Has anyone ever shot a concert?

Dev · Mar 13, 2017

I'm thinking about giving it a go. The only things I'm worried about is the amount of light available.

Assuming I have a fast lens, what developer and film would be the most appropriate do you think?

I've tried delta 3200 but that looks horrible. I'm thinking about Tri X 400 in diafine @ 1600.

Also, how do you meter? Matrix metering? Center weighted? Spot?
From where do you measure? The stage lights? The performers?

Thanks :~)

jimjm · Mar 13, 2017

Stage lighting can be very tricky. For me, the primary goal is to get an accurate meter reading of the performer's face, and don't worry about the shadows or anything else. Especially with stage or spot lighting, the shadows will go pretty dark. Also, you can't take just one reading and base all your exposures from that because the light will usually vary in intensity at different parts of the stage.

Here's where having a camera with a true spot meter can help. Matrix metering is just a pre-computed exposure based on what the camera thinks the scene needs. Stage lighting can be pretty extreme, so you need to evaluate the scene yourself and not depend on the camera to figure it out. Center-weighted might work in some situations with more even lighting overall. A spot meter lets you selectively meter the most important part of the image (usually the performer's face), and decide yourself if any over or under-exposure is needed. I'll spot meter off the subject's face, then add +1 stop for light skin, and 0, -1 or even -2 stops for darker skin. I used a Nikon F4 for a long time and found the spot meter worked well for this. The 180/2.8 lens is amazing if you need more reach.

I've shot TMax3200 (sadly, now extinct) at 1600 and gotten good results in D76 1:1 and in HC-110. Tri-X at 1600 showed more grain, but gave a more classic gritty look. If you want to minimize grain and contrast, there are probably other developers that will work well with Delta 3200, but you might see better results by shooting it at 1600. I've also been shooting HP5+ at 1200 and 1600 in HC-110, and have been pretty happy with it.

Nikon F4, 180/2.8 AF, TMax3200 @ 1600

Nikon F4, 28/2.8, TMax 3200 @ 1600

Nikon F4, 180/2.8 AF, Tri-X @ 1600

locutus · Mar 13, 2017

I shoot concerts on Tri-X pushed 1 stop to a EI of 800 in D76, lenses used are 80mm f/1.4, 35mm f/1.4 and 19mm f/2.8.

For metering it is indeed all spot work, do regular spot measurements of the performers face or other points of interest, shoot in manual and preserve that setting for a while until you notice the light has changed too much.

Shadows will fall wherever they are, generally speaking they will not contain much information anyway and that is fine.

Metering again for each shot is far too slow and will make you loose shots, better have some frames that require more printing work.

As you are working with very directional stage light and not caring about the shadows don't go overboard on push processing, the actual subjects are often far better lighted then you would have thought at first.

A important rule to keep in mind is that clean blacks can look much better then muddy lifted shadows with nothing of interest in them.

etn · Mar 13, 2017

I never shot a concert (and don't intend to), but being a musician myself, be aware that musicians and audience are very sensitive
to noise. This is particularly true for classical music and jazz. Therefore, use a Leica or a Rolleiflex (or something in the same league
decibel-wise) if you go to such a concert. Don't use a Hasselblad! even 35mm SLR are borderline in my opinion.
Obviously, this is irrelevant for hard rock concerts.

My worst ever related experience: I attended a classical concert which my then-girlfriend (a professional violinist) played.
A few rows behind me was a guy with a big, modern, professional-grade Canikon DSLR on a tripod. For what I know he might have been
a photog for the local press or so. He definitely looked like it. Believe me or not, he took one picture every few seconds
for the duration of the concert. The wonders of digital. I could have killed the guy. Needless to say it ruined the experience
for everyone sitting within 10 meters. That day I swore I would never shoot a concert but rather shoot insensitive photographers

By the way, many classical orchestras I played with did not allow photographs being taken during the concert. When they needed pics
e.g. for their website, they would stage a concert for this purpose. The photographer was also free to move around "inside"
the orchestra (try that in a real concert!) Better pics and no frustration to anyone.

To answer your question about metering:
Jim nailed it. Follow his advice. The light generally does not change, so measure once and you're good for the concert - unless of course
there is a big change in lighting conditions.

munz6869 · Mar 13, 2017

Years ago, when I was shooting a stack of theatre (for publicity and documentation) for a couple of years, my setup ended up being a couple of Olympus OM40/PC's with 28mm and 50mm lenses, loaded with Delta 3200, which I'd then process in Ilford DDX to minimise the grain. The OM40/PC's are ugly, battery-chewing monsters, but have a weird 80's 'matrix metering' that seems to deal with hotspots in otherwise dark scenes really well. And with some good OM lenses, they served me really well. They have a reasonably quiet shutter for an SLR, but per etn's comment above, I tended to avoid snapping away during quiet, poignant scenes...!

