# Shot Success Ratio

Status
Not open for further replies.

#### aselley

##### New Member
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?

#### catchlights

##### Moderator
Staff member
you shot 1200 images and finalize it to 40 image to keep, and and you call it 1:6?? :what:

.

Last edited:

#### munkey

##### New Member
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
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
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
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!

#### ortega

##### Moderator
Staff member
only the image matters,
no one cares how many shots you have to take to get "the" shot

#### aselley

##### New Member
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
Heh!! If you are picky in nature, make sure you are picky before you take the shot, not just after!

#### munkey

##### New Member
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
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
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
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?

#### aselley

##### New Member
Heh!! If you are picky in nature, make sure you are picky before you take the shot, not just after!
Maybe But as you said, you shoot buildings, they don't tend to jump around like a monkey does

#### Simon_84

##### New Member
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
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
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
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?

#### hazmee

##### Senior Member
All I can say is, YMMV so be it digital or film.

#### mutant

##### New Member
For me, roughly I keep about ~80% of my shots, PP roughly about ~10-20%.

Status
Not open for further replies.