Photo Shoot (Page 4): for a full session I take about 150 images, 4 or 5 of each pose to account for blinking, strange facial expressions, ect. About 70-80 will be keepers, client sees...

Annie_Girl Loc: It's none of your business

for a full session I take about 150 images, 4 or 5 of each pose to account for blinking, strange facial expressions, ect. About 70-80 will be keepers, client sees about 40 of those as there will be doubles.

Mini sessions I average about 100 images, around 50 will be keepers but the client sees 20.

Hawknest Loc: South Georgia

deej wrote:

Dang, you must be real picky!, :thumbup:

i really am but not so much when taking snapshots. i don't want to mislead you and those 700-800 shots may cover a period of 7-8 to 10 days depending on what i'm shooting i.e. wildlife in most sessions would take much longer i.e. 3-4 weeks, couple of months a year unless i get very lucky which is not normally in my case. rick

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

Hal81 wrote:

Wow! I guess Im just an old stick in the mud. When I was a wedding photographer I never took more than ten rolls of 120 film with me on a wedding. Thats 12 shots per roll. only 120 shots per wedding. Unless it was a very large wedding. than I might throw an extra roll or two in my case. Yes I said case.I never carried a camera bag. And my cameras were never in my case. Both cameras were ready at all times with strobes attached. In my case was extra strobes. My wide angle lens, film. Always kept a roll or two in my pockit for quick use. We were prepaired for all the shots that had to be taken. We knew our settings we only took the shots that we needed to tell the whole wedding story. Through the years you knew what shots they wanted. You knew what things to carrie with you. I always carried a small sewing kit, black & white bobby pins, aspirans. Also my own three candle candlelabra that I could put on a light stand in case there was none avalable for the candlelite shot.It was adjustable to any height I needed. I made a paper filter I could slid in front of my strobe head so the shot looked like candle lite. My case came in handy to stand on to get over the heads of the people when getting the shot of the bride & groom comming out of the church.Very seldom had to shoot the same thing twice. When doing the group shot I always
took three shots, You could never see if everyone had their eyes open. Id take one shot, take a step to the right take the second, then take two steps to the left to take the third shot. This made it much easer to pick out the negative by lineing up someones head with the backgroung. You learn a lot after 39 years of wedding photography. 50% of the job was knowing how to handle people. You have to be a good people person to be a good wedding photographer. The last wedding my wife attended I couldnt get over how many shots the guy took each time he hit the shutter. It was like a machine gun. No wonder they take thousands at a wedding. He was using a nikon D4. Even with that said I saw him miss a lot of important shots im sure the bride would have wanted. Opps Sorry for rambleing on. Just chalk it up to an old 83 year old man.

Wow! I guess Im just an old stick in the mud. When... (show quote)

When I was learning the old guys talked about doing a wedding in 10-12 shots, 5/6 film holders, 4x5, usually B&W, I still remember seeing beautiful B&W wedding poses, but everybody got the same shots, shooting script and it was adhered to,
Bob.

Hal81 Loc: Bucks County, Pa.

bobmcculloch wrote:

When I was learning the old guys talked about doing a wedding in 10-12 shots, 5/6 film holders, 4x5, usually B&W, I still remember seeing beautiful B&W wedding poses, but everybody got the same shots, shooting script and it was adhered to,
Bob.

Your so right Bob. Back in the 30s & 40s you had to go to the studo for your wedding photos. Candid wedding photography didnt become popular till the 40s. Than it was the Speed graphc when you had to carry a case full of Film holders. The holders were two sided. Put in the holder pull out the dark slide take your shot reverse the dark slide so you what had been exposed and put it back in. Than pull out the holder, flip it over put it back in, pull out the dark slide. Take your shot. Flip the dark slid and put it back in and remove the holder. put it back in your case. take out another and start the same thing all over again. The first guy I worked for took ten or twelve holders with him on a wedding. Thats Only 20 to 24 shots And than they were B&W. The large 11X14 of the bride would be tinted to make it look like color. Yes we have come a long way. But 2000 to 5000 shots I think is nuts.

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

Hal81 wrote:

Your so right Bob. Back in the 30s & 40s you h... (show quote)

Our son and daughter in law got married, we never managed to get through all of the shots of the wedding, looked at about half of the proofs, had baby pics before the wedding alblums,
Bob.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Annie_Girl wrote:

for a full session I take about 150 images, 4 or 5 of each pose to account for blinking, strange facial expressions, ect. About 70-80 will be keepers, client sees about 40 of those as there will be doubles.

Mini sessions I average about 100 images, around 50 will be keepers but the client sees 20.

I think those are pretty good numbers - a very efficient approach. Also as I recall, roughly equivalent to how professionals shot weddings in the pre-digital era. Photographers who feel the need to shoot a thousand images or more for a typical wedding indicates to me that they don't know what they are doing and/or are not very confident in what they are doing. Randomly firing away with the hope that by luck enough usable images come out of it can be intrusive to the event and is certainly not very efficient; it will take a whole day or two just to go through them all and edit it down to a presentable set for the client.

Wall-E Loc: Phoenix, AZ

rook2c4 wrote:

I think those are pretty good numbers - a very efficient approach. Also as I recall, roughly equivalent to how professionals shot weddings in the pre-digital era. Photographers who feel the need to shoot a thousand images or more for a typical wedding indicates to me that they don't know what they are doing and/or are not very confident in what they are doing.

Part of the increase in the number of images taken, is that wedding photography isn't just the set/formal shots anymore.
Shooting film at a reception, except for the cake cutting and MAYBE the first dance, was unheard of. Now it's expected that you'll get images of EVERY family member in multiple groupings, and the casual, unposed shots that were never captured before.

rook2c4 wrote:

Randomly firing away with the hope that by luck enough usable images come out of it can be intrusive to the event and is certainly not very efficient; it will take a whole day or two just to go through them all and edit it down to a presentable set for the client.

True enough. Most wedding photogs I talk to DO spend about a day just on culling. Even before they get to working on the post processing. That's what Monday's are for! <VBG>