D. Diggler wrote:
468/1153 = 41% success rate. Not bad.
I'm not sure "success" is the right word unless you're delivering every photo that's in focus and people aren't blinking. He wouldn't be any more "successful" if he delivered 90% of the photos and half of them just weren't quite as good as the other half.
Yeah I wouldn't call it success either. I deliver the images that tell the best story. Out of the 41% I would say I'm happy with 1% of them. I don't think the number of images delivered or taken denotes quality of someone work. Just my 2 cents.
Be interesting to see how many some of these people would come back with if they had a camera that did 11 frames per second. Thirty-three shots of the first knife slice into the cake.
I'd hope that future cameras that can shoot oodles of fps will also offer lower frame rates to get a little variety in a burst without filling up cards needlessly.
One of the reasons I prefer the silent mode on my 5D3. A nice sedate 3fps
leethecam wrote:
I'd hope that future cameras that can shoot oodles of fps will also offer lower frame rates to get a little variety in a burst without filling up cards needlessly.
One of the reasons I prefer the silent mode on my 5D3. A nice sedate 3fps
Nikons have continuous low and continuous high, which can be programmed in the settings.
D. Diggler wrote:
Be interesting to see how many some of these people would come back with if they had a camera that did 11 frames per second. Thirty-three shots of the first knife slice into the cake.
I have no need for 11fps. Poor composition and poor angles and poor vision and no skill still equals 11fps of crap images.
leethecam wrote:
I prefer the silent mode on my 5D3. A nice sedate 3fps
I imagine the 5D3 is very quiet but I read the other day where someone was saying there are actually cameras out now where the stills are totally silent. Not positive but I think the Lumix GH4 was mentioned as one of those cams. Might be kinda weird, though, like "Did I really take the picture?"
Last wedding from Saturday. Ended up with 4900. About 1600 from one shooter, and another $1200 from another. Only 2000 were mine. I think of the final 1000 images delivered, about 700 were mine, 250 my second shooter's, and about 50 from my assistant.
Too many. I became too accustomed to shooting with my wife, who gives me 800-1000, and I shoot 2000. Plus, that means I'm only dumping 3 very fast CF cards.
This last wedding had my 3 CF cards, plus 3 SD cards which were slow as molasses, and anotehr 3 CF cards put onto my portable hard drive.
On a side note, Reggie (loosetrucks) shot with me, and seriously nailed it.
Prettym1k3 wrote:
Last wedding from Saturday. Ended up with 4900. About 1600 from one shooter, and another $1200 from another. Only 2000 were mine. I think of the final 1000 images delivered, about 700 were mine, 250 my second shooter's, and about 50 from my assistant.
Too many. I became too accustomed to shooting with my wife, who gives me 800-1000, and I shoot 2000. Plus, that means I'm only dumping 3 very fast CF cards.
This last wedding had my 3 CF cards, plus 3 SD cards which were slow as molasses, and anotehr 3 CF cards put onto my portable hard drive.
On a side note, Reggie (loosetrucks) shot with me, and seriously nailed it....Show more →
Yea, he was more consistent than I was when he shot with me.
Between myself, Scott, and reggie we had over 5K for a short wedding. It was a bit daunting, but the final coverage was solid through every single phase.
Been a member for quite awhile, just mostly lurking, but I have to comment on this thread. Looking at the numbers posted here makes me wonder if I am doing something wrong. My 2nd and I shot my last wedding with just over a total of 1000 frames (10 hours), with about 550 to be delivered. The electronic proof of the 80-page wedding book (yes, I use press books) was posted online for the couple to preview/approve in 8 days.
Rincon wrote:
Been a member for quite awhile, just mostly lurking, but I have to comment on this thread. Looking at the numbers posted here makes me wonder if I am doing something wrong. My 2nd and I shot my last wedding with just over a total of 1000 frames (10 hours), with about 550 to be delivered. The electronic proof of the 80-page wedding book (yes, I use press books) was posted online for the couple to preview/approve in 8 days.
There's no "wrong way." The idea of shooting more shouldn't be considered in a vacuum of just numbers. It's more about intention. Much of it is about "shooting through moments" as they unfold--it's a phrase I think that has been echoed several times. If that's an idea that you can maybe see a value in, I'd definitely suggest trying it out a bit and seeing if it fits how you see coverage or not. It may help you it may not, but the bottom line is that everyone is going to have their own approach. If you're open to exploring then I say go for it. If you're happy with what you're doing now, keep doing that.
