Live theatre performance shots

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

DJ - 18 Dec 2004 12:23 GMT

I've just posted my live performance shots from Machiavelli, Machiavelli
performed at Melbourne's La Mama recently. The play is a "single hander", played
by a friend of mine, Libby Stone. La Mama is a tiny theatre space, so tiny the
audience is almost part of the action.

My pictures are at

http://www.splatco.com/david/machiavelli/index.htm

They were taken with a Canon 300D and the 50mm f1.8 lens, set at ISO800. I
decided right at the outset to not even bother with the "kit" lens, it's just
not fast enough.

The show is reviewed at
http://www.theage.com.au/news/Reviews/Machiavelli-Machiavelli/2004/12/10/1102625
521286.html

Reply to this Message

David L - 19 Dec 2004 05:44 GMT

> I've just posted my live performance shots from Machiavelli, Machiavelli
> performed at Melbourne's La Mama recently. The play is a "single hander", played
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> The show is reviewed at
> http://www.theage.com.au/news/Reviews/Machiavelli-Machiavelli/2004/12/10/1102625
521286.html

hi, thanks for showing these. I'm always waiting to get a DSLR camera.
Did you need to increase brightness/levels after the shots? Do you
think there is "room" to increase the shutter speed without sacrificing
the quality?

Reply to this Message

DJ - 19 Dec 2004 13:01 GMT

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 05:44:52 GMT, in aus.photo you wrote:

>> I've just posted my live performance shots from Machiavelli, Machiavelli
>> performed at Melbourne's La Mama recently. The play is a "single hander", played
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>hi, thanks for showing these. I'm always waiting to get a DSLR camera.
> Did you need to increase brightness/levels after the shots?

David, I shoot in RAW and generally aim for a deliberate 1 stop under exposure.
That helps avoid burnt out highlights. The Canon RAW format has 3-4 stops more
dynamic range than jpg., so I regard "investing" 1 stop of that as wise
insurance. So yes, I generally wind up bumping it up a stop or so in the
computer.

> Do you
>think there is "room" to increase the shutter speed without sacrificing
>the quality?

I have no real answer to that. Aperture is a trade off as well for two reasons:

1. The low cost lenses I can afford are not needle sharp at max aperture.

2. Even with auto focus it's hard to get a good focus in low light conditions,
especially if you are trying to track a moving target and frame the subject in
different parts of the FOV. I prefer manual focusing but let Canon's little red
focus indicator lights assist me.

dj

Reply to this Message

David L - 20 Dec 2004 23:38 GMT

> On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 05:44:52 GMT, in aus.photo you wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
>
> dj

Hi DJ, Many thanks for the insight that's great.

Reply to this Message

Bruce Murphy - 19 Dec 2004 07:05 GMT

> I've just posted my live performance shots from Machiavelli, Machiavelli
> performed at Melbourne's La Mama recently. The play is a "single hander", played
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> decided right at the outset to not even bother with the "kit" lens, it's just
> not fast enough.

If the light is with you and you're careful about movement, f/2.8
lenses can be acceptable. I'm thinking something like a 80-200 f/2.8
zoom. You may well also find an 85mm f/1.8 or similar lens
particularly useful for this sort of thing.

Granted, I've mostly worked on bigger sets.

B

Reply to this Message

DJ - 19 Dec 2004 12:35 GMT

>> I've just posted my live performance shots from Machiavelli, Machiavelli
>> performed at Melbourne's La Mama recently. The play is a "single hander", played
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>lenses can be acceptable. I'm thinking something like a 80-200 f/2.8
>zoom.

Ah, if only I could afford something like that!

You may well also find an 85mm f/1.8 or similar lens

>particularly useful for this sort of thing.

At La Mama a 50mm is almost too long to fit in the theatre!

>Granted, I've mostly worked on bigger sets.

I deliberately varied the exposure between favouring smaller apertures and
faster shutter speeds, within the limits of the light. I figured that way I'd
maximize my chances of getting something usable. Most of the shots are in the
aperture range 1.8 to 4.5, with exposures 1/25 through to 1/250. I got off about
150 shots in a 1-hour show. A remarkably high percentage were OK technically,
i.e acceptably sharp. I lost almost as many to overexposure in the scenes with a
single spot light - in my excitment I forgot the camera would see a lot of
darkness and expose for the average scene - than to poor focus or movement. All
part of learning - I need to study the auto exposure modes more.

The other thing that was gratifying was that even on ISO800 the noise is totally
acceptable. In fact, compared to anything I could have got out of film in a
previous life, 40 years ago, totally stunning. I did the shoot at the dress
rehearsal in the afternoon and was able to get home, print 4-5 A4 prints and be
back for the evening show and present the prints to the cast.

I love digital!

Reply to this Message