How many photo's do you shoot...

[Todd Patten]

before you come across one that you say to yourself, "NOW THAT'S IT!!!!". I mean, what is your good to "what happened there" ratio? there are time when I half my photo's are what I envisioned them to be, and then there are days when 1 out of 100 are what I hoped them to be. This is why I don't do weddings

For example, I look at Hodgy's photo's here (Sat's Wedding July 24) and wonder how he got so many trendous shot's in one session! Now admittedly, right now I am under-utilizing my D70 and sticking with mostly family shots. I have to wonder if I were more serious if the outcome would be better. I just shoot of hundred's of photo's with no regard for anything and delete those that are horrible, develope those that are decent and keep most on my harddrive for posterity!

[Chunk]

before you come across one that you say to yourself, "NOW THAT'S IT!!!!". I mean, what is your good to "what happened there" ratio? there are time when I half my photo's are what I envisioned them to be, and then there are days when 1 out of 100 are what I hoped them to be. This is why I don't do weddings

For example, I look at Hodgy's photo's here (Sat's Wedding July 24) and wonder how he got so many trendous shot's in one session! Now admittedly, right now I am under-utilizing my D70 and sticking with mostly family shots. I have to wonder if I were more serious if the outcome would be better. I just shoot of hundred's of photo's with no regard for anything and delete those that are horrible, develope those that are decent and keep most on my harddrive for posterity!

With digital being so inexpensive to develop, I take a lot more versions of a shot than I did with film but I still generally try to think about what's being captured before pushing the button. Read some books on composition and then think of how you can optimize that with your particular subject rather than just "shooting with no regard for anything".

When the National Geographic photographers go out on a shot for an article that need maybe 15 or 20 shots they take a ton of shots. Their percentage of 'winners' may be not all that much higher than yours.

I just read a good article on composition in the September issue American Artist magazine.
Most beginnig photo books have sections on composition.

Take those decent shots of yours and evaluate each of them for what good elements you have and what could still be improved. Compare the decent shots to the discards of the same subjects and decide what makes one good and what prevents the other from being good.

[Gabe]

Todd, I've heard many times that the difference between an amateur and a pro is that the pro knows which photos NOT to take. It's when you start to really evaluate the scene in front of you for photographic value that your pictures will improve. I think most of us, when starting out, shot "hundreds of photos" - but with time we learned when to put the camera down, or try a different approach or angle. My moment of epiphany came shortly after I had bought my first SLR, when my photographer friend said to me, as nicely as possible, that the slides I was showing him looked like I had shot them by putting the camera on top of my head and clicking the shutter randomly LOL

That following weekend I hit the cypress swamps out here and came back with a handful of photos that left his jaw on the floor ;) A couple of those are still on my portfolio site. He had told me to try to tell a story or make some kind of statement with every photo I shot - and that made me think of each frame a lot more carefully.

Another eye-opener was the book Photographic Composition, by Grill and Scanlon. This is one of those books that covers what Chunk is talking about in the above post. It helped me a lot.

That being said, I shot a model a couple of weeks ago, our first time out together (which isn't always a good thing, but it worked out this time), and I shot about 55 frames on a memory card. Some were just different angles of the same shot. Three are, in my opinion, good enough to be shipped to American Photo magazine for their annual contest (just sent them out on Friday), a few more are good enough to be in our portfolios (better for her than for me, as I don't want a bunch of shots of the same girl in my book), and others were competing with each other for the best angle of the same scene. About 10 or 12 would not make the cut at all, though.

Digital is great as you can preview each shot in the LCD - if you didn't get what you want, you can reshoot it (most of the time) right away with an improved composition. That has helped me out in getting a better "keeper" ratio, I have to admit.

[opus]

I've heard that the difference between an amateur and a pro is that the pro only shows their best pictures.

Having said that, if you're asking what "my" ratio is, and I'm not a pro... well, the answer is, it varies. One weekend in Paris, 5 rolls of film, landed me about 10 *GREAT* shots, a bunch more "really neat" shots, and the rest were somewhat average, with a couple underexposed or blurry ones filling out the rolls. I consider that a really good trip.

