I'm entering my 3rd year of photography and have noticed something in the last month or so. While shooting at locations I've shot before as well as shooting new locations, the number of pictures have decreased alot. Is this normal? I seem to be getting picky about what I shoot. I seem to be deleting more pictures when I review them. It's getting harder each time I go out to shoot to get what I think are good shots. Again, is this normal?
Posted by Howard Cihak on October 28, 2012 at 10:17 AM
George, as a long time film shooter who had to be picky because of the cost of film and processing, I've never become the "digital machine-gunner" that I've seen a great many other photographers become. I've been on group shoots at picturesque locations where other have come back from an hour of shooting with exclamations of how many HUNDREDS of images they've made, while I had only a couple of dozen for the same time in the same location.
Certainly, in landscape shooting, using your eyes instead of your camera to find subjects is preferable, but logic suggests that the more time you spend looking at scenes with your unaided eyes, the less time you'll be able to devote to looking through the lens. I imagine there will be those who will defend the process of getting hundreds of images an hour, but I suspect the only real test of what is right for you is whether you're satisfied with your results and whether you're enjoying the experience as much as you'd like.
Posted by Karl Buiter on October 28, 2012 at 10:27 AM
Funny, I have been thinking that for awhle.
And its especially apparent in National Parks where you can observe many with DSLRs running around making at best a minute by minute travelogue of their trip. All the bad light, the not-so-interesting subjects - the one shots that will be blown out or dark in countless ways. And yep, they'll have thousands of pictures to swim through.
I have noticed my habits departed from that. I am now much more picky about what I am going to work on. And when I do, I will work the scene with bracketing, filters, lenses ,etc. I suspect at some point I'll just know where I want to be and do an even smaller number of shots.
Maybe its like Golf - just need the 7 Iron with a fade :)
Then I may be ready for Medium or Large Format.
Posted by Paul Martin on October 28, 2012 at 5:24 PM
I came from film, too -- so I am also less of a "gunner". Back then for a weeks trip, I would shoot maybe 8 rolls of 36 exposures, usually less. I think you also get more picky, as you said, because you learn what is going to look good and what won't work.
Posted by Bret Edge on October 29, 2012 at 8:23 AM
I shot film for many years before converting to digital and I think that helped me to slow down, make fewer images and be a bit more contemplative in my efforts. The whole "spray and pray" method is something I see all the time as a workshop instructor. I try hard to get my clients to slow down and think before they press the shutter button. As I tell them, I'd rather leave with one outstanding photograph than a thousand bad ones.
Posted by Bill Bean on October 29, 2012 at 11:09 AM
I spent a lot of years shooting 4X5 before digital became "acceptable" and I think that made me a more judicious photographer. The process of shooting 4X5 forces you to be more thoughtful before you press the shutter button and I've carried that over to digital. If I shoot something at all I rarely expose more than 2 or 3 images. The exceptions being if there are especially difficult or rapidly changing conditions or if I'm shooting at a location that I know I won't soon be able to revisit. I agree with Bret, 1 great image trumps 1000 average images every time.
I'm newer to photography as well (about 6 years), and I have only really shot digital except for those teen years with a polaroid. I have noticed the same thing. When I visit places I've been half a dozen times, I sometimes don't shoot at all in part because I can tell I will not get something better than what I have. Increasingly, I don't go to these places unless conditions suggest I WILL get something better or at least different (full moon, or no moon and milky way, or snow) or I go just to enjoy the place and only take my point and shoot. This is partly because I shot a lot at places I enjoy experiencing, but enjoying them doesn't necessarily require continuing to photograph them.
Now, if you find this happening at places that are new to you, it may be that you are just trying to feel the place and understand it...find that feeling that enables you to know how to photograph it. There is nothing wrong with that either. I think finding that balance between being there in 360 degree person and looking through the lens and actuating your shutter is normal and it's a good place to be.
Film was so expensive. 16$ per roll of slide film developed. Digital has freed me to explore so much more!
Posted by Bill Pelzmann on October 30, 2012 at 4:13 AM
I certainly shoot a LOT more with digital than I ever did with film.
Stitched panoramas, focus stacking, and exposure blending/bracketing almost guarantees this.
However, as you gain experience, becoming more selective and critical is normally the case.
I'd actually be concerned if you didn't notice this trend after several years.
Someone said the difference between an amateur and a pro, is that the "pro" knows when to NOT take a shot.
When it comes to editing there are definitely differences of opinion about deleting files.
One extreme never deletes anything unless it is totally out of focus or the exposure is way off. They argue storage is cheap, and who knows what new software will be capable of in the future. Or, your tastes may change.
The other extreme only keeps the very best.
I started out in the "keep everything" camp and have become a much more critical editor over time.
However, I rarely delete images in the camera, and prefer to evaluate them on a large screen first.
Posted by Pete Miller on October 31, 2012 at 9:13 PM
This is a very normal process. You have become much more discerning in your composition, so you shoot less! That said, I have still shot a lot of pictures in the last 2-1/2 years. Just finished archiving to blu-ray discs (25GB/disc), consuming 14 discs for the images that I had not already burned to archive grade DVD's (50 year media).
Like Bill, I do a fair amount of focus stacking now (after Bill's presentation in Moab back in May), but I'm still not shooting 500 pics each time I go out like I used to. :)
Discussion
9 repliesCertainly, in landscape shooting, using your eyes instead of your camera to find subjects is preferable, but logic suggests that the more time you spend looking at scenes with your unaided eyes, the less time you'll be able to devote to looking through the lens. I imagine there will be those who will defend the process of getting hundreds of images an hour, but I suspect the only real test of what is right for you is whether you're satisfied with your results and whether you're enjoying the experience as much as you'd like.
And its especially apparent in National Parks where you can observe many with DSLRs running around making at best a minute by minute travelogue of their trip. All the bad light, the not-so-interesting subjects - the one shots that will be blown out or dark in countless ways. And yep, they'll have thousands of pictures to swim through.
I have noticed my habits departed from that. I am now much more picky about what I am going to work on. And when I do, I will work the scene with bracketing, filters, lenses ,etc. I suspect at some point I'll just know where I want to be and do an even smaller number of shots.
Maybe its like Golf - just need the 7 Iron with a fade :)
Then I may be ready for Medium or Large Format.
Now, if you find this happening at places that are new to you, it may be that you are just trying to feel the place and understand it...find that feeling that enables you to know how to photograph it. There is nothing wrong with that either. I think finding that balance between being there in 360 degree person and looking through the lens and actuating your shutter is normal and it's a good place to be.
Stitched panoramas, focus stacking, and exposure blending/bracketing almost guarantees this.
However, as you gain experience, becoming more selective and critical is normally the case.
I'd actually be concerned if you didn't notice this trend after several years.
Someone said the difference between an amateur and a pro, is that the "pro" knows when to NOT take a shot.
When it comes to editing there are definitely differences of opinion about deleting files.
One extreme never deletes anything unless it is totally out of focus or the exposure is way off. They argue storage is cheap, and who knows what new software will be capable of in the future. Or, your tastes may change.
The other extreme only keeps the very best.
I started out in the "keep everything" camp and have become a much more critical editor over time.
However, I rarely delete images in the camera, and prefer to evaluate them on a large screen first.
Like Bill, I do a fair amount of focus stacking now (after Bill's presentation in Moab back in May), but I'm still not shooting 500 pics each time I go out like I used to. :)