I'm working on three shooting dates from last summer's Chicago Air & Water Show. I don't have the original statitics, but let's assume 1000 frames per day, probably 3000 frames to start editing (probably actually more, but I've culled more than once since last August). As I pause to respond to this post, I've just reduced the count to 382. And, I know there's still some crap that will be deleted in the next culling round, but I want to update the keywords first. I hope there's really less than 100 of the very very best from what is now my 8th year of shooting this event.

There's nothing wrong with shooting a lot. But, there is something wrong with editing too many and keeping too many. Do you really have 2400 images worth editing in detail (6000 x .4)? Do you really even have 240 images work editing and keeping? Wasting time on editing inferior images is a discouraging waste of time.

You might need a better culling approach and / or tools and / or critical eye.

Regarding workflow, do you inspect your images at the 1:1 pixel level to confirm each image as a candidate keeper is, in fact, in sharp focus at the relevant details?

Regarding tools, do you have software and hardware that immediately renders the image details for 1:1 inspection? Do you have tools that render side-by-side images for comparison of similar images and a forced rejection of one, even if both seem acceptable? Do you have a database tool that lets you compare similar images, even across years, to confirm improvement and to reject more inferior and / or complete duplicative frames of the same subject?

Do you look at every image critically, with an approach of: give me a reason to not delete this frame? One must delete as many frames as needed to isolate the keeper. Consider what you'll do with each individual image? Would you share an inferior image, knowing in other's eyes, you're only as good as the worst image you share publicly? What would you do with two identical / near identical frames of the same subject? Couldn't you just re-crop from virtual copies of the 'best of all' frame and create different renderings?

If interested in some of the tools I use, continue to respond the discussion.

Well, well, well... we are having another two camp debate: thoughtful photograph vs shoot ans ask questions later.

Looks like
JPEG vs RAW
SOOC vs PP

Each own has his or her technique, there is no "right or wrong" here.

Fo me, each time the camera doesn't click it's a missed opportunity.

Case in question: once I did a head shot of one of my nieces at her birthday, which went pretty well. As I edited the image in Capture One, I noticed a nice butterfly that was entering the frame from the left... maybe, if I had shot 20 or so frames with continuous drive (my A7C cand do 10 FPS) the butterfly might have flown just over her head making the photo awesome.

Lesson learned: you are not going back in time, film belongs to the past... and that perfect moment will never happen again.

Shoot, shoot, shoot, until you empty your cl... fill you card.

Ask questions later.

I want to open a topic that has been bugging at me for a while. Don’t know if it has been up for discussion on UHH but here it goes.

When I am out doing a shoot, I shoot so many images that I feel as though I am over shooting. For instance, I went to England on a pilgrimage back in the summer. I shot over 6000 images. Didn’t realize that I had that many until I got home. Then you have to load them on your computer, analyze them, decide which ones to keep, do PP, and so on. I can usually get rid of 60% of them just because they suck.

Trying to figure out how possibly shoot less. Or, just shoot to my hearts content. Has anyone had this situation and how did you handle it.

Just curious!

And like lots of silly UHH discussions, the idea of shooting 1 "considered shot" has nothing (ZERO, NIL, ZILCH, NADA) with many types of photography, especially modern digital photography. Proposing to shoot like film, probable means you don't even shoot film in Feb 2023, where the cost is easily $1.00 per frame. Proposing to shoot like film also seems to indicate you didn't shoot sports, or wildlife, or similar, even back in the day, because that's not how to succeed in these genres in a digital format in Feb 2023.

Ripping off 5 duplicate frames of something static, that's probably equally silly, especially if you're standing there straight up like a statue. But, working around a subject, say a full 360 circle and varying your eye-level from ground level to overhead, here take as many as possible of all the different views, to justify why you even considered the subject in the first place.