Between the dim, monochrome washes of basement dives and the explosive lighting of arena shows, achieving the correct exposure for concert photography can be one of the biggest challenges for beginning and experienced shooters alike.
Here’s a basic four-step breakdown for how I set exposure shooting gigs.
Determining Exposure for Concert Photography
The following, which requires shooting in manual mode, is my standard process for setting exposure at the start of a set and for every lighting change afterward:
- Shoot a test exposure
For this test frame, I’ll just make an educated guess at exposure given the amount of light in the venue. Generally this is going to be around f/2.8 and 1/160 between ISO 1600 and 6400.
- Review the histogram and image display
That’s right, chimp it up. In reviewing the above test frame, I’ll look at both the histogram and overall rendition of the image. With the latter, it’s important to use a camera with a fairly accurate LCD, otherwise one can be misled. I’ll also review the areas of blown highlights to ensure that important details are intact in the subject.Of the four steps, this is both the most difficult and the most important. The good thing is, if you blow it, you’ve always got another shot.
- Rinse, repeat
Too bright? Too dark? Go back to step 1 and adjust as necessary. ISO, shutter speed, and aperture – whatever it takes. When you’ve nailed it, proceed to the last step.
- Set it and forget it Once you’ve achieved optimum exposure for the current lighting scheme, lock it down and concentrate on making images – i.e., don’t sweat the technics. When the lights change (and they will), go back to step one and repeat the whole process.
Notice that I haven’t mentioned the in-camera meter and with good reason. As any experienced photographer will attest, all light meters can lie; or at the very least, they are never accurate 100% of the time for all scenes or situations. With concert photography, this take away is especially true.
End Notes:
Ideally, this give and take process only takes a few seconds of the first song as the lighting scheme stabilizes, and for every subsequent major lighting change. Obviously the above routine is less applicable to strobes and highly variable lighting, but this four-step system is my core basis for establishing exposure throughout a set.
In the next article in this two-part series, I’ll go into more depth on the additional techniques I employ in conjunction with this routine to achieve the best possible exposure at the time of shooting.
25 Comments Add your own
1. Zach | March 26th, 2008 at 2:17 am
Awesome, can’t wait to hear what you have to say about strobes.
2. Todd | March 26th, 2008 at 3:42 am
Hey Zach, I will most likely touch on dealing with strobes and other short-duration lighting (i.e., flare-ups of white light that has been popular recently) in the second part of this mini-series. Stay tuned.
3. Alain G | March 26th, 2008 at 5:01 am
Hi Todd.
I use almost the same method
From my point of view, the difficult parts are :
- decide if the exposure is good : you have to know exactly how works your histogram and decide if it’s ok with the overexposed/underexposed parts
- when the lights change very often, I don’t use manual mode but aperture priority and spot metering.
4. Todd | March 26th, 2008 at 5:49 am
Hey Alain,
Nice to hear from you here, and good to know that this method is similar to yours. I think it is a fairly natural process with a DSLR — with film, set it, hope it’s not underexposed, and pray.
I would agree about the difficult parts, especially in knowing what a “good” histogram looks like for concert photography, since the shadows are so often dominant. Perhaps this is something I’ll write about in the second part, as it is worth exploring.
And for quick changes, I, too, agree. Sometimes manual is not fast enough, for no other reason than the fact that we’re not fast enough
5. Raquita | March 26th, 2008 at 6:25 am
WISH I had seen this before the weekend… Friends of mine did a hip hop show at blueberry hill… HORRIBLE lighting.. like seriously no light.. but I tried to shoot it anyway. (put a few public in my flickr stream)
Next time I shall be more prepared!
6. CONCERT PHOTOGRAPHY HOW-T&hellip | March 26th, 2008 at 6:52 am
[…] Read More… […]
7. Todd | March 26th, 2008 at 7:15 am
Hey Raquita, next time. The Duck Room at Blueberry Hill is one of the worst venues to shoot in, because they have the bad habit of turning the lights off for the headliners. I’ll check out your recent shots.
8. Paul D'Andrea | March 26th, 2008 at 7:27 am
Interesting. I would have thought that with the quickly changing light you would have used some sort of auto setting, like aperture priority. Or do you try to get a test shot when the light flares and then wait for it to flair again for further shots in that type of light?
I’ve found it’s helpful to use spot metering in scenes of such high contrast. What metering mode are you using?
Also, thanks for the great site and such fantastic information.
9. Todd | March 26th, 2008 at 8:56 am
I always use manual mode, Paul. I used to use aperture priority for years, but have grown to love the absolute control – for better or for worse – that manual affords.
For quickly changing lighting as you mention, yes, I basically make a test exposure for each “state” or scheme for the lighting, and then internalize those setting so I can switch between them as necessary. I will write about this more in depth in part two.
I use the evaluative/pattern or Matrix metering (Nikon), rather than center or spot, but this is somewhat misleading. I only use the indicated metering as a guideline at best and only when the meter shows gross exposure differences to my settings.
For the most part, I simply ignore the light meter and prefer to use this feedback look to achieve the desired exposure.
10. Dan | March 26th, 2008 at 9:07 am
Good advice Todd. I use pretty much the same technique… it didn’t take very long to learn not to trust the meter.
Shot a gig last night where there was so many unpredictable bright bursts that spot metering with Aperture priority would have been ideal. Shame my camera has a pretty awful ‘partial’ metering mode instead of spot.