Marc!

Steve Smith · Mar 13, 2017

Ear plugs (assuming it's a loud, amplified show). If you like the performers, get ER20 musicians ear plugs which reduce the volume but keep the tonal balance. If you don't like the performers, get the ear plugs with the most reduction you can find.

As for metering, remember that most of the scene is dark. If you use a meter, it will try to expose it as a normal daylight scene (18%) so you will need to reduce exposure by about two stops.

Steve.

Paul Howell · Mar 13, 2017

I think everyone has given good advice. First you need to know what the rules are for shooting, professional vs amateur. When I was a working PJ classical events we were not allowed to shoot during the actual performance but shot at a dress rehearsal. At rock events we were allowed to shoot during the first couple of songs then had to leave the hall but were allowed to shoot the after party, if there was one. I have used Trix in Dinafine but found it too soft, preferred Trix pushed to 1600 or 3200 in Acufine. Shoot with a camera with manual advance, motor winders and drives are just too loud. If you have more modern AF SLR with an integrated motor drive you might think about making a muffler of some sort out of foam. Depending on where you are sitting dictates the lens, up front a 50mm will work for wide shots, farther back 85 to 135. My go to lens in the day was a 105 2.5 and 50mm 1.4.

Ko.Fe. · Mar 13, 2017

HP5+ @1600 in HC-110. The only big deal which is special with concert is to get as close as possible. The rest is nothing special. I prefer mobile phone meter, it shows me actual picture and I could measure where I need.

jimjm · Mar 13, 2017

As others have mentioned here, equipment choice can be a critical factor. Many venues will not appreciate a large camera like the Nikon F4, so something more discreet like an Olympus or Leica will often make a difference. I believe the OM4 and OM3 bodies also had spot metering? I used to have an OM1 and OM2 and was surprised at how quiet the shutters were.

MattKing · Mar 13, 2017

Does 1977 count?

All the advice above is excellent.
The shot below is via a scanned newspaper page, reduced to a pdf. You usually will want something slightly better.
It really helps if you have special access. I was in the orchestra "pit" with a couple of photographers and the security guys. Tri-X shot at ASA 400, developed normally.

removed account4 · Mar 13, 2017

hi dev

i have shot concerts, mostly intimate ones where i ws not very far from the band.
i used 35mm ( both full+half frame ), shot wide open ( f2 or less )
at 1/60th when i could. i didn't use a flash because it would have distracted the band
... sometimes i shot at 1/15thS and got a bit of atmosphere, still wide open.

Ian Grant · Mar 13, 2017

I've shot a lot of concerts and would sometimes use a stringer (a second photographer shooting under my direction).. My preferred films were intitially HP5 but as soon as it was released XP1 and later XP2 which I push processed as needed, colour was the two specialist push process E6 films from Kodak & Fuji, now long gone.

Ilford dropped recommendations for push processing with XP2 only because labs hadn't like XP1 which had a non standard C41 colour development time, so only recommended the standard time for XP2, however it push processes beautifully in C41 chemistry much finer grain than Delta 3200.

When Kodak & Fuji dropped their high speed E6 films 800/1600 EI I had no choice except to switch to digital, but at that point I was sometimes shooting 3 or 4 concerts a week occasionally 2 venues on the same night.

If I shot a concert on film today I'd still use XP2 Super.

Ian

Ian Grant · Mar 13, 2017

MattKing said:
Does 1977 count?

All the advice above is excellent.
The shot below is via a scanned newspaper page, reduced to a pdf. You usually will want something slightly better.
It really helps if you have special access. I was in the orchestra "pit" with a couple of photographers and the security guys. Tri-X shot at ASA 400, developed normally.

View attachment 175064

Page Friday.

eh Jimmy -

Dead Link Removed

Ian

Dev · Mar 13, 2017

Awesome replies guys! I very much appreciate it and enjoyed reading them.

bvy · Mar 13, 2017

Ian Grant said:
Ilford dropped recommendations for push processing with XP2 only because labs hadn't like XP1 which had a non standard C41 colour development time, so only recommended the standard time for XP2, however it push processes beautifully in C41 chemistry much finer grain than Delta 3200.

Interesting and informative. I wouldn't have thought to push XP2.

Ian Grant · Mar 14, 2017

bvy said:
Interesting and informative. I wouldn't have thought to push XP2.

I still have the original XP1 data sheet with the push processing details. XP1 needed a slightly longer colour development time than colour films, I kept using the same push process times with XP2. If you want the times I'll dig out the details (they are in my darkroom).

In the early to mid 1980's I had business with Ilford and over lunch with 2 directors and a research chemist asked why they'd dropped push processing with XP2. Their explanation was to make life simple for processing labs because XP1's non standard colour dev time caused them problems, some labs wouldn't process it at all which was holding sales back. XP2 overcame this obstacle . I was already push processing XP2 and they agreed it could be pushed just like XP1.

