p.7 #1 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
myam203 wrote:
Sounds exactly like what I would do, but I still don't end up with thousands of shots. Not judging, I just don't know how that happens.
Because weddings are full of moments everywhere you turn.
Sep 03, 2014 at 08:31 PM
glort Offline • • • • [X]
p.7 #2 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
Inku Yo wrote:
Can I see your portfolio?
I have already answerd this on the other thread you asked the question. How many threads are you going to ask it on and what is your obsession to see what I do?
p.7 #4 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
myam203 wrote:
He's trying to find out if you suck or not.
Ding ding ding! We have a winner! Someone sure is opinionated about the way other people shoot. I'd like to see the work produced by someone with such strong opinions.
p.7 #5 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
canerino wrote:
For what its worth, this is from an interview with Steve McCurry talking about his transition from film to digital:
"Moving to digital has helped dramatically. In the days when I used film, I could go though between 800 to 1000 rolls of film on a single shoot of which only 20 to 25 really exceptional photos would be chosen for use."
So that's 19,000ish on the low end if he used 24 exposures per roll to 36,000 on the high end if he used 36 exposure rolls to get to TWENTY FIVE SHOTS.
This is quite interesting.
Sep 03, 2014 at 09:03 PM
glort Offline • • • • [X]
p.7 #6 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
myam203 wrote:
He's trying to find out if you suck or not.
Oh!
Well I do suck!
Big time.
Worst shooter in the world.
Terrible.
Don't know my arse from my elbow and haven't been able to take a decent pic in the 30 years I have been a full time fauxtographer.
Got all the awards hanging on my walls from a mongolian website for only $2 each!
I pretty much figured it was the old childish last ditch tactic of "discredit you to make myself look better and what I say right and your opinion wrong" that people that feel threatend resort to.
It makes me laugh my arse off when people get all pissy if you don't put pics up on forums for them to pick apart and tell you how they would have done them. You'd think it was a requirement of participating on the site or something.
I couldn't give less of a stuff what any other photographer thinks of my work.
They don't buy my pictures or are the people I have to impress to give me gigs.
The only people I could give a damn about what they think of my work is my clients because their opinion is firstly nothing like that of shooters and no matter how clever the critiqueing nitpickers are, they NEVER look at pictures like the paying customers do.
Now all the people that don't like what I say can feel like real champions because black will turn to white because I have admitted I'm a hopless photographer and they can feel better about themselves.
Glad we got got that out the way and can now get back to the real entertainment.
p.7 #7 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
glort wrote:
Oh!
Well I do suck!
Big time.
Worst shooter in the world.
Terrible.
Don't know my arse from my elbow and haven't been able to take a decent pic in the 30 years I have been a full time fauxtographer.
Got all the awards hanging on my walls from a mongolian website for only $2 each!
I pretty much figured it was the old childish last ditch tactic of "discredit you to make myself look better and what I say right and your opinion wrong" that people that feel threatend resort to.
It makes me laugh my arse off when people get all pissy if you don't put pics up on forums for them to pick apart and tell you how they would have done them. You'd think it was a requirement of participating on the site or something.
I couldn't give less of a stuff what any other photographer thinks of my work.
They don't buy my pictures or are the people I have to impress to give me gigs.
The only people I could give a damn about what they think of my work is my clients because their opinion is firstly nothing like that of shooters and no matter how clever the critiqueing nitpickers are, they NEVER look at pictures like the paying customers do.
Now all the people that don't like what I say can feel like real champions because black will turn to white because I have admitted I'm a hopless photographer and they can feel better about themselves.
Glad we got got that out the way and can now get back to the real entertainment.
p.7 #8 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
glort wrote:
Oh!
Well I do suck!
Big time.
Worst shooter in the world.
Terrible.
Don't know my arse from my elbow and haven't been able to take a decent pic in the 30 years I have been a full time fauxtographer.
Got all the awards hanging on my walls from a mongolian website for only $2 each!
I pretty much figured it was the old childish last ditch tactic of "discredit you to make myself look better and what I say right and your opinion wrong" that people that feel threatend resort to.
It makes me laugh my arse off when people get all pissy if you don't put pics up on forums for them to pick apart and tell you how they would have done them. You'd think it was a requirement of participating on the site or something.
I couldn't give less of a stuff what any other photographer thinks of my work.
They don't buy my pictures or are the people I have to impress to give me gigs.
The only people I could give a damn about what they think of my work is my clients because their opinion is firstly nothing like that of shooters and no matter how clever the critiqueing nitpickers are, they NEVER look at pictures like the paying customers do.
