Shot Success Ratio


Status
Not open for further replies.

aselley

New Member
Sep 30, 2008
396
0
0
Singapore
aselley.zenfolio.com
#1
I remember when I used to shoot film, the uncertainty of capturing a shot had to be balanced between taking another and then the cost of development. This, of course during the "film" stage of learning meant that if I got 1-2 shots that I really liked out of a roll of film, I felt myself lucky.

Now of course I shoot digital, and thanks to some PP the success rate is slightly higher. For example, at the zoo this past weekend I think I conservatively shot about 1200 frames, and then reduced this to 200 or so when I got home to make up a group of photos I liked. Then with further editing and PP further reduced this to about 40.

Mathematically, its a ratio of about 1:6 for photos I like, or that I would have kept in the days of film. And for the ones I further edited, and would post, it leaves me with a ratio of about 1:30 or about the same as I had with film.

So what is your ratio of success? Is there a number you consider that makes a shoot a great success? Is there a number you aim for? OR have you even noticed an improvement in number? Or do you get more selective over time and so the number stays about the same?
 

munkey

New Member
Apr 25, 2007
448
0
0
32
#3
Dood, he mentioned 1:30. Imho I find myself left with 1/3 fotoz that are usable, well aesthetically pleasing at least. For the killer shots, I'd be happy if I got 1-2 for each shoot.
 

Kit

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
11,699
42
48
42
Upper Bukit Timah
Visit site
#4
It depends on what you are taking and your definition of "success".

I'm into the business of taking photos of buildings. When you are taking something stationery, you'll spend more time in composing your photos. This is especially so when you are making a living out of it. In this instance, the success rate should be 100%. Most of the time, you need to get more than one shot of the building from different angles and because each shot takes time to set up, you've got to make everyone of them count.

If you are into other genres like sports, reportage, etc, you'll find that you need to work with elements that can be beyond your control and that your success rate might fall.

I'm never too concerned about numbers in photography. All it really matters is if you achieve your onjectives in the end. That said; if you were to make an effort to exercise some thinking process before you hit the shutter, your rates will only improve with time. If you were getting 2 shots out of a roll of film before and 40 shots out 1200 clicks now, maybe you should start thinking about how you use the camera. If you exercise some self discipline, it doesn't matter if its film or digital. Your success rates will be more or less the same, if not better.
 

Fotophilic

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2006
2,388
0
36
big tree town
#5
sometimes when i am in a studio, i only keep 10% of what i have taken.

sometimes when i shoot events, i only keep 1% of what i have taken.

sometimes when i am walking around, i keep none of what i have taken.

it depends, it really depends on a lot of things. "success" is subjective.
 

chanjyj

New Member
Apr 8, 2007
1,909
0
0
#6
Dood, he mentioned 1:30. Imho I find myself left with 1/3 fotoz that are usable, well aesthetically pleasing at least. For the killer shots, I'd be happy if I got 1-2 for each shoot.
1. I would say success rate 95%, killer shots 20% for a normal lens.
2. For a wide angle lens, success rate goes up to 98% and killer shots goes dramatically up to 40%.
3. For a telephoto in low light, success rate drops to around 80%. But I would say killer shots goes up again.

Killer shots always come at the opposite ends of the focal length spectrum.

Again, though, I must say that I do this as a job and if my success rate isn't so high I'm in deep **** so I am "forced" to produce the photos, it may not be a fair comparison with others.
Sorting out the photos after taking them is a pain!
 

aselley

New Member
Sep 30, 2008
396
0
0
Singapore
aselley.zenfolio.com
#8
If you were getting 2 shots out of a roll of film before and 40 shots out 1200 clicks now, maybe you should start thinking about how you use the camera. If you exercise some self discipline, it doesn't matter if its film or digital. Your success rates will be more or less the same, if not better.
That's a very valid comment. If I use the example of the 1200 which was at the Zoo, photos taken of the more "slow" targets probably had a higher success, or rather a higher likelihood of returning a shot I was happy to keep. This might have been a result of deliberation or that the target didn't really move much and so framing became so much easier (much like your buildings)

Whereas when I was shot the primates, their frolicsome nature meant panning for "action" and therefore a little harder to capture in just a single or even fewer frames.

