other things
being equal take the side so you are on your left of the wicket. More
batsmen play right-handed so when he's at your end and plays round his
legs he's facing you.
Bowlers are difficult to get. I've never got good results from square
(sideways on) - with a long enough lens to give detail they cross the
picture area too quickly and I've never mastered panning. Well done if
you have got good shots. I prefer to get as close to the line between
the wickets as I can without disturbing the sightline of the batsman
at the far end - right next to the sight screen if there is one.
Again, pick the side with the better background. Then when they are
bowling from the far end, they look as if the are bowling straight
into the lens. It took me a long time to stop flinching when facing a
quickie, even though they are 50 yards away!
>From there you might also get lucky with a shot when they are bowling
away from you. If the bowler wants to appeal for a wicket, he will
turn to the umpire behind him with the traditional cry of
"YYYEEEUUURRRGGGHHHOOOWWWOOOZZZEEE" which can make a good aggressive
pic. And if the oppo batsman is looking pissed-off with stumps akimbo
and bails flying, it's a shot the bowler will love.
A nice shot which I do as a "banker", specially if it's the first time
I've shot for a team, is a general view of the field when "my" boys
are fielding. If it's getting late and the sun is low, so much the
better. If you get round to not far off square, a 35mm should give you
most of the fielders. Take it just as the bowler is about to let go
and everybody will be in position an concentrating hard. If you can
get the pavilion in the far side of the shot, so much the better. With
that many people in the shot, you're bound to sell a few copies! And
of course team photos are always popular. I find them a pain to do,
but the effort of rounding up the team and getting them to look
serious is usually appreciated afterwards.
OM content at last - I started using a Tamron 80-210 zoom (on an OM1n,
of course) with a cheap 2x converter, but quickly gave up. Lousy
quality and hard to see through the lens. Found a second-hand Oly
500/8 mirror lens, which was good for small grounds. Then found a
second-hand Sigma 600mm mirror which is good for bigger grounds. But
mirror lens bokeh is awful - highlight doughnuts are OK, but out of
focus foliage is really quite bilious! Last year, after being infected
by the list, I found a used Oly 600/6.3
whch is the best yet. It needs a fairly bright day, but the optical
quality seems fine. Being rack and pinion focussing it is a bit
cumbersome, and it certainly needs a hefty tripod. No chance of
getting an outfield catch with that setup, but great for stuff around
the wickets. If we ever get a summer this year I might even try adding
the 1.4 converter on a bright day, to get the blood vessels in the
bowler's eyes! If it's a bit gloomy, I've found the Fuji Superia 800
ASA print film is excellent stuff.
After your coments about using 2 bodies, next time I'm in the mood for
a 2-film match I might try the same. Put something like the Tamron 180
on the other one and try and nab some catches.
It's great fun, but very time-consuming and extremely tiring. You have
to spend 4 or 5 hours concentrating very hard for 5 seconds every now
and then. A pro said in his autobiography that in the press box at a
big game there is loads of chat and banter. Until the bowler starts
his run-up when it all goes deathly quiet until the ball is dead. Then
they will start up again in mid-joke as if nothing has happened.
Good luck John - keep us posted.
Pommie John
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|