p.5 #1 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
I find an event will have endless possibilities and shot options. I can't get them all but I'll certainly try to capture as many as possible.
Now I should say that my work involves high-end social events rather than weddings, but the principles are much the same.
I'll observe keenly everything around me choose a moment and a best frame, wait for the perceived action to happen and grab it in a burst of 3 shots (5D3 silent mode).
In a day I may shoot 1500 shots. I'll aim to deliver 300-350 of which 130 are usually selected for the album and receive extra retouching. So given that I only usually need 1 in 3 because of burst mode that gives me a fairly good hit rate of oof/bad action to great shots. Many of the shots I cull are good enough to be shown, but there's no point in overloading the client and final selection for the album should be fun not a chore.
I tend to be adventurous in my frames, and the nature of my work is that most is in crazy lighting with moving targets - maybe with a smoke machine to add to the fun. So I expect a good number of fails in my work - but trimming through is no hardship and my rates allow the time.
I don't however, press the button unless I consider I've got a good chance of getting a shot worth capturing.
Remember that in the "good" old days of film, many togs would shoot a little safer (film is too expensive for mistakes) and prints would oft be inspected at 10x8
Now I'm blowing things up to 100% on my screen and if I can't count eyelashes it's not deemed in focus, (although they'll slip through if the shot is stellar).
Expectations have changed and so has the shooting style.
When I got married our tog used medium format and we could only afford the 24 exposure option. 23 of them were delivered - but every one of them was safe and posed. (Yes one had the flash not off, and no he didn't break into a new roll of film... grrr...)
I'm not sure if it's truly possible to shoot 10K images and still have time to truly observe the event - but if the delivery gets the results, the rates allow the time, and the guests don't feel bombarded by an enthusiastic tog, then does it matter?
p.5 #3 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
Yes mathmatically...
But not really. I shoot in bursts of three because people are not predictable - particularly if they are laughing, talking or moving. Most times all three of these images are deliverable but I'll choose the best moment and deliver that.
I could shoot single shot and tell myself that 1/3 second later it would never get any better, but I'm humble enough to accept that won't always be the case and that I'd rather get the best for my clients - hence motor drive.
I choose silent mode because it is... well... silent - but also because I find 3 fps is just about right to get sufficient variety in a short 1 sec burst whereas 5/6 fps would be just getting me too many shots for the same overall variety.
So if you assume that I'm shooting a burst of 3 to deliver (not achieve) a great shot then the % rate of actual deliverables is somewhat closer to 50%, and with my style of shots I'll take that any day.
Indeed, I usually have to trim down perfectly good shots from the deliverables because I feel they duplicate other shots and my aim is to deliver a good range without melting my clients' heads with too many shots.
It's important to note my business model for most clients is album based. I will deliver X amount of shots which have all benn fully adjusted and locally tweaked in LR, with a view to Y shots that actually go to album - and these receive additional work. It's therefore important that all deliverables look great and are available for printing, but my clients have a suitable number to select an album from.
(Usually they can't contain themselves and the album gets quite big - so extra ££ for me with additional costs for more images retouched and designed into the album.
There are of course those who prefer to offer all varients of every acceptable image as deliverables and I hear of cients receiving 1000 images or more, but many of these will be very similar and often part of sequence bursts. Not worth the extra post in LR and confusing / tiring for the client.
p.5 #4 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
ernstbj wrote:
Hi Tony. Let me put my dunce cap on (yet again). Can you elaborate by what you mean "For me slowing down actually increased my shutter count." I'm just guessing but are referring to seeing a moment and whereas before you might have taken a shot and then moved on now you perhaps linger more, taking more shots and trying to create something special?
Hey Ernst,
I think the first thing that was mentioned (slowing down) was probably something I said referring to the pace at which we shoot. Essentially I most likely meant that I find shooting weddings to be like when you get better at a sport. Everything slows down so you find yourself where you need to be instinctively, with less movement and effort.
With that said I think that I simultaneously find myself shooting more. I think they're unrelated. The increased shooting (in my opinion) has to do with getting better at what I do and getting less satisfied with mediocre things. It's just a matter of constantly improving the composition, expression, ect...