I also concur that "success" is a very relative term, but I was curious about what type of ratios others seem to get? Or is it that we do get a lot more selective? Or is that just my picky nature? :)
 

Kit

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
11,699
42
48
42
Upper Bukit Timah
Visit site
#9
Heh!! If you are picky in nature, make sure you are picky before you take the shot, not just after!
 

munkey

New Member
Apr 25, 2007
448
0
0
32
#10
Well it really depends if you're doing it for commercial purposes or just for keepsake. I really treasure the nice photos that i've nailed for keepsake, as 10 yrs down the road when you look back at it you would probly say- THATS A FKING GOOD SHOT YO
 

catchlights

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 27, 2004
21,903
46
48
Punggol, Singapore
www.foto-u.com
#11
when I shot weddings with film many years ago, customers expect to see 36 photos from each roll of film, and so I deliver 36 photos from each roll of film. not sure how would you call that?
 

aselley

New Member
Sep 30, 2008
396
0
0
Singapore
aselley.zenfolio.com
#12
Well it really depends if you're doing it for commercial purposes or just for keepsake. I really treasure the nice photos that i've nailed for keepsake, as 10 yrs down the road when you look back at it you would probly say- THATS A FKING GOOD SHOT YO
I think that's what I am looking/wondering at...the shots that you nail and they just last. Though if I have found out one thing, it's a lot cheaper to find those shots when you don't have to pay for developing costs. :)
 

aselley

New Member
Sep 30, 2008
396
0
0
Singapore
aselley.zenfolio.com
#13
when I shot weddings with film many years ago, customers expect to see 36 photos from each roll of film, and so I deliver 36 photos from each roll of film. not sure how would you call that?
Well I guess I would call that 100%. :)

But it is client led, not photographer led. How many of those 36 per roll would you have delivered if they just asked for you to chose the very best photos?
 

Simon_84

New Member
Mar 18, 2004
1,479
0
0
bukit batok
#15
if i can get 2 good shots per year, that's more than good enough for me.
i'm not that productive to get that killer shot in a consistent manner.
 

Last edited:

notone

New Member
Nov 12, 2003
866
0
0
biopolis
#16
To me,
~20% pics I will keep and back up.
~5% I will spend time to tune in PS and/or show to others.
>95% are direct JPEG.>50% chance shutter@burst mode:)
I donot look for something I can cherish for years and years, except moments of family members---which I will feel successful as long as I have captured.
 

aselley

New Member
Sep 30, 2008
396
0
0
Singapore
aselley.zenfolio.com
#17
To me,
~20% pics I will keep and back up.
~5% I will spend time to tune in PS and/or show to others.
>95% are direct JPEG.>50% chance shutter@burst mode:)
I donot look for something I can cherish for years and years, except moments of family members---which I will feel successful as long as I have captured.
I think when it comes to family and friends all rules of thumb don't apply. Since in these situations the people, the event and the emotional memory are far more important than the photo itself.
 

waileong

Deregistered
Feb 5, 2003
2,519
0
0
Visit site
#18
The difference with film is that you have an incentive to improve your ratio over time.

I remember when I used to shoot film, the uncertainty of capturing a shot had to be balanced between taking another and then the cost of development. This, of course during the "film" stage of learning meant that if I got 1-2 shots that I really liked out of a roll of film, I felt myself lucky.

Now of course I shoot digital, and thanks to some PP the success rate is slightly higher. For example, at the zoo this past weekend I think I conservatively shot about 1200 frames, and then reduced this to 200 or so when I got home to make up a group of photos I liked. Then with further editing and PP further reduced this to about 40.

Mathematically, its a ratio of about 1:6 for photos I like, or that I would have kept in the days of film. And for the ones I further edited, and would post, it leaves me with a ratio of about 1:30 or about the same as I had with film.

So what is your ratio of success? Is there a number you consider that makes a shoot a great success? Is there a number you aim for? OR have you even noticed an improvement in number? Or do you get more selective over time and so the number stays about the same?
 

mutant

New Member
Jun 28, 2008
297
0
0
East
#20
For me, roughly I keep about ~80% of my shots, PP roughly about ~10-20%.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom