Professional photographer here for 2 decades chiming in. Is this the same photo people were saying used 1/8000th shutter speed? 1/8000 is extreme overkill for an event like this imo. You would only use this setting to capture fast moving objects, think car races, sports events, etc. Not a subject standing still at a podium. Even people dancing would easily be frozen sharp under 1/1000th in full sun like this. And you don't want to overkill your shutter speed for no reason because you are forced to raise your iso to compensate which makes for more grainy photos. No you want that crisp clear perfect photo, lowest iso possible, professional knows exactly what f-stop, shutter speed and iso combo they need for that perfect crisp photo. Personally I think 1/8000 is just overkill on the shutter for something like this, it's so far above what you would need, I would have prioritized iso and fstop instead, unless I thought I needed to be prepared to capture something at high speed. Now I'm not accusing him of anything, all photographers have their personal style and techniques so maybe he's just a high speed in broad daylight no matter the situation kind of guy who likes high iso and a nearly closed fstop.
I’m also a photographer, I wouldn’t use F1.6 while shooting with the sky as a background. At f4 you would have less risk of getting the shot out of focus. I found it very odd. He knew what was going to happen and wanted all the blod splats to be frozen. These people are sick.
Have you used a flagship camera made after 2018? There is no missing a shot with face tracking. Today's camera's nail focus like a motherfucker. You bring nothing to the discussion.
Okay, you'll be being a little bit uncivil here, hence your downvotes, please consider being a little nicer, but, you are essentially right. A friend of mine shoots my local NHL team and what his current camera can do, Canon R series, and holy cow, 20 frames per second at 50 megapixels, it's just absolutely insane. He walked me around and all of his slave robot cameras, this guy doesn't miss a goddamn shot
Yes it's noise, but old timers like me still say "grain" sometimes, especially when communicating with clients because they understand what grain is but not noise. If he happened to get the bullet streak in focus at f1.6 then this photo is astronomical. At this point it depends on focal distance now, because at 1.6 it's not uncommon for a nose tip to be blurry when an eye is sharp. Maybe he was zoomed in at 200mm? I assumed he was 50-80mm, shot up close from below.
Agree. f 1.6 in sun, you would have a very small slice of "depth of field", even when zoomed at 400+mm. - also old school (used a nikon f3, fm, or cheapest hasselblad i could find)
It's not zoomed in. There is no 400mm f1.4. There's a thing called compression when you use telephotos. A minute of looking for the other shots or just looking at the podium you'd know it's no more than a 50mm lens and that image was cropped. At a distance the depth of field grows regardless of crop.
Depends on ASA. If he was rating it at 2800 digitally, that would be about 3-4 stops faster than normal. F16 would be able to give better depth of field. Also with such a bright day, even at ASA 400 there wouldn't be a problem digitally.
In other shots you can see the flag so the bullet image is cropped. Judging by the lack of compression between the podium, trump, flag and audiance it's not even an 85mm. It's probably the Sony FE 50mm f/1.2 GM Lens.
So being that far back the focal plane is enough for the streaking bullet to be just as you see it. Plus the podium is somewhat in focus giving you an idea.
He said he was shooting the flag waving above the stage when the action started. Not sure how strong the wind was but maybe just compensating for movement.
I'm a former pro photographer as well, my last camera was a 1dx mark ii, and I mean this with all due respect but one 8,000th of a second is nothing with the anti-aliasing noise filters in the current rigs, and I'm still a decade behind with the equipment I'm describing. This is a well-lit daytime shot and I doubt you would see an ISO above 1,000 in the current rigs
No, the purpose of the photographer wasn't to capture solid, low noise, high quality pictures of the event. It was to capture 14 frames a second of Trump's head exploding. Bear that in mind.
Seems as if he follows Presidents and takes their picture. That's not odd or weird. Freaking 23 years apart. Is that an innocuous explanation? We should see how much he had been following president Trump before that
I would like to know if he was photographing Trump’s previous three to five rallies, or conveniently just this one, at a ridiculously high shutter speed.
Have to agree with you here, but, separating the subject from background is more of an f-stop thing, but, you clearly press a shutter button now and again, haha
I know, he's got to compensate for the aperture by cranking up the shutter speed. That or get an ND filter but adding glass can introduces reflections.
Shutter doesn't separate subject from background, fstop does. Shutter is for freezing or dragging motion. And 1/8000 shutter is ridiculous. Maybe photographers have just gotten lazy with the advancement of technology these days. Unless he has very shaky hands or planned on capturing a head exploding, I don't see why the hell he would shoot at 1/8000th.
Didn't say the shutter did. That's two sentences. The f stop is 1.6. The shutter had to be 1/8000th of a second. Go outside and expose for the sky at f1.8 or f1.4 if you have a lens that fast.
Also as stated in another post he was trying to capture the flag waving.
You don't need 1/8000 shutter speed to capture a flag moving, that is insane. And in my job i mostly shot at 1.4 - 2.0 outdoors in sunlight and never EVER did I need to crank my shutter speed that high.