My first few years doing this I took a lot of pride in how few images we'd shoot (1200 or so) vs. how many we'd deliver (600-700). Now I've come to realize that there's no point in being prideful of myself or my methods. I'm not trying to impress anyone except our clients. As I've refined my work I've become more particular about the quality of it.
So rather than trying to keep numbers low just to say I can, I'm disregarding all of that and just shooting. As a result we usually come home with 3500-4000 between the two of us. I don't really know if that's high or low, but it's working for us right now...
p.5 #5 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
Thanks Tony. Much appreciated.
Years ago, I asked someone on a forum what camera / lens combination I should buy to shoot weddings. Whereas some folks suggested primes & others zooms, one fellow simply wrote "try different lenses and use what works best for you." At the time I thought that wasn't very helpful. But he was right.
I just joined the forum and treasure reading the different perspectives that you, Lanny Mann and others kindly share on this forum (and hopefully I'll have the opportunity to share as well).
p.5 #6 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
glort wrote:
I don't believe any one claimed they take one shot only of everything they take. That is just an exaggerated defense to what has been said that some people are clearly feeling threatened by. That is the viewpoint that shooting 10 or 100 shots of every single thing is excessive and the keepere rate can be much higher without sacraficing the overall quality of the images delivered.
If you do want to see the guys whom do take one shot and nail it almost every single time and base their livelihood on that skill, go to the sports section and have a look at the guys who regularly shoot Cheer. Baseball and basketball guys would be similar.
The cheer guys shoot ALMOST as fast as some wedding shooters, 150+ frames in under 3 min. and 97%+ of them at least, are KEEPERS!
There is definately no " Only 1 in 10 is good enough to be shown to the clients" mindset with these guys!
They would be annoyed to have to edit any more than about 3-4 shots despite the fact these performers are moving about as fast as they can, are rarely ever still for more than a single second, if that in the higher levels, and are making expressions and have peak action moments non stop.
You HAVE to nail it because in 15 seconds, IF you are lucky,after that group finishes the next group is going to be on the floor and you have to edit any bloopers, download the card and put another one in the camera ready to start on that next group. There is no one else on the other end editing either. The images you send are sent either to the viewstations or burnt to disk as is.
Getting quality " on the money" shots is no lees important in this market than any other and producing bad shots is certainly no less damaging to a photographers reputation and likleyhood of being hired for the next event.
There are quite a few shooters on this very board that do this regularly and have been dsoing so for years.
Unfortunately for the " 100 shots to make sure one is right" wedding shooters, these Cheer and many other sports Photographers shoot their theroies down in smoking flames and prove that it can be done. Sure the guys doing things like football and car racing may fire off a burst but I gaurantee their keeper rate absoloutley laughs at what a lot of wedding shooters here are saying is such a nessity to get good pics.
Often the cheer guys for example shoot 12 hours a day for 2-4 days at a time.
I'm not trying to berate peoples claims as much as open their eyes to wider horizons and point out that in other fields, people are doing every day as a matter of course what some are vigrously claiming can't be done with something far less energetic.
It's just not the case.
I'd love to crosslink this thread and hear what some of those guys say to some of these theroies. Alos be interesting to see how many frames the guys that shoot sports as well as weddings take on a normal Nuptiuals job.
If people think they can't get the greatest majority of shots right the first time of people barely moving and following a largely predictable pattern when they do, or you are fully able to direct and guide them, I would reccomend you don't even let the thought of shooting action sports cross your mind.
Still lifes and product shots however may be something far more suited to the particular proclivities and outlooks of some as they would move slow enough to get 10K frames of each and every setup and the shooters could then go through and choose the best one.
p.5 #7 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
Listen, can I take one shot of a scene and deliver that to my client? Of course, but why be satisfied with that? I take that shot every day with my eyes closed. Now that I've got that angle, let's move on and try to do something different. Trying to do something different takes a few shutter releases.