I was doing regular push process runs of XP2 with Photocolor C41 chemistry, and pushing E6 with the Photocolor Chrome 6 kits. The Fuji & Kodak P800/1600 E6 films needed push processing to achieve full speed but the emulsions were balanced to give their optimum colour saturation and contrast range when pushed.

Ian

destroya · Mar 14, 2017

i ran into the same issue as you a few years ago. as an injured drummer who cant play anymore, I always loved seeing shots of my bank playing so i decided to shoot some of my old band for fun. having no idea where to start, I used my digital for the first show to get an idea of how to meter, which lenses worked best at which aperture and so on. then the next few shows were with tmax 400 or tri-x at 800 or 1600 developed in XTOL

I actually found the nikon matrix meter to be pretty good, much better than center weighted. about 70% of the shots came out properly exposed. the rest were very much under exposed. I agree that spot metering was best, especially in the smaller clubs that did not have a lot of vari-lights and moving spot lights. this allowed me to get a good reading and leave it set there so i could focus on composition. a fast lens also helps quite a bit as does a monopod for smaller clubs. if you are lucky and know the band, get there for sound check and use an incident meter on the stage if possible

bvy · Mar 14, 2017

Ian Grant said:
I still have the original XP1 data sheet with the push processing details. XP1 needed a slightly longer colour development time than colour films, I kept using the same push process times with XP2. If you want the times I'll dig out the details (they are in my darkroom).

Thanks. It would be interesting to see, but don't go to any trouble. I just recently started shooting it, mostly for portraits. I like the look a lot, but I'm finding the print times ridiculously long...

Ian Grant · Mar 14, 2017

Actually the box with the XP1 data sheet is close to my desk & PC here in the darkroom.

Standard C41 100-400 38º C 5 mins

800 EI 6.5 mins
1600 EI 7.5 mins

I never had issues with long printing times with my Durst M601/605.

Ian

pentaxuser · Mar 14, 2017

Ian, can I take it that speeds beyond 1600 with XP2+ are not really possible or just to be avoided unless a dire ncessity but the neg will still print something worthwhile?

Thanks

pentaxuser

Ian Grant · Mar 14, 2017

At a push I would shoot at 3200 but in general I stuck to 1600 and 800 when the lighting was better. I used mostly a Vivitar S1 70-210 f2.8-f4 lens at f2.8 or f4, or a standard 50mm f1.8 lens.

Ian

flavio81 · Mar 14, 2017

Dev said:
I'm thinking about giving it a go. The only things I'm worried about is the amount of light available.

Assuming I have a fast lens, what developer and film would be the most appropriate do you think?

I've tried delta 3200 but that looks horrible. I'm thinking about Tri X 400 in diafine @ 1600.

Also, how do you meter? Matrix metering? Center weighted? Spot?
From where do you measure? The stage lights? The performers?

Thanks :~)

Hi,

I worked as a concert photographer while i was an university student. "Concert" as in "jazz club" concert, mostly, but i've also done 'normal' (big stage, light show) concerts.
In short, my advice is:

- get fast lenses (i used minimum f2.8, also a 1.2 lens)
- get as close as possible; i used to jump on stage because I was already known by the musicians so no problem
--- or get far, mount a stable tripod and use a fast lens like a 200/2.8, but this is tricky
--- monopods are your friend, always
- concerts with light shows have wildly varying levels of light, so you better use an autoexposure camera
--- and understand perfectly how to apply exposure compensation depending on what the meter sees
--- i used centerweighted metering because the error was predictable and thus compensable
--- you need a fast-acting meter, so no cameras with CdS meters, better a camera with SPD (silicon photodiode) meter.
- use a wide latitude film
- use a fast film
--- my choice was Superia 1600 (ISO 1600)

also
- you can also use flash only if the musicians are OK with this. Try to arrange a shoot when they are rehearsing so you can use flash without bothering them.
- color temperature: know your color temperature. If lights are tungsten (or the white balance is close to tungsten), then DON'T use a flash without applying the correct (85B, etc) filter over the flash head. Otherwise you'll get a very "amateur" look.
--- for use without flash, sometimes an 80C or 80D filter works to get better results when doing color printing. But this assumes the light levels are high enough to accept the light loss of the filter.

flavio81 · Mar 14, 2017

Ian Grant said:
If I shot a concert on film today I'd still use XP2 Super.

Pushed XP2 sounds like an ideal film for B/W concert photography. Good recommendation!!

Jim Noel · Mar 14, 2017

I have photographed several. But I never shot one,even if they deserved it, because guns were stopped at the entrance.

flavio81 · Mar 14, 2017

Jim Noel said:
I have photographed several. But I never shot one,even if they deserved it, because guns were stopped at the entrance.

you are missing most of the fun, then!!

Has anyone ever shot a concert?

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency