What is your photo-taking "success rate"?
This question is targeted mainly at amatuer/professional photographer - people who take their photos seriously. Out of 100 photos you take, how many are keepers?
Clearly there are many factors. For example, if it was sports or portraits, where the subject/lighting is dynamic, one can take very many photos with a low "success rate". On the other hand, it it was landscapes or architecture, where the subject/lighting is relatively fixed, the "success rate" would be high.
For "general purpose" amatuer photography, say a trip to the zoo or botanical gardens, a holiday to another city or a drive to the country, what is reasonable success rate to expect?
I'm reasonably new at photography. In theory, I think I know all there is to know about the camera - stuff like depth of field, exposure, film (or sensor) speed, tripod use, etc. To the best of my ability and judgement, my success rate is about 10% - 20%. Is that a reasonable rate?
If it is high, either I'm good or I'm not critical enough about what's good (most definitely the latter, I think). If it is low, either I'm crap or I'm overly critical (probably the former).
So, what is your success rate?
Clearly there are many factors. For example, if it was sports or portraits, where the subject/lighting is dynamic, one can take very many photos with a low "success rate". On the other hand, it it was landscapes or architecture, where the subject/lighting is relatively fixed, the "success rate" would be high.
For "general purpose" amatuer photography, say a trip to the zoo or botanical gardens, a holiday to another city or a drive to the country, what is reasonable success rate to expect?
I'm reasonably new at photography. In theory, I think I know all there is to know about the camera - stuff like depth of field, exposure, film (or sensor) speed, tripod use, etc. To the best of my ability and judgement, my success rate is about 10% - 20%. Is that a reasonable rate?
If it is high, either I'm good or I'm not critical enough about what's good (most definitely the latter, I think). If it is low, either I'm crap or I'm overly critical (probably the former).
So, what is your success rate?
Comments
Let's put this into perspective though: those amazing National Geographic photographers probably take 10,000 photos on their assignments, and they probably get a couple dozen shots worthy of consideration for the magazine out of that.
When I was studying in Italy, I took about 1800 photos, of which about 6 were outstanding, as good as any pro shot I've seen. Another 200 more or less were good enough to keep the negatives for and make an album out of, and the rest ranged from OK to awful with lots of pictures for sentimental value and documentation in the mix.
tonton: I love available light photography.
1/3 success rate is what you should be aiming for. It's all well and good to know all there is to know about camera settings and all that technical stuff but the real learning curve is "composition" of shots.
Thats what makes all the difference... the framing and the timing of shots, knowing your subject and anticipating what your subject may do next (in the case of a moving object or person). The "rule of thirds" is always good to remember and achieving an "eye" for interesting photos is something that anyone interested in photography will always be learning.
Good luck with the photos
In the beginning, more than half of my shots were technically wrong (let's not talk about composition yet). They were either blur due to various reasons or over/under exposed, etc. Learning from EXIF information is great, and I've reduced my technically wrong shots tremendously. Now, I hardly have to think about the technical settings...
Working on composition now
I see you're from Australia...beautiful country! I spent a year travelling there and enjoyed every minute
(I want a 6+ megapixel digital with a bulb setting so bad I can taste it. Sure would be nice to have the LCD to compose on, and I wouldn't have to pay to develop bad slides.)
CV
technically, maybe 10 to 15%
Emotionally thought, i keep around 60%
Originally posted by MiMac
I see you're from Australia...beautiful country! I spent a year travelling there and enjoyed every minute
Yes, in fact, am planning a big road trip from Adelaide to Perth, some 3000km in the straightest paths in November/December. About two thirds the width of Australia! Of course, I won't be taking the most direct path, so it could well be some 4000-5000km. Looking forward to some great photo taking opportunities. Trying to get as much practise and advice before then, so I don't "waste" my trip.
It's always surprising how the ones we want may not turn out, while others surprise us by turning out really well. Experience will reduce this, I guess. Before, when I was a point and shoot photographer, and money was limited, every shot had to count as film costs add up! Now that I've gone digital, and taking a stronger interest, I'm happy to keep my finger on the trigger. Thanks to your feedback, now I don't feel as bad with a low <10% success rate. Somehow, I always thought that pros could get near 100% success rate with "one shot one kill" sniper accuracy
Originally posted by chris v
I bracket just about everything I really want. This is especially important in cave photography, because often, you might not be able to get back into the smae cave for a number of years. I'll do 3 or 4 exposures of the same scene, usually. Inariably, the ones I'm excited about never turn out, and the I'm surprised by something I didn't expect to work. If I shoot 36 exposures, I'm lucky to get 4 or maybe 6 really worthwhile shots. Above ground, the ratio might be just a little higher.
