concert photography

[BTMonolith]

hi all

is this a good forum to discuss concert film photography? wasn’t sure if to post here or in “documentary” or even just “exposure.” i’m just getting started and would like to ask about metering, films, lenses and just any advice on shooting small-ish rock concerts on 35mm film.

i’ve shot two shows so far, lab processed rolls and scans back from one already. i’ve learned that a center weighted meter is tricky. i got mostly underexposed shots of the musicians with highlights intact and blown out guitar reflections. it appears i metered and adjusted my exposure for darkness a lot because i have a few where the blacks are grey. for that shoot i rated tmax 400 in camera at 1600. grain wasn’t an issue for me but i was wondering about the effects of push on contrast. i’ve read push processing increases contrast. should i keep that in mind when exposing and metering in order to get more face and less all white guitar? since that shoot i picked up a body with spot metering and plan on reading more precisely the performers faces as they move in and out of light. how can i figure approx how many more stops of highlights i have in order not to blow out any features like shiny guitars? does that depend on film stock and processing? for my next shoot i will use TMAX 3200p and rate at 6400. focus wasn’t too much an issue but i’d like the extra speed to get my shutter around 1/60 and hopefully stop down my lenses a bit from their largest aperture. hand holding a 105mm at a rock concert might not be doable all the time i’ve learned, at least at 1/30. also carry a 28 and 50mm.

hopefully i posted this in the right spot. please advise/move if not. i love this forum and hope to pick your brains often as i fumble my way through this new obsession of mine. i’ve read all old posts i could find with regards to concert shooting on here- was just hoping to get some direct conversation. i’d be happy to post some of my scans and the images of negs if there’s need. thanks!

 

[LiamG]

I'm surprised there's no other response, as there are much more knowledgeable people that me here. I have no experience with concerts, but I do have experience with indoor sports, where there are similar problems, and poor lighting.

Yes, you will increase contrast by pushing- I think of it this way, what you're really doing is underexposing the film, then giving it extra development to compensate, so that underexposed negative will have poor contrast, and your extra development is making it more "normal." Wherever you're placing the performers face, at middle grey, or whatever you're envisioning, the amount of highlight detail you'll get above that will be limited by the film stock, the development procedure, and the scanning, as it sounds like that's what's going on- you don't really know where the limiting factor here is without carefully examining the negatives and controlling for some of the factors, but when using a lab to develop, your options are limited. You might have to adjust what you're doing to the results the lab can provide (e.g. expose for highlights) if you're stuck with that one lab.

Remember too that the "box speed" of films like Tmax 3200 already reflects a push- tmax is actually an ISO 800 film without any push, so when pushing to 6400, you're essentially pushing that film 3 stops rather than one.

In your shoes, my first thought would be- can I get away with flash? Tmax 400 either rated box or pushed one stop with flash would let you negate some of the uneven lighting and highlight issues by adding your own, even light. Otherwise, spot metering for what you want as the most important aspect (faces, it sounds like), using an incident meter on the stage itself, or just trial and error would all be helpful. Faster lenses are your friend- every additional stop is twice the light, and twice the shutter speed.

 

[BTMonolith]

thanks LiamG! i think my biggest mistake was adjusting the exposure with shutter speed as i reframed for composition. i think i put the center weight meter on a dim face, recomposed and adjusted exposure for a shirt or guitar as the center of my frame moved. then i got sum highlights off a shirt, blown reflections and mostly empty shadows/black. i’ve read more about exposing dark scenes and it seems i might want to read a little darker than a face for some shadow detail. i don’t want to flash in their faces and at least one of my upcoming shows doesn’t allow, so i’ll practice better zone selection with my spot meter. i have read that about TMAX 3200P, but i’ve also seen results that i’d be happy with from people rating at 6400 so that will be what i use next. i couldn’t imagine attempting sports, i feel lucky to have 1/60 on a flailing guitarist!

 

[BSP]

Pushing TMAX3200P to 3200 will result in very grainy photographs. I stopped using it for concerts and now push HP5+ or RPX400 to 1600 shoot my 50mm at f/2 or f/2.8 at 1/125 or 1/60 and hope for the best. Of course this will also result in high contrast but that's the way I like it.