I'm not trying to say one way is "right" or "better" but that's the way I do it and it works for me. If you shoot 1800 frames for a 10 hour day and deliver 300 images and your clients are paying you $5k+ for shoot and burns, more power to you.
p.5 #8 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
Also, just because a frame is properly exposed and in focus, doesn't automatically make it a "keeper." I can shoot 10 frames of a scene, all properly exposed and in focus, but only 1 of them (maybe) is the keeper.
p.5 #9 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
hardlyboring wrote:
I found/find myself growing tired of digital cameras. Not so much digital in a sense that digital is better than film but more in the sense that when I am holding a digital camera I am basically holding an everlasting machine gun computer image maker. I personally found myself overshooting just because quite frankly I could. It became a rather mindless activity. Of course we are always attempting to be creative etc. but I found myself composing shots and then just shooting not really thinking about expressions, other things in the frame, etc. I sometimes found myself not really taking anything in to account other than just lining up the shot and blasting away....Show more →
Doug--love your work man, you know that I have great respect for what you produce and how you produce it. It seems to me though, that have somehow have an issue with the ease that digital has made in the creation of images. Like in order for it to be valuable (to you) it has to be difficult to obtain on the front end (correct me if I'm wrong). So instead of seeing the capability to overshoot as a tool and seeing how you might best utilize the tool, you're seeing it as more of a crutch? I guess for me the only thing that matters is getting the shot--and I don't really care how I get there (and neither do my clients).
It's interesting--I know that in architecture there are designers that love a blank slate to work with, without restriction/limitation to do whatever they want without really having to think about it. That feels like how you see digital technology. I used to hate that openness to projects...I needed rules and boundaries and restrictions so I could come up with creative ways to solve that problem and it felt a lot more satisfying to do it under those conditions. So in a way, I think I understand where you're coming from. But with photography, I love the freedom to shoot and explore--and shoot to think. Maybe some are better at visualizing than others--I used to always need something to work from in order to advance a design, for instance. I couldn't come up with something in a vaccuum--I needed a process to evolve my thinking. To me this is what high-volume shooting is about... visualizing my thought process. And my limitations are not being clairvoyant and not having control over anything that's going on.
So you may wonder "well after all this time, you should be able to get a better shot off the bat and call it done, right?" Well yes, and no. I could do that to a degree, but the fact that my starting point is better means that my destination should get better as well. So I know I'm not going to get the perfect shot the first time around, so I keep studying as I shoot, meanwhile the moment is passing so things are happening and I can't just wait around for the peak moment if I don't know when it is going to be. I don't hammer through but I burst 2-3 shots when I see a spike (if that makes sense). There may be a few different spikes in the moment and then one of those could be THE shot... All this time I'm still working my composition, blocking distracting stuff in the background moving in or out to include/exclude context that might not be necessary, etc.... maybe you can do this without feeling the need to shoot throughout, but I just feel more comfortable building the process and having the reference points afterwards to evaluate--kind of like a monday morning game-day tape to look at what you did and how you can do it better next time.
p.5 #10 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
cas5 wrote:
Just last week one of my partners hired an experienced wedding photographer to cover a company event. I knew the photographer well and he's second shot for me a number of times. He turned in about 100 raw frames per working hour. While the company was thrilled with what they got I know he wasn't working hard. He'd frequently have the camera down by his side and he'd sniper shoot a frame or two. When he caught a moment it was because of luck rather than intention. When you look at his raw images he would have one or two frames of something and move on. The frames were never refined, his backgrounds weren't clean and they rarely had peak moments because he missed the moment while bringing the camera to his face. The client was happy, there were usable frames and they were better than the standard run of the mill photographers that they might have called in to cover the event but they weren't the best representation of the event that the client could have had. They were good enough.
I began to understand the difference between what I was doing and the foundation style of shooting in a project that I ran for a local hospital. I had 21 other wedding photographers working for me and got to see all their unedited images -- about 1/3 of the photographers were related to foundation in one way or another. In one instance I shot side by side with a foundation wedding photographer that used to shoot for the chicago tribune. We shot the same subject: morning rounds in the halls of the hospital. Boring shit and he out shot me in every respect. My images showed a work environment and people talking. His images showed a dynamic work environment with happy people. Aside from his frames being better composed he worked hard to capture images where the subjects were smiling. There was never just one shot of any scene he worked it until the moment had passed. He caught peak moments and moments just after peak moments that simply made for better photos than mine. I turned in around 400 images in two hours and he was almost triple that number. Comparing his images side by side to mine, it became clear that he simply worked the moments harder than I did.
