Shoot about 1000 and deliver 300-400. And they get about 200-250 more from my second photographer, if they chose that option...
My guiding principle when deciding whether or not to take a shot, and whether or not to edit a shot, is quality over quantity. I made the mistake early of delivering way too many images to clients, and the feedback I got was that they were overwhelmed, many of the photos looked the same, etc... So now they only see my best. Not only is it better for them but its better for business!
Why is it when someone does something different it is wrong, or insane?
Our customers love us, they seek us out because we deliver quantity AND quality. We typically deliver 1000 images and for us that is perfect.
A lot of our business is referral from very happy customers. And we have NEVER had a complaint about too many images. If anything, it helps our print sales.
We never look at those who deliver less and think they couldn't do better or their deliverable is lacking compared to ours. Each artist delivers their product in an individual way and that's what their clients want.
i do think there is some tendency to think that more is better, but that's just asinine, at least down to a certain point. i mean, if you charge average price and only deliver two hundred images....i think the customer got hosed. however, i don't think someone who delivers 2x as many as i do is some kind of hero, either.
basically, what the answers here tell me is that the 750-1200 that i shoot singlehandedly on a wedding day (not counting bridal sessions, etc.) is certainly a decent number. i know i work hard to cover as much as possible, and i also know that i occaisionally hit the button more than once just to make sure i get the shot. ultimately, i typically deliver between 500 and 800.
We average about 6500 images for a 10 hour wedding with 2 shooters, all raw (so about 70-80gb per wedding)...We edit down to about 600-800 per wedding for the clients.