(I want a 6+ megapixel digital with a bulb setting so bad I can taste it. Sure would be nice to have the LCD to compose on, and I wouldn't have to pay to develop bad slides.)
CV
Ge the D70 my friend. It is well worth it. I love mine. So much control. Beats the crap out of my CoolPix 995. No waiting for anything (well focus sometimes).
On some occations, I do take lots of pictures that I think are really great, and with a high success rate. For instance, on a diving trip to the Great Barrier Reef, I took about 200 pictures with my digital camera, and at least 100 of them were exelent. However, I blame that on the beauty of the Reef rather than on my underwater camera skills
So I guess about 10%, with 5% being "really good". about 5% gets deleted straight away, especially low light photos, since they tend to be blurry. I look at the picture on the LCD screen and decide wherther or not to take another picture right away if the first didnt turn out too good. I never delete pictures before I get back home, and generally keep enough space to take at least 40-50 pictures on the memory card, so I dont run out of pictures and have to delete off the camera to fit in another one - You only do that mistake once
.:BoemanE
If you consider that a good picture, is a good exposure, with a sharp image (unless of want blurry effect), most of my pictures with my walkaround lens are correct. Now if I take shots handheld with my sigma 100-300 , the ratio, will be decrease because it's difficult to have sharp images even if you don't have shaking hands.
Now if you consider a good picutre, a picture with a good compostion worthless to be published somewhere, or to interest others peoples, than the ration drop dramatically
Originally posted by drumsticks
Yes, in fact, am planning a big road trip from Adelaide to Perth, some 3000km in the straightest paths in November/December. About two thirds the width of Australia! Of course, I won't be taking the most direct path, so it could well be some 4000-5000km. Looking forward to some great photo taking opportunities. Trying to get as much practise and advice before then, so I don't "waste" my trip.
Sounds great
Dunno if you have tried the Great Ocean Road trip from Melbourne to Adelaide, excellent scenery...breathtaking! I flew Adelaide to Perth so missed out on that bit
BTW I took a digital video camera as well as my trusty Canon SLR so I have at least 80 hours of video of Australia as well! So much that I still haven't looked at it all yet and it's been 4 years!
Have fun on the trip!
Originally posted by MiMac
Dunno if you have tried the Great Ocean Road trip from Melbourne to Adelaide, excellent scenery...breathtaking! I flew Adelaide to Perth so missed out on that bit
No, haven't done the Great Ocean Road yet. Flew once and took the bus once, but not driving. By the way, the Ghan goes from Adelaide to Darwin. The Indian Pacific goes from Sydney to Perth (via Adelaide). (For those who don't know, those are the names of trains).
Originally posted by johnq
I tend to delete as I go, so if it doesn't come out, it's gone on the spot. So I guess that's 100% success rate
Originally posted by BoeManE
I never delete pictures before I get back home, and generally keep enough space to take at least 40-50 pictures on the memory card, so I dont run out of pictures and have to delete off the camera to fit in another one
A good compromise I do sometimes is to keep all photos until you need the space. Then review them and delete the *really* bad ones, all in one go. And continue shooting.
We all have our own standards. Pros might classify success if its sellable. Amatuers perhaps if it is hangable on the wall. Grandma and granddad if it is memorable, etc. Perhaps should rephrase question to "what is the success rate to your own standards and for your own purposes?".
Seems like we're all about the same at about 10-20% good ones and about 5% or lower for *really* good ones.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
Now if you consider a good picutre, a picture with a good compostion worthless to be published somewhere, or to interest others peoples, than the ration drop dramatically
You mean "worthy to be published"?
Originally posted by drumsticks
No, haven't done the Great Ocean Road yet. Flew once and took the bus once, but not driving. By the way, the Ghan goes from Adelaide to Darwin. The Indian Pacific goes from Sydney to Perth (via Adelaide). (For those who don't know, those are the names of trains).
Anyhow, Indeed some of my favourite pics would not win any awards for technical excellence but are of great sentimental value and remind me of good times (glad I kept a lot of stuff I was not sure of). I suppose it's hard to put a price on memories.