I came home with some great shots from London, too, on that same trip. One week of shooting, 10 rolls, and my *GREAT* shots were maybe 8, my "really neat" shots were a dozen more, and the rest were average. But by then, I had gotten my Paris photos developed, and they thrilled me, which caused me to shoot much more than I might have otherwise, which brought down my ratio. I started trying too hard.

This year in Mexico I shot digital, and got a couple dozen *GREAT* shots ... they're not so much fine art, but they could absolutely be used for advertising. In fact, the resort has requested copies. Then we came up to California and spent a week there, and several hundred shots later, I found very, very few that I even LIKE.

And last year in Mexico I didn't get a lot of great shots either. I shot about 10 rolls of film and got maybe 4 *great* shots.

I shot a wedding for a friend in December, and while the pictures didn't match Hodgy's, they made me and the newlyweds very happy.

But right now I'm tooling around town looking for stuff to photograph, and I'm very unhappy with everything I've shot the past couple weeks.

So I don't know why it works that way.

[Charles Hess]

Digital does afford you the opportunity to shoot, shoot, shoot, delete, shoot some more, and I'm not sure that this is the best way to approach the hopes of getting some keepers. I avoid shots that I think will not be "the one", try to visualize what the image will look like before pressing the shutter, and do get excited when I see a situation that will produce a keeper. I still shoot mostly film, but have found that when I'm out with my digital gear, I do not shoot any more frames digitally than I would if it were film. I also do not review every shot taken. That works for me, though it may not work for others.

[ChaosCubed]

I like to think that I have an "eye" for somethings....LOL ...But maybe I'm just lucky.

I would say, when I go out with a MISSION to take photos... I usually end up with about 45- 50 on my camera. I end up with at most 5 that are GOOD shots.

I do NOT evaluate a shot everytime I take it - as I take photos of children, and time is of the essesence. I basically control the camera (the manual settings have become my friend lately) and follow along the action and see what happens. I try not to "pose" my kids - and that is more than likely WHY it takes a bit more effort to get that perfect shot.

[Todd Patten]

Excellent feedback! It's been about 10 or so years since I went out to shoot with a purpose. As I said in one of my first posts here, I lost my desire for photography when I started to do weddings for people. However, when the D70 came around I bought it and just started to have fun getting pictures of family and friends. Now I'm giving more thought once again to becoming more aware of composition. Actually, it was just this past weekend that I thought to myself that I needed to stop just firing away and "think about it" again.

I do admit, sometimes I just like firing away at different angles and different exposures just to see what I get. I remove my eye from the viewfinder and hold the camera up high. I get down lower than normal, I fire a series off. It's just fun!

My next step is to get some inexpensive studio lighting, like the bee's, and try to self teach myself on some of it. Of course, with the assistance of some good books and photo mags.

[opus]

Todd, I agree with you that sometimes it's fun to just *try* new things, even though you doubt you'll get any keepers out of it. I consider those times "research". I usually do that more when I'm just not seeing great shots, when I'm getting bored. I'm learning that I don't get "great" shots that way, but every so often I'll get something interesting. The other day, I stuck the camera out the car window and just started firing (I was too uninspired to get out of the car) and it was neat to find later that I had *perfectly* framed a boring little plant.

I'm thinking digital is a great learning tool, but I'll still go back to film when it's really important.

Todd, what do you think your "style" is?

[another view]

This might seem like I'm not answering your question, but give yourself a self-assignment. Pick a subject that interests you or another hobby and go shoot some specific images. For example, not just architecture but specifically barns. Or water towers. Whatever you want. Study other shots of this subject and see what you can do differently. Everyone has seen good shots of barns, but come back with something unique.

You'll be "looking" more and not shooting until you see what you want. Compositionally, this will improve your ratio of keepers.

[Todd Patten]

Todd, what do you think your "style" is?

I generally wear Ralph Lauren polo shirts, JC Penny jeans, sandles or boat shoes and a Red Sox hat.



Photography wise, I have no idea. I like wide angle shots a lot. I guess that's kind of the photo-journalistic approach. I live portrait shots where the focus is on the eyes. I never really thought about my style I guess.