The photo editing was done by Michael Davis formerly photo editor for National Geographic and the presidential archive. On average, Foundation related photographers had more images that were selected to appear in the book. It's interesting to note that of the 14,000 images that were shot, not a single PJ image was strong enough to make the cover. I had to bring in a commercial photographer to get that image.
At an average wedding I had been shooting 1500-2000 frames and at my last wedding I consciously doubled that count. The only reason the count doubled was that I worked harder during the day constantly saying to myself how do I make this image better? Can I clean up my background? Is there more of a story to tell? How would wirken/murray/sergio/huy be shooting this? have I explored every angle? Is the framing right? am I cutting off limbs? where's my next shot? The higher frame count was a direct result of my attitude during the day. ...Show more →
I'm taking a college B+W/darkroom class and I'm forcing myself to shoot all my assignments with my 4x5 Tachihara. First assignment is 10 prints and I have about 6 sheets of film remaining and another box on order. Talk about humbling and going old school!
Yes, it's rather extreme but it's been helpful nonetheless.
Now comes along the wisdom of the many on this thread, in particular Cas5 and Tony!
Now I see the genius, and this post summed up this thread nicely.
I shoot a fair amount of news assignments and will work on this technique, and hopefully this will translate into weddings in the future.
p.5 #11 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
dhp_sf wrote:
Doug--love your work man, you know that I have great respect for what you produce and how you produce it. It seems to me though, that have somehow have an issue with the ease that digital has made in the creation of images. Like in order for it to be valuable (to you) it has to be difficult to obtain on the front end (correct me if I'm wrong). So instead of seeing the capability to overshoot as a tool and seeing how you might best utilize the tool, you're seeing it as more of a crutch? I guess for me the only thing that matters is getting the shot--and I don't really care how I get there (and neither do my clients).
It's interesting--I know that in architecture there are designers that love a blank slate to work with, without restriction/limitation to do whatever they want without really having to think about it. That feels like how you see digital technology. I used to hate that openness to projects...I needed rules and boundaries and restrictions so I could come up with creative ways to solve that problem and it felt a lot more satisfying to do it under those conditions. So in a way, I think I understand where you're coming from. But with photography, I love the freedom to shoot and explore--and shoot to think. Maybe some are better at visualizing than others--I used to always need something to work from in order to advance a design, for instance. I couldn't come up with something in a vaccuum--I needed a process to evolve my thinking. To me this is what high-volume shooting is about... visualizing my thought process. And my limitations are not being clairvoyant and not having control over anything that's going on.
So you may wonder "well after all this time, you should be able to get a better shot off the bat and call it done, right?" Well yes, and no. I could do that to a degree, but the fact that my starting point is better means that my destination should get better as well. So I know I'm not going to get the perfect shot the first time around, so I keep studying as I shoot, meanwhile the moment is passing so things are happening and I can't just wait around for the peak moment if I don't know when it is going to be. I don't hammer through but I burst 2-3 shots when I see a spike (if that makes sense). There may be a few different spikes in the moment and then one of those could be THE shot... All this time I'm still working my composition, blocking distracting stuff in the background moving in or out to include/exclude context that might not be necessary, etc.... maybe you can do this without feeling the need to shoot throughout, but I just feel more comfortable building the process and having the reference points afterwards to evaluate--kind of like a monday morning game-day tape to look at what you did and how you can do it better next time....Show more →
I totally get what you are saying. To be honest the reason I started this thread was mainly to say that originally I thought overshooting was bad but after thinking about it more I realized that it is not bad and it doesn't really matter how people achieve success.
In any artistic endeavor after a while you have to find ways to keep yourself fresh and improve aspects of your "art" that you find valuable. It is a job but we are also trying to be creative for 12 hours straight and produce our own brand of "art". I was not feeling fulfilled with digital. I was much more satisfied as an artist when I shot film and had to work a different way to achieve my shots. It's all about the process for me and also about keeping myself excited and upbeat about every single wedding. I want to go into each wedding (even the crappy ones) with a very positive attitude ready to have fun and be as creative as possible even when we are maybe not at the nicest venue etc.
So film has basically done that for me. I really get excited about each wedding now because I am able to push myself personally in a way that digital was not letting me even if it is just in a psychological sense. I am certainly shooting less and waiting to shoot at the exact moment I want to capture. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't. I have not noticed my coverage suffering because I have been shooting film. Plus with Jackie shooting I don't feel like anyone is getting shorted anywhere.