On the 13th of July, 2024, Doug Mills took a world-famous[9][10][11][12][13][14] photograph during the assassination attempt[15] of the 45th President of the USA, Donald J. Trump, capturing one of the bullets whizzing millimetres away from his head. The New York Times article's expert considered the photo as 'a one in a million shot and nearly impossible to catch even if one knew the bullet was coming
I think they wanted every single blood droplet frozen in time and space to rub in the face of Trump supporters for maximum humiliation and demoralization.
Instead they got the bullet whizzing by. And probably the most iconic and heroic photo of any President ever. TOTAL BACKFIRE.
Photographer here: No way that photo was shot at F/ 1.6. Just looking at the composition of the image, the reason Trump and the podium look so compressed is due to a long focal length (certainly above 85-100mm is my guess). At those final lengths, the depth of field you'd get from an f stop of 1.6 would be so shallow that you'd see visible blurring of the podium.
Even if you were trying to shoot in bursts (if you've ever heard photographers in something like a congressional meeting, you'd know how many shots these photographers rattle off every minute) there's absolutely no reason why you would shoot at 1.6 in this environment.
Using the sunny 16 rule, which states that in direct sun, you can shoot 100 iso at F/16 with a shutter speed of 1/125, you realistically can shoot 1/8000th of a second without major exposure differences at F/1.6 but again I don't see why any photographer would risk an out of focus subject by shooting this scene at 1.6 when they clearly didn't have to.
Professional photographer here for 2 decades chiming in. Is this the same photo people were saying used 1/8000th shutter speed? 1/8000 is extreme overkill for an event like this imo. You would only use this setting to capture fast moving objects, think car races, sports events, etc. Not a subject standing still at a podium. Even people dancing would easily be frozen sharp under 1/1000th in full sun like this. And you don't want to overkill your shutter speed for no reason because you are forced to raise your iso to compensate which makes for more grainy photos. No you want that crisp clear perfect photo, lowest iso possible, professional knows exactly what f-stop, shutter speed and iso combo they need for that perfect crisp photo. Personally I think 1/8000 is just overkill on the shutter for something like this, it's so far above what you would need, I would have prioritized iso and fstop instead, unless I thought I needed to be prepared to capture something at high speed. Now I'm not accusing him of anything, all photographers have their personal style and techniques so maybe he's just a high speed in broad daylight no matter the situation kind of guy who likes high iso and a nearly closed fstop.
It's not grain, it's noise. Flagship camera's today have remarkably low noise.
https://petapixel.com/2022/01/18/the-nikon-z9-is-so-fast-it-can-capture-a-speeding-bullet/
https://www.digitalcameraworld.com/news/can-doug-mills-photo-of-a-bullet-and-president-trump-be-real-yes-heres-how
"The Metadata reports f/1.6 at 1/8,000sec"
F1.6 is letting in a LOT of light, hence 1/8000's. Iso could have been 50-100. Noise would have been a non-issue.
I’m also a photographer, I wouldn’t use F1.6 while shooting with the sky as a background. At f4 you would have less risk of getting the shot out of focus. I found it very odd. He knew what was going to happen and wanted all the blod splats to be frozen. These people are sick.
Have you used a flagship camera made after 2018? There is no missing a shot with face tracking. Today's camera's nail focus like a motherfucker. You bring nothing to the discussion.
Okay, you'll be being a little bit uncivil here, hence your downvotes, please consider being a little nicer, but, you are essentially right. A friend of mine shoots my local NHL team and what his current camera can do, Canon R series, and holy cow, 20 frames per second at 50 megapixels, it's just absolutely insane. He walked me around and all of his slave robot cameras, this guy doesn't miss a goddamn shot
¯_(ツ)_/¯
If you're gonna inject an opinion on camera's bring your A game. I can't afford the latest gear but dammit, I know its capabilities.
These people are sick and evil.
Yes it's noise, but old timers like me still say "grain" sometimes, especially when communicating with clients because they understand what grain is but not noise. If he happened to get the bullet streak in focus at f1.6 then this photo is astronomical. At this point it depends on focal distance now, because at 1.6 it's not uncommon for a nose tip to be blurry when an eye is sharp. Maybe he was zoomed in at 200mm? I assumed he was 50-80mm, shot up close from below.
Agree. f 1.6 in sun, you would have a very small slice of "depth of field", even when zoomed at 400+mm. - also old school (used a nikon f3, fm, or cheapest hasselblad i could find)
It's not zoomed in. There is no 400mm f1.4. There's a thing called compression when you use telephotos. A minute of looking for the other shots or just looking at the podium you'd know it's no more than a 50mm lens and that image was cropped. At a distance the depth of field grows regardless of crop.
I know
Depends on ASA. If he was rating it at 2800 digitally, that would be about 3-4 stops faster than normal. F16 would be able to give better depth of field. Also with such a bright day, even at ASA 400 there wouldn't be a problem digitally.