 

[Colin Corneau]

I'm really not much convinced of the whole lore on TMAX33200...I've had great results shooting it at box speed (Ilfotec DD-X for the record) and sure it's grainy -- you won't find any film that's not, above 400. Taste is subjective of course, but it's nice looking grain and very snappy contrast too.

Pushing a good 400 speed film to 1600 or 3200 will definitely give high contrast too (again that's personal taste), due to loss of detail in shadows and highlights. It works quite well too, from when I've done it (again in DDX or a well suited developer like Microphen).

Consider Ilford's Delta 3200...it's fairly low contrast at 800 or 1600 but when you shoot it at 3200 or even 6400 its contrast improves some...it's quite clever in that it starts out lower contrast, to compensate for the increased contrast when shooting at a higher speed. Its grain looks quite different than TMZ, but Ilford always makes a quality product.

Try them out! See what you like, for your taste and purposes. I'd suggest keeping things consistent in terms of ISO you shoot at as well as developer that you use. Good luck....

 

[Ariston]

Which do you prefer - shadow detail or less grain? Kodak says pushing lower-speed film to 3200 will result in less grain, but also less shadow detail.

As far as exposure, if you are talking about concerts in small venues such as clubs, I would not expect the lighting to fluctuate that much. It might be easier to set your exposure manually, leave it alone, and shoot away. If you are talking about a large concert with elaborate lighting, that probably isn't going to work.

I have shot exactly zero concerts, though, so keep that in mind.

 

[BTMonolith]

thanks everyone! examples like these are what i would consider to be acceptable small concert shots on TMAX at 6400 :

https://flic.kr/p/2b7Xce5

https://flic.kr/p/56o7Dp

depends on the stage lights of course but i want 6400 in order to keep shutter at 1/60 slowest and lenses stopped down once. my nikkor 50 1.4 AIS isn’t brilliant wide open and my 28 2.8 AI is slightly better but just slower. carry a 105 2.5 AIS that’s amazing wide open but just a little long for slow shutters. gonna look at the stocks you recommended, BSP. Ariston you are right- for the small bands and venues i am shooting, there’s really just an ambient stage light and maybe a spot. it’s just that usually the exciting performers duck in and out of the ideal spot. but yeah i’m def gonna lock exposure for a well lit face i think next time. so what i’m having a difficult time imagining is the amount of contrast i’ll have after pushing +2/+3 and where that places black and white, highlights and shadows. it comes down to stock, chems, and processing and also experience i’m sure. but my immediate thoughts are where to meter. the middle and slightly under is what i’m going to do next.

i’ve also learned that negatives are so important to look at when considering these things. i can’t really learn from lab scans. gotta start somewhere though! now i’m just getting process from a lab who understands what i’m going for and i’ll scan with my DSLR. here’s a link to my lightly post processed ( black down ) scans of my first concert. it was TRI-X +2. thanks for all replies- i don’t personally know anyone else doing this or even anyone else shooting film IRL so even if i’m just rambling it’s cool to have people who respond and help

https://lightroom.adobe.com/shares/d286479953ab46b9ba3730d0e443607e

 

[LiamG]

Looking at those scans I would guess that there's still detail remaining in the areas that are "blown out" in a digital sense, it's more a question of scanning. Tmax 400 is pretty amazing at preserving highlight detail.

Nice shots too, I think you'll be getting results you're happy with pretty fast.

 

[BTMonolith]

thanks LiamG! i think you are right about those scans not showing it all. gonna home DSLR scan from now on

 

[MattKing]

In my limited experience, the biggest challenge with concert photography isn't related to film and development, it is related to lighting and metering.
And concert lights are horrible (usually) for photography.
Try your best to spot meter off of a mid-tone.

 

[jamesaz]

I have a short 8 in. table top tripod that I've used pressed up against my shoulder (kind of like a rifle stock) for extra stability in low light situations. Something like that could possibly help give you a bit more shutter flexibility. Good luck.