On 2/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >cotty wrote: >"Scrabble Champ " >by Ann Sanfedele , USA >Nice profile by Annsan of a Scrabble player, well executed by an >observant lady. I think I'd go in on the face - you know he's playing >Scrabble, but there's no way of knowing it by looking at the pic. Go >close, or pull out and show us the board. Difficult to do as the face and >board are so far apart. Are you allowed to walk about during these >competitions? The lighting is superb. Well done Ann. > >______ >Thanks, Cotty! > >Just for information ..... > >The only reason I was allowed to be _this_ close to the game at the >Nationals in >1992 >was that I was working the tournament at the time as a word judge, I was >shooting >_without_ >a flash and both Joe and his opponent are used to me hanging around the >table in >this kind of situation. I actually did do word judging on this >particular game. >For this tournament, I was not the official photog but I had been in >1983 when >the person you cant see opposite Edley was the winner (Joel Wapnick). >This was >the final game of the tournament and Joel and Joe were playing for pretty big >bucks. > >The lighting was what it was because the local TV guys were set up with >powerful >strobes. >The reflections from the board and the white table cloth were intense so it is >intentionally eliminated. I was able to shoot only a few frames very quickly. >That being said, my full frame >shot is actualy a bit more interesting - and a bit more of the board >shows. This >cropping was >one I was working on for the WINNERS calendar I've just completed - and on the >cover of that >he is cropped even more (as you suggest.) I was shooting with a 50 mm and >standing just to the right of the TV camera tripod setup, and using >manual rewind. > >As the ALL STARS tournament is going to be on ESPN (they say) next Sunday, I >though it >would be nice to have one of them in the PUG. Frankly, I was careless >with this >PUG entry - >just racing to get it in at the last moment.. it needs fiddling with. > >As to are you allowed to just walk around - that varies - but in this >situration >the other players >were kept back. There were two people sitting at the table annotating >the game, >the tourney >director was close by, there were a number of news people, and me.
Thanks or the info Ann. Very interesting. In those situations, I have learned over the years that I tend not to give away too much when it comes to covering events or contests. I find organisers (quite rightly) are over protective of their charges and faff accordingly. Hence, if I'm working (tv news) then I will enter the room and chat amiably to the press relations person or organiser - usually prodding for a cup of tea as that always gets me off on a goof foot ;-) and puts them at ease giving them a line of command to follow up with an underling. Then I pick a nice quiet spot far away from the action and set up my sticks, dropping bags and gear their. This effectively becomes my base camp. The organiser usually asks something like 'ok are you happy here?' and dashes off to greet others. My position is selected on appropriateness for a nice big wide shot, and subsequent steady shots on the end of the bottle for big close-ups like concentrating sweaty faces etc. Once under way, I pick off a few of these, and then quite happily unlock the camera from the baseplate, hoik it onto my shoulder, and wander at will. The looks on some of the organisers' faces - shock! He's not staying put! Horrors! I then roam at will, as quietly and decisively as possible, no hesitation, getting different angles, lots of close wides, different heights, some from the floor, some from standing on top of a chair. In a large quiet room full of people, it is almost pysically impossible for an organiser or press bod to move about and restrain us (I won't be the only one sometimes) because people are afraid of drawing attention to themselves. It took me fully 6 months to get past this phase and now it's not a problem. I just think of the paycheck. If I'm shooting stills for pleasure, same deal. The roaming goes on for a max of 5 minutes, then I'm done. I go on the assumption that it's better for a quick 5 minutes of quiet activity than half an hour of constant shuffling about from the back trying to improve an unimprovable view. The most important thing with people like actors, models, artists, athletes, competitors, is not to get in their eye-line. Actors especially. Puts them right off. Otherwise, they're fair game IMO. We once turned up to shoot a choir practising in a lovely old barn. The organiser (a charity) was keen to oblige us but the musical director was being ultra precious and kept throwing wobblies. First he wouldn't let us put up a couple of 2Ks (lights) then he was saying we could only film one number, and once only (usually like to get at least two runs of a number, one for a master wide and another for close-ups etc) - - and it was then limiting our ability to do our job effectively. We rang our editor and he said fine, pull out. We did. Net result - the charity lost out on TV coverage of their event from us. To them it could have meant extra money. To us it is no big deal. For every precious bozo like that, there are two dozen fabulous people waiting in the wings who offer no end of support and help. Yesterday I was shooting 550 school kids rehearsing for a choral evening at the Albert Hall tonight in London and the organiser would have had all 550 standing on their heads for me if I had asked. Most folk are fine, but I always respect to subjects, and I'm sure you do to, Ann. It's a lovely shot, and as you know, I love faces. Best, Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _____________________________ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