There's no sub f1.8 lens for a Sony that's 200mm.
In other shots you can see the flag so the bullet image is cropped. Judging by the lack of compression between the podium, trump, flag and audiance it's not even an 85mm. It's probably the Sony FE 50mm f/1.2 GM Lens.
So being that far back the focal plane is enough for the streaking bullet to be just as you see it. Plus the podium is somewhat in focus giving you an idea.
I have a 1.8 Canon Mark 2 85 mm but oh my god, nobody would use that lens for coverage
f1.8 is quick and 85mm is a minimum for a portrait lens.
He said he was shooting the flag waving above the stage when the action started. Not sure how strong the wind was but maybe just compensating for movement.
I'm a former pro photographer as well, my last camera was a 1dx mark ii, and I mean this with all due respect but one 8,000th of a second is nothing with the anti-aliasing noise filters in the current rigs, and I'm still a decade behind with the equipment I'm describing. This is a well-lit daytime shot and I doubt you would see an ISO above 1,000 in the current rigs
No, the purpose of the photographer wasn't to capture solid, low noise, high quality pictures of the event. It was to capture 14 frames a second of Trump's head exploding. Bear that in mind.
Seems as if he follows Presidents and takes their picture. That's not odd or weird. Freaking 23 years apart. Is that an innocuous explanation? We should see how much he had been following president Trump before that
Photographing presidents is what he does.
Decades of rapport and trust gets you access.
https://greatawakening.win/p/17teNncPLu/who-is-photographer-doug-mills--/
I would like to know if he was photographing Trump’s previous three to five rallies, or conveniently just this one, at a ridiculously high shutter speed.
He's not Trumps personal photographer. He's not going to be at every rally sequentially. That's a ridiculous standard.
May 11, June 13, June 18
https://nitter.c-r-t.tk/dougmillsnyt
Secondly the shutter speed isn't ridiculous. It's sunny, and he's trying to separate trump from the background.
Have to agree with you here, but, separating the subject from background is more of an f-stop thing, but, you clearly press a shutter button now and again, haha
I know, he's got to compensate for the aperture by cranking up the shutter speed. That or get an ND filter but adding glass can introduces reflections.
Shutter doesn't separate subject from background, fstop does. Shutter is for freezing or dragging motion. And 1/8000 shutter is ridiculous. Maybe photographers have just gotten lazy with the advancement of technology these days. Unless he has very shaky hands or planned on capturing a head exploding, I don't see why the hell he would shoot at 1/8000th.
Didn't say the shutter did. That's two sentences. The f stop is 1.6. The shutter had to be 1/8000th of a second. Go outside and expose for the sky at f1.8 or f1.4 if you have a lens that fast.
Also as stated in another post he was trying to capture the flag waving.
You don't need 1/8000 shutter speed to capture a flag moving, that is insane. And in my job i mostly shot at 1.4 - 2.0 outdoors in sunlight and never EVER did I need to crank my shutter speed that high.
Go outside and take a picture. No filter. Lets see your meta data.
From Wikipedia: The last sentence hits different
On the 13th of July, 2024, Doug Mills took a world-famous[9][10][11][12][13][14] photograph during the assassination attempt[15] of the 45th President of the USA, Donald J. Trump, capturing one of the bullets whizzing millimetres away from his head. The New York Times article's expert considered the photo as 'a one in a million shot and nearly impossible to catch even if one knew the bullet was coming
Less impossible with today's cameras shooting 20 raw or 120 jpegs per second bursts (nikon z9).
"EVEN IF ONE KNEW THE BULLET WAS COMING"
It's amazing how much info has come out so fast! Almost as if there is a Great Awakening...
Gotta have good photos for the history books!
Nothing to see here
I wonder if he was hoping for a big blood spray and rights to the most famous photo ever taken?
I think they wanted every single blood droplet frozen in time and space to rub in the face of Trump supporters for maximum humiliation and demoralization.
Instead they got the bullet whizzing by. And probably the most iconic and heroic photo of any President ever. TOTAL BACKFIRE.
They must be seething.
Yeah, gonna grab some fries and a club soda with that nothing burger
Photographer here: No way that photo was shot at F/ 1.6. Just looking at the composition of the image, the reason Trump and the podium look so compressed is due to a long focal length (certainly above 85-100mm is my guess). At those final lengths, the depth of field you'd get from an f stop of 1.6 would be so shallow that you'd see visible blurring of the podium.
Even if you were trying to shoot in bursts (if you've ever heard photographers in something like a congressional meeting, you'd know how many shots these photographers rattle off every minute) there's absolutely no reason why you would shoot at 1.6 in this environment.
Using the sunny 16 rule, which states that in direct sun, you can shoot 100 iso at F/16 with a shutter speed of 1/125, you realistically can shoot 1/8000th of a second without major exposure differences at F/1.6 but again I don't see why any photographer would risk an out of focus subject by shooting this scene at 1.6 when they clearly didn't have to.
I jest, but Doug mills has one heck of a reptilian looking face.