Low lighting, kids in caves with Christmas lights?

[Michelleltn]

I would like some feedback on what I could have done better here. We went to some caverns tonight. They had low lighting in some areas, better lighting in others. Some red lights, blue lights etc. (And then Christmas decorations too.)

I kept switching between night mode and Manual b/c some shots did better in night, but others did not. (So if I couldn't get a good pic on night, I tried playing with manual for a bit.)

I did manage to capture some good ones, you can see them on my blog. Well they were the best of the bunch-so I blogged them. Others I just totally deleted b/c I couldn't manage to do anything even when color adjusting. (BTW) I don't yet work in raw format.

But these I am trying to figure out. Christmas Caverns pictures by MichelleL_bucket - Photobucket

I did not want to have to resize them all and post them here.

(I will try to post underneath, the settings I used. ) And if you have ideas if you can comment.) Most not posted were very similar to the ones before. (So it looks like there might be an easy common fix.)

Another question is when I used manual and tried to get the kids in some of the low light settings they would blur. (Of course the cave was not tripod friendly.) And I have an IS lense, I tried to be very still, but I am wondering if the shutter can remain open after the picture snap, b/c when I told the kids to stay still until I got the 2 second read back display. The picture wasnt' as blurry. So would the shutter still be open, and then if they move it could blur?

Another problem I had is the kid went through this flourescent spinning tunnel. It was all I could do to try to stand outside and get a pic. Without getting dizzy. When I did manage a good shot of the colors (sides) the people were totally black, (Even brightening it manually was no help.) When I got a picture of the kids you see the light blur everywhere. (Is this shot possible?)

Thanks

[windrider86]

If you posted your photo here for us, I'm willing to bet you'll get more responses!!

[Michelleltn]

Blurry cavern roof.

Night Scene TV shutter speed 1 AV 3.5 EXP Comp 0 ISO 400 ISO AUTo ON focal lenth 18mm wb auto


This was in the tunnel the sides were spinning with lights. (Not sure how to capture the light-so it would show up still in the photo. )

[Doug Sundseth]

First, a one-second exposure is almost always going to be blurry if you don't have a tripod. With VR/IS and very good technique, I can get about 2/3 of my photos sharp at 1/2 second hand-held. Now that's for static subjects.

When you're shooting people, especially kids, either you or the subject is almost certain to move during that one second.

Recommendations: Higher ISO and faster lenses.

Second, it looks like there's intentional lighting provided by the site. I'd recommend that you just go with that rather than trying to get a natural-looking light. (This is the same advice I've seen given for photographing concerts, BTW.)

Example: Over Thanksgiving, we travelled to Carlsbad Caverns (our second trip). The first time, I tried using bounce flash to pull out details and reduce blur. The problem is that the caverns were lit by a theatrical lighting designer and the flash killed the theatrical lighting. The second trip I went entirely "ambient" (no flash), pushed to ISO 1600, and shot wide open:



That's hand-held at 1/10 second. Other photos from that trip (that I've not yet posted) were significantly longer exposures.

[Michelleltn]

Originally Posted by Doug Sundseth

First, a one-second exposure is almost always going to be blurry if you don't have a tripod. With VR/IS and very good technique, I can get about 2/3 of my photos sharp at 1/2 second hand-held. Now that's for static subjects.

When you're shooting people, especially kids, either you or the subject is almost certain to move during that one second.

Recommendations: Higher ISO and faster lenses.

Second, it looks like there's intentional lighting provided by the site. I'd recommend that you just go with that rather than trying to get a natural-looking light. (This is the same advice I've seen given for photographing concerts, BTW.)

Example: Over Thanksgiving, we travelled to Carlsbad Caverns (our second trip). The first time, I tried using bounce flash to pull out details and reduce blur. The problem is that the caverns were lit by a theatrical lighting designer and the flash killed the theatrical lighting. The second trip I went entirely "ambient" (no flash), pushed to ISO 1600, and shot wide open:


That's hand-held at 1/10 second. Other photos from that trip (that I've not yet posted) were significantly longer exposures.

Okay so night setting is really not the best setting for this situation. So what lens is faster? I plan to get a 50mm. Is it faster? I thought the fast (ness) was all about the shutter speed.

I went to Carlsbad when I was about 12 years old. Wonderful place. I hope to go back and take my kids some day. Hopefully by then I will be better at photographing them.

Thanks for your input.

[mikoyan]

Faster glass refers to the maximum f-stop. Typically it is listed on the lens. But be prepared to shell out some cash.

[Doug Sundseth]

A 50 f/1.8 is about two stops faster than a kit lens at the shortest focal length. This means that you could use the same ISO and go to 1/4 second exposure. You'll get a much shallower depth of field, which can be good or bad, and 50mm is a bit long (especially on a crop sensor body) to get decent landscapes.

Also, most 50mm lenses don't have IS/VR, IIRC.