Soccer Photography, Portrait or Landscape?

I'm having an ongoing debate with some friends about soccer photography. After examining my files I have come to realize that I shoot almost exclusively in landscape and frequently crop to portrait. I use a 2 camera setup 400mm and 70-200mm and usually from the ends of the fields. My friend says he shoots 90% in portrait and almost never in landscape.

Can anyone comment on this issue?

For me it varies according to the assignment. If I'm using my 300 2.8L and I'm doing event photography and need to get snaps of individual players to sell to parents/players, etc., I generally shoot in portrait so I can isolate the player within the frame. For editorial work I'll shoot in portrait for things like after a goal kick and a couple of players will attempt to head or trap the ball. This allows me to get the ball within the frame before or after they head it.
I generally shoot in landscape during normal play but if the players get too close I may switch to portrait if I don't have the time to grab my 700-200 2.8

My theory is 90% of sports are vertical. The only sport that I can think of off hand is swimming where with the exception of the diving competition it is a horizontal sport. I shoot accordingly. The overwhelming number of frames I shoot are vertical. There are always exceptions of course (baseballs slide into the base for example) but I generally feel that to fill the frame I need to shot horizontal.

the best description I've heard - humans are generally taller than they are wide, so shoot in the orientation that's taller than it is wide.

With that said, I shoot landscape sometimes, but I'm with the other guys in that most of the photos are in portrait.

Ok, Don't you run up against having the action go into the edge of the pic more often if you shoot in vertical?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jacobovs

Ok, Don't you run up against having the action go into the edge of the pic more often if you shoot in vertical?

---

That's a good point as I think you can. Plus, in sports like football you don't always have a runner running down field free and clear. Many times you have a would be tackler who is horizontal which require the shot be in a horizontal mode. Also, photo editors usually want additional players within the frame, unless again, you are shooting event photography and want individual players to sell to parents, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fidgety

That's a good point as I think you can. Plus, in sports like football you don't always have a runner running down field free and clear. Many times you have a would be tackler who is horizontal which require the shot be in a horizontal mode. Also, photo editors usually want additional players within the frame, unless again, you are shooting event photography and want individual players to sell to parents, etc.

---

It's amazing how a "little" debate like this can lead to self-discovery. Let me preface by saying that I don't do this for a living. Having said that I have sold my share of pictures to parents. I fully appreciate isolating little johnny in a shot with the ball for mom or grandma.
Here is my perspective, every kid(and sometimes adults) deserves to be a hero, all of the shots that I like have that context. The soccer star getting by a defender, the slide into home plate, the running-back hurdling a lineman or the volleyball player spiking over a blocker: all of these have context. It's hard to be a hero if you are dribbling down the sidelines alone. I guess it's more of a PJ view of sports photography. All( with very few exceptions) of the shots I have sold involved Johnny being a hero. Here I refer to team sports of course. I find the isolated shots of players boring, with the exception of the emotion after a major event like scoring a goal. So for me, it's hard to shoot context by shooting vertically ( i will definitely try in my next outing). Even baseball shots of a pitcher are so much more(IMHO) interesting if taken from behind the plate with the batter, umpire and catcher in the frame.

I know this is long winded but thanks for giving me a new perspective and lots to think about.:)

Shal,
Good discussion. I think that knowing a sport and being ale to anticipate the action is critical to knowing if you want to shoot landscape or portrait. I do not shoot a lot of team sports, but with football I like landscape because of the other players around the main focus (usually). Such as a running back who is breaking tackles. I can then crop as needed.
With individual sports (track, gymnastics ect) I like to shoot portrait if I know where they will be. This gives me a tighter shot and less cropping. But you have to know the sport and know where they will be or you end up getting half a person.

Long winded to say in my opinion, you have to know the sport to know if you are going to shoot mostly landscape or not.

Phil

Depends on if you are trying to catch the action:
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2803/...a85fb1efe4.jpg
or the player.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2549/...abcbc21235.jpg

I'm not a sports photographer (yet), but I'd think it would make more sense to shoot landscape. That way, you'd have the best of both worlds. As long as you are getting sharp photos and the client isn't looking for a wall hanger, you should be able to crop any way a person wishes. There are many times that I have shot a bird horizontally and then after viewing it, deciding a vertical crop would be more pleasing. I then crop accordingly and have plenty of pixels left to do it justice.