The use of a camera flash at hockey games has been the topic of debate for some time, and is nothing new to those who have been around the sport for some time. Afterall, there’s nothing worse than being faced with the blinding flash of a camera when you’re streaking into the offensive zone on a breakaway.
I have spoken to a number of players from our local team, the Gold Coast Blue Tongues about this topic and surprisingly only a few of them found the camera flash irritating. The majority said they had no major issue with it, as long as the camera flash was not used when the players were facing the direction of the camera, which is interesting as you can’t get a good face on shot of a player unless they are looking in your direction.
The main argument about using a camera flash is that it allows you to take higher quality photos with a much faster shutter speed. Understandable, even I can see the logic here.
Theory put to practice
I decided to take this whole camera flash argument to the next level and look at the actual outcome of using a flash; the photos.
So, I have endearvored to answer 3 questions:
- Are the photos better quality?
- Are the photos clear and realistic to what a person at the game sees?
- Overall, to flash or not to flash, which is better?
Photo Comparisons
Below are 3 photos. They were taken by 3 different photographers, each with their own cameras. The first 2 are taken without the use of a flash, the 3rd uses one.
No Flash - Taken through netting
Photo 1 Summary: This photo was taken by Blue Tongues fan “Smashy” and surprisingly, was taken through the netting at the game. Considering that, the photo definitely passes the first 2 points in that it’s great quality and realistic. There is a slight blur, however that is expected with non-flash photos in the Gold Coast rink (which has shocking lighting). The colours are also very good. All-in-all, this photo passes the test with high marks.
No Flash - No netting
Photo 2 Summary: This photo was taken by Blue Tongues photographer Sasky Stewart on her Canon digital SLR. No netting was in place, so the ability to take higher action shots gives her photos the edge over Smashy (photo 1). Saying that, considering the lighting in the rink, this photo is actually very good. There is slight pixelation which is caused by post-processing in order to lighten up the photo slightly, but is a good quality image considering. From purely a hockey photo point of view, this photo has it all, clarity, action and realistic colours as compared to the rink.
Flash Used - No netting
Photo 3 Summary: This photo was taken by photographer, Jaime from Australian Charity Photos. It is clear right away that he uses a flash for his photos as the colours are much more vibrant and the image clarity is much clearer. Unfortunately, the colour vibrancy is much too high, and therefore actually works against the photo. The ice surface, which is supposed to be white/grey comes over as a horrible shade of green and looks like the guys are skating on a lake of vomit. The shadows of the players are much too intense. The actual photo looks like it’s been taken with artificial light… which is where it fails. Good quality white balancing and post-processing could rectify much of this problem, however we don’t know if the photographer does that or not. The clarity is great, however as far as hockey photos go, this falls right at the bottom of the pile. Is it better quality? Yes, give or take. Is it realistic? No, not at all.
To Flash or Not To Flash?
While clarity and brightness are great, there must be a line which a good hockey photo does not cross. Photos 1 and 2 may be slightly lower quality, but at the end of the day, they are by far the better images. In our opinion, if you’re going to take photos of a hockey game, for the love of the hockey gods, leave the flash at home!