Now all the people that don't like what I say can feel like real champions because black will turn to white because I have admitted I'm a hopless photographer and they can feel better about themselves.
Glad we got got that out the way and can now get back to the real entertainment.
p.7 #9 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
canerino wrote:
For what its worth, this is from an interview with Steve McCurry talking about his transition from film to digital:
"Moving to digital has helped dramatically. In the days when I used film, I could go though between 800 to 1000 rolls of film on a single shoot of which only 20 to 25 really exceptional photos would be chosen for use."
So that's 19,000ish on the low end if he used 24 exposures per roll to 36,000 on the high end if he used 36 exposure rolls to get to TWENTY FIVE SHOTS.
I'd consider the body of work he's talking about; which is almost definitely photojournalism and or marketing - not weddings. Thus, it was quite common for a PJ to shoot 20k images and only get 10-20 published. While he might very well have used 24 or 36 exposure film, the truth is 12 exposure was used quite often "back in the day". I only used 12 exposure myself because I only had one camera, and wanted variety between color and B&W. So, yea, I'd shoot numerous rols a week. It's not uncommon. Weddings, however, are completely different. Most wedding film 'togs limit themselves to 10-20 rolls for a reason.
p.7 #10 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
But he has been doing it for THIRTY YEARS! And has AWARDS!!! You know what they say: a word is worth a thousand pictures.
SloPhoto wrote:
Your work changes the weight of your word.
It does matter here. Maybe not for the casual lurker, but you have been throwing your opinion around like it has high value.
Sep 03, 2014 at 09:39 PM
glort Offline • • • • [X]
p.7 #11 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
Inku Yo wrote:
Ding ding ding! We have a winner!
Geez that was original.
Think it up all by yourself did you? Can I use it sometime?
Someone sure is opinionated about the way other people shoot. I'd like to see the work produced by someone with such strong opinions.
Meh.
I wouldn't bother if I were you.
I had a look at the work of someone that is strongly opinionated about taking 4-8000 shots at a wedding and states all sorts of stretches of the imagination to push their point and I saw nothing that changed my views on the matter or I thought came near justifying anything they were imploring was so important.
Not to say their work wasn't nice enough, just that I couldn't see the justification to take the huge amount of shots they made out was so essential when what they showed was really nothing different or particularly outstanding to what I have seen so many other shooters that take a fraction of the number of frames produce.
I was beggining to think that I was missing out on some work the likes of which had never been seen or done before in the history of photography and the known universe but that wasn't the case. What I did see was in fact a lot of static shots of images that were posed ( not that there is anything wrong with that) and would only take a few frames to get the expressions that wouldn't be rapidly changing and could easily be directed to get them in a few shots at most. The candind and on the fly shots I did see as an over all proportion of what the shooter was promoting in no way justified the numbers of frames they were saying they take or went anyway to change my mind on the issue. Bit dissapointing really when you think that maybe you could be wrong and there was a better way of doing things but then discover it's not the case at all.
If I did have any of my pathetic, paltry, sucky work online for other photographers to nit pick, I'm pretty sure Their deep seated opinions and position on their differening work methods wouldn't be swayed in any way even what they saw was the most brilliant work they had ever laid eyes on.
Probably best to save your time and just stick to arguing the point here. Maybe with a bit of luck, maturity and use of logical points, you can change an opposing opinion?
Or maybe spending a few days going through your weddings from a month back and picking out the best speech shots from the 50 you took of every one that got up and said anything would be more productive?
Glad you like doing that. Personaly I'd feel it was a real chore and waste of time to end up with the same amount and quality of images I do now but that's just cause my work sucks the big one.
p.7 #12 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
amonline wrote:
I'd consider the body of work he's talking about; which is almost definitely photojournalism and or marketing - not weddings. Thus, it was quite common for a PJ to shoot 20k images and only get 10-20 published.
Isn't this the point though? When high volume shooters are doing it because they are approaching weddings like a PJ project? Of course there are elements that are more static and predictable that you don't need a flurry of bursts to capture but if you're trying to delve deeper than what's on the surface and keep things as authentic as possible, is it not that much of a stretch to see that someone approaching weddings in truly PJ fashion is creating a buttload more exposures than anyone approaching it with a more traditional mentality?
p.7 #13 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
glort wrote:
Geez that was original.
Think it up all by yourself did you? Can I use it sometime?
Meh.
I wouldn't bother if I were you.
I had a look at the work of someone that is strongly opinionated about taking 4-8000 shots at a wedding and states all sorts of stretches of the imagination to push their point and I saw nothing that changed my views on the matter or I thought came near justifying anything they were imploring was so important.