You are correct about what I shoot on film being more valuable (at least to me personally). I have to force myself to work differently and when I succeed with film it is much more of an accomplishment personally than anything I have do digitally.
Again this is all personal. I don't think clients care either way. Actually I know they do not care.
I have no intention of not giving a client exactly what they are expecting from us just because I need to be some sort of pompous artiste. Hopefully I can give them something a little extra because I am actually having fun on a personal level shooting their wedding.
p.5 #12 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
Letting this topic sink and stir around a bit....
High-level thinking:
For me ... If I hear over-shoot it feels like spray and pray.
But if I am thinking about working a scene, shooting with a purpose to capture a specific moment.
That to me is being a professional. Working the scene to create lasting, impactful images for my client.
p.5 #13 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
Ziffl3 wrote:
Letting this topic sink and stir around a bit....
High-level thinking:
For me ... If I hear over-shoot it feels like spray and pray.
But if I am thinking about working a scene, shooting with a purpose to capture a specific moment.
That to me is being a professional. Working the scene to create lasting, impactful images for my client.
Interesting topic.
I agree. This has been one of the most interesting and normalizing threads to read as it gives some insight to what it takes for others to get the images that they are presenting. It feels like 2000-2500 is the norm for a full day, with or without a second shooter. I'm right within that, so I guess I'm normal. Sure, that would be 100 rolls of film, but most of us aren't shooting with film, so there is no point in pretending like we are. This is just the nature of digital photography and it does allow for more adventurous shots.
"Over-shooting" is not the same as "Spray and pray," but are either of these things always negative? Jmraso posted a link in another thread to a video (Thread: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1314938/1#12553797 , Video: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=e-WxCoDewbY ) Gene Ho seems to be taking a very deliberate approach to spray and pray that is getting him results. I guess it is more spraying and less praying since he seems to be getting consistent results. Regardless, he's not even looking through the camera and he's just moving the camera and picking winners when he culls. Is it careless or just a different technique?
On a side note about the video, it is refreshing to see a pro shooting DX sensor cameras (D300S), but he uses a lens lineup with a crazy gap in focal length! (10mm, 15mm, 50mm, 85mm)!!!
p.5 #16 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
I've been paying attention to this thread since it started because I thought it was an excellent topic started by Doug. I cannot figure out why people care so deeply about the amount of images that others are shooting? Like, it really seems to bother some people that others are shooting 10K images a wedding. Why?
Doug also nailed it there "I was much more satisfied as an artist when I shot film and had to work a different way to achieve my shots. It's all about the process for me and also about keeping myself excited and upbeat about every single wedding."
Isnt that a major part of our job (with client satisfaction being the other)? I think Doug is a perfect example of finding what works for you and driving at it (and I think his photography is better for it). He has taken such an alternate route to what the overwhelming majority of the wedding industry does and he is happier for it and he is carving out a niche. Bottom line is that works for Doug and I think that is awesome! Who am I to say "you should subscribe to the school of thought to shoot a lot of images because XXXXX shoots a lot of images and his photography is awesome." It works the other way to! Who am I to say, "Oh, you shoot 10K frames a wedding? You should really try to shoot less." What the hell do I care!?
Do your thing and do it well and be kind to others.
p.5 #17 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
jmraso wrote:
Mr. Diggler It was me who posted it !!
But just suggesting the use of a second camera in the other hand not to spray-and- pray but to take a second maybe interesting shot !!!
, sorry, I am a little over the recommended dose of Dayquill today as I'm fighting a nasty cold! Noted and corrected.
I know your intention was different when you posted the link, but I watched the full video while I was doing some other stuff and I thought that his approach applied somewhat to this thread. My point is that the techniques that were demonstrated are unique to digital and really embrace the digital process, as well as some trial and error.
p.5 #19 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
bthatton wrote:
The word overshoot is too negative to begin with. It implies that someone is doing something wrong. I haven't called anyone an undershooter.
It was me who posted it !! 
, sorry, I am a little over the recommended dose of Dayquill today as I'm fighting a nasty cold! Noted and corrected.