11. Todd | March 26th, 2008 at 9:16 am
Hey Dan. Yup, I imagine many concert photogs use a similar method if they shoot manual (or use exposure compensation with aperture priority).
I don’t recall, is it possible to “hack” the 400D to have a tighter spot meter?
12. Rod | March 26th, 2008 at 9:33 am
Like you todd, i ALWAYS use the manual mode. The difference with you is I never search the “good” exposure, i like to under and sur expose … because I like to have some effects . Otherwise, I’m simply OK with all your article
mode M is the only mode for a total control in concert.
13. Todd | March 26th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Rod, of course “good” in terms of exposure is relative. There’s no such thing as a perfect exposure unless one is a technician. For photographers, there are only exposures that best express one’s visions (and often within the constraints of technology.
But I do very much like the notion that you prefer something slight less or more. Perhaps you can write a guest article here on that.
14. xavier | March 26th, 2008 at 9:37 am
I do not own a D3 yet (i shoot with a S5), but i do use the same technique.
As i can’t do such extreme isos, i tend to try to get the best of a sensitivity i find reasonable. I shoot manual, select a sufficient shutter speed to fix the movement and then play with the aperture setting.
I don’t like to waste the potential of my sensor ;). Strangely i figured that going from 400 to 640 iso and being able to stop my lens from 1.6 to 2.2, allows me to get more details (than with a 1.6 an 400 iso combination).
But there again it’s all about using the best of the lens and sensor and stopping the lense to a point where noise is acceptable.
15. Rod | March 26th, 2008 at 10:07 am
Oh todd, it would be a great honor
I have several examples with low speeds or very dark exposed situations 
@Xavier : I had The Fuji S5 PRo : I hadn’t read the manual, but I think it’s possible to realize incredible things : not in ISO … but by putting +5 at exposure … you have the equivalent, in light, a 1600 shot by putting 400 …
16. Todd | March 26th, 2008 at 10:23 am
Hey Xavier,
Thanks for your thoughts on this and for sharing your own technique. The point you mention of producing best image quality considering lens performance, ISO, and detail are all very interesting, and I would agree.
It is not always best to shoot at the lowest ISO if that also means compromising on lens performance. Even though stopping down and using a higher ISO will produce more noise in most cases, it can also mean a dramatic increase in image detail with respect to the lens. Great point.
17. xavier | March 26th, 2008 at 10:26 am
@Rod, i read about your disappointments. I also read that you can dial an exposure compensation, but i dind’t found much difference with and without the comp (i made these tests at La Boule Noire for the F.M. gig).
I read that the exposure compenation was acting on the shutter speed/aperture combo. Is it acting a different way on the S5, like at the sensor level?
I’m still waiting for an answer on photim forums.
I hope you’ll be able to get a S5 back one day.
I would also like to know if it’s possible to get the S5 color rendition on the D3 through a profile, as i’m starting to love how colors show on my prints.
18. Rod | March 26th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Xavier, go to :
http://www.gdargaud.net/Photo/FujiS5pro.html
And see REAL tests made with Dynamic Range + Sur Exposure. Pictures talk always better than words
After seeing this site, I knew I didn’t use my S5 Pro correctly as well.
19. xavier | March 26th, 2008 at 11:07 am
@Todd : it’s not always the case, but i figured that my Nikon 50mm f1.4 and Sigma 30mm f1.4 are very very good at f2.2, and it’s worth increasing isos a bit to reach that aperture.
20. Todd | March 26th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Xavier, I understand. The Nikon 50mm is alright wide open, but not so much that I would use it at that setting for critical work where sharpness/detail is very important.
As an aside, I find the 50mm much sharper on the D70 compared to the D2x wide open. On the D70, it’s very, very sharp even at f/1.4, while the demanding D2x sensor always made the lens look poor wide open. Unfortunately I haven’t used the prime on the D3 enough to get a feel for this, but I believe the lens is somewhere in between in performance on the new flagship.
21. doug | March 26th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Fortuitous timing, Todd - thanks. I went to a Hawksley Workman show last night and cameras were allowed, so I was able to use my 30D. I’m not proficient enough with manual yet (at least to the point where I will trust myself), so I shot aperture priority, and all the quick-changing blues and purples (plus the green jumpsuits the band was wearing) really played havoc with my meter. Lots of blown-out faces, too. Lots of post in LR.
http://flickr.com/photos/dr_t/2362665083/
I’m going to have to make a point of getting more comfortable with manual and using the histogram.
22. Todd | March 26th, 2008 at 5:12 pm
Hey Doug, I can see how the lighting and scene could have easily tricked the meter. Looks like RAW saved the day, though!
Once you go manual, I think you’ll love it. It’s hard to go back once you’ve switched over. For the longest time I shot aperture priority exclusively, using exposure compensation, but manual is great for all but the quickest situations.
23. Terry Ng | March 26th, 2008 at 6:44 pm
Great tips Todd! Have you found Active-D Lighting of any help? Could you touch upon it in this low light style of shooting?
24. Todd | March 26th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Terry,
Actually, I have yet to try Active-D lighting in-camera with the D3. I’ve used it in Capture NX with success on highly contrasty lighting, but haven’t used it as a camera setting as of yet.
Just as with my uses in post with RAW, I think Active-D lighting would be most beneficial for low light scenes where the light is very harsh. D-lighting should be able to “open up” the shadows in contrast to the standard settings.
25. Concert Photography How-T&hellip | April 4th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
[…] part one of this series, I covered my basic four-step approach to determining exposure that might otherwise […]
speak up
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed
You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>