Not to say their work wasn't nice enough, just that I couldn't see the justification to take the huge amount of shots they made out was so essential when what they showed was really nothing different or particularly outstanding to what I have seen so many other shooters that take a fraction of the number of frames produce.
I was beggining to think that I was missing out on some work the likes of which had never been seen or done before in the history of photography and the known universe but that wasn't the case. What I did see was in fact a lot of static shots of images that were posed ( not that there is anything wrong with that) and would only take a few frames to get the expressions that wouldn't be rapidly changing and could easily be directed to get them in a few shots at most. The candind and on the fly shots I did see as an over all proportion of what the shooter was promoting in no way justified the numbers of frames they were saying they take or went anyway to change my mind on the issue. Bit dissapointing really when you think that maybe you could be wrong and there was a better way of doing things but then discover it's not the case at all.
If I did have any of my pathetic, paltry, sucky work online for other photographers to nit pick, I'm pretty sure Their deep seated opinions and position on their differening work methods wouldn't be swayed in any way even what they saw was the most brilliant work they had ever laid eyes on.
Probably best to save your time and just stick to arguing the point here. Maybe with a bit of luck, maturity and use of logical points, you can change an opposing opinion?
Or maybe spending a few days going through your weddings from a month back and picking out the best speech shots from the 50 you took of every one that got up and said anything would be more productive?
Glad you like doing that. Personaly I'd feel it was a real chore and waste of time to end up with the same amount and quality of images I do now but that's just cause my work sucks the big one.
Can I see your portfolio? I mean, because really, if I've been wasting my time all along, I would really love to see the work of a truly talented photographer. Perhaps then I can find the motivation to be a wedding sniper and not a wedding spray and prayer.
p.7 #14 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
dhp_sf wrote:
Isn't this the point though? When high volume shooters are doing it because they are approaching weddings like a PJ project? Of course there are elements that are more static and predictable that you don't need a flurry of bursts to capture but if you're trying to delve deeper than what's on the surface and keep things as authentic as possible, is it not that much of a stretch to see that someone approaching weddings in truly PJ fashion is creating a buttload more exposures than anyone approaching it with a more traditional mentality?
I think there is a major difference in photographing a wedding where you know what's coming *most* of the time, and traveling the world photographing events where you have no idea what's to be expected from minute to minute, and you haven't been in a lab's reach in 500 rolls.
Sure, in both, it's a one-shot opp; but when you're in a foreign land, you get even less second chances. It was also not uncommon to be told to shoot xxxx number of images by those that hire you - whether it was needed or not. At the same time, there were plenty of the same type of photographers who could get 10 publish-worthy shots in 100 images.
The real point, as has been said many times by several here, is it doesn't matter how you get your shots. My interest was, how does it affect the client if those that create considerable extra work start to eat into what a client deems a reasonable delivery time? What would a publication tell you if they expected something in two weeks, but you told them because you have to go through 10,000 images, it's gonna be 6?
Maybe I'm getting a little "off topic", but this is where I see concern as it correlates with high volume shooting.
p.7 #15 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
amonline wrote:
I think there is a major difference in photographing a wedding where you know what's coming *most* of the time, and traveling the world photographing events where you have no idea what's to be expected from minute to minute, and you haven't been in a lab's reach in 500 rolls.
Sure, in both, it's a one-shot opp; but when you're in a foreign land, you get even less second chances. It was also not uncommon to be told to shoot xxxx number of images by those that hire you - whether it was needed or not. At the same time, there were plenty of the same type of photographers who could get 10 publish-worthy shots in 100 images.
The real point, as has been said many times by several here, is it doesn't matter how you get your shots. My interest was, how does it affect the client if those that create considerable extra work start to eat into what a client deems a reasonable delivery time? What would a publication tell you if they expected something in two weeks, but you told them because you have to go through 10,000 images, it's gonna be 6?
Maybe I'm getting a little "off topic", but this is where I see concern as it correlates with high volume shooting....Show more →
Your line of thought has me wondering now, too. I wonder what the average cost of photography is between the one-shot-nailers and the overshooters.
I don't think shooting more adds tremendously to the workload. Sure, it take a bit longer to go through the images, but aside from that, aren't we all delivering around the same final number? Or, are people who are delivering more images charging (and receiving) higher prices accordingly?
I mean, I've see in the other post where people are delivering 300 or so final images. Those better be mind blowing shots or those people aren't charging that much and the clients basically shrug their shoulders and go, "Oh well, I guess we got what we paid for."
p.7 #16 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
When I shot weddings with film I had to time and capture the moment. When I had digital I timed and got the moment but then had the luxury of being able to 'work' the moment. Get the shots leading up to the moment, get the shots after the moment, get an even better moment that happened a few seconds afterwards which I would not have always had the spare film to capture because the moment was a 'must have'. Still don't ascribe to the 'machine gun' mode of shooting but digital does give you the ability to shoot more and present more to build a more comprehensive picture of the wedding. It allows multiple shots of portrait or groups so that you don't have to worry about the dreaded closed eyes or at least have somewhere to clone from. It means you can shoot at wide open apertures and take enough frames to guarantee one in focus (I've never seen a camera yet that could hit perfect focus even close to every time at f1.2-1.8 in low light, including my 5D3). It allows you to experiment, to try new things.
But most of all, despite the very valid points that machine gunners can make guests uncomfortable, equipment is worn down far faster and a lot of people are ignoring culling time (time=money!) when considering profit margins, screw what others opinions are. If you are making money by doing what you are doing then it is correct for you. Although there is an art element, end of the day, it's a business. The old guard will correctly say that they used to build better quality stuff in the past but it's the people making stuff which is cheap and disposable who are the multi billion dollar corporations. Even if it is all art, the art world has proven that there is no right way or wrong way and would be aghast at the idea that one persons way of expression can possibly be invalid just because it is more primitive. Add those two facts together and it's an interesting theoretical discussion for a photography forum but has practically zero world use application. Do what makes your business successful for you. If that means you are not Cartier Bresson shooting the perfect decisive moment in a single frame (he didn't anyway, apparently his contact sheets are a revelation) then so be it. We are not all world famous ground breaking photographers but we do need to put food on the table.
p.7 #17 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
amonline wrote:
The real point, as has been said many times by several here, is it doesn't matter how you get your shots. My interest was, how does it affect the client if those that create considerable extra work start to eat into what a client deems a reasonable delivery time? What would a publication tell you if they expected something in two weeks, but you told them because you have to go through 10,000 images, it's gonna be 6?
Maybe I'm getting a little "off topic", but this is where I see concern as it correlates with high volume shooting.
I think you're stretching the topic to validate your viewpoint that high-volume shooting is a problem for clients. Lots of people who have said that they shoot through moments / overshoot / high-volume shoot / whatever you want to call it have stated that it doesn't affect their delivery or post process time by much more than maybe an extra hour max to cull down a set.
That's a far cry away from pushing a 4 week turnaround to 3-6 months due to shooting more frames at a wedding. As has been said again and again, high volume shooting does not equate to high volume delivery. If it's not for you, that's totally fine, but please stop presuming that it is affecting those who choose to shoot this way in ways that it actually is not.
p.7 #18 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
Part of the topic relates to "end product". Time is an "end product" in the eyes of the client.
How do you know high volume shooting does not lead to longer delivery time? Common sense dictates that it can and possibly does in at least some cases.
Not sure why you're picking a fight with me. I've been neutral on the whole topic of high volume. I just brought up a valid possible byproduct.
p.7 #19 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
amonline wrote:
Part of the topic relates to "end product". Time is an "end product" in the eyes of the client.
How do you know high volume shooting does not lead to longer delivery time? Common sense dictates that it can and possibly does in at least some cases.
Not sure why you're picking a fight with me. I've been neutral on the whole topic of high volume. I just brought up a valid possible byproduct.
Not trying to pick a fight at all. It's just my personal experience is very contradictory to what you're suggesting so I feel compelled to respond to it. I've shot weddings that had a lot of action and ended up with a lot of frames as well as others where very little happened and ended up with half as many. It really doesn't take that much time to cull so I'm not sure why the product delivery time keeps coming up is all. Culling is the fastest part of the process. And processing photos isn't really that time-consuming either once you have an established workflow that is efficient/consistent. I've probably shot somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 weddings this year and have currently been able to keep up with editing to deliver within my promised 4-6 week time period while working with a starting point of around 4-6k images each wedding.
p.7 #20 · Overshooting vs decisive moment /// Is the end product all that matters?
Dear God. Are you reading reading these threads, or just a post here and there? I said in the other thread on the SAME topic that it's not necessarily in the culling. If one chooses to deliver *more* because they shoot *more*, wouldn't that add to their editing time? If 500 images takes 4-6 weeks, how long will 700 take? 1,000?
I guess you just don't get it, so we'll just say you win. It's obvious from your contradictory findings that I don't know anything. After nearly a decade shooting weddings for a living, I must be clueless. My opinion definitely shouldn't count.[/sarcasm]
I'm done with this topic. It's reaching *that* level.
