XT owners/users: % of good/bad pictures

[Catd]

Example: If you take about 10 pictures, how many of those pictures are "excellent" or *good* enough to post on this board?
I feel like I'm only taking 1 out of 10 *decent* pictures. But I'm 100% novice when it comes to this camera!

[gasrocks]

Don't you think it depends on the experience/talent of the photographer and not which body they are using?

[Tom W]

Indeed, the camera has a much better acceptable percentage than I do - that is, it does a better job of focusing, exposing, and recording an image compared to my ability to select & frame my subject.

[RuggerJoe]

Example: If you take about 10 pictures, how many of those pictures are "excellent" or *good* enough to post on this board?
I feel like I'm only taking 1 out of 10 *decent* pictures. But I'm 100% novice when it comes to this camera!

I would say I have less than 10% of what I take is post worthy. It took over 700 shots to get the 55 shoots I put up on Flickr (www.flickr.com/photos/rugerjoe - Comments are most welcome). But I would say thats more in my photography skills in general and not a reflection of the camera.

[75D]

I have to agree with everyone else (in my case)it is not the camera but the operator.
I am still getting used to it and only about 10% are acceptable, and only a few of them would I post.

Wayne

[i_will]

It's all up to the user. I've taken about 8000 pictures so far but would only pick out a dozen or so if I actually had to make a portfolio. I take pictures for my organization (mainly sports) and put up about 90% of my football shots on my website just to make everyone happy (the fact I took a picture of them and put it on my site). My target audience is every other FSA around Texas which is probably about 1000-1500 combined, so I usually put up whatever pictures I take unless they come out really blurry.

[peacock]

I've taken about 10,000 picture in 3-4 months with the XT / 350d , most of these might be labeled as "crap":lol: but I like to think of them as my learning curve;) very few of the rest I am totaly happy with but I guess that makes me want to improve. I'm also not shy about posting images that I dont think are that great , why ? because I find the imput of others helpful , and there is a wealth of talent here to learn from:)

[1goodshot]

I got to get a new 350D if you can get 1 good picture out of 10. Right now I use a 10D and only get 1 or 2 good ones out of 100.

[Lani]

Example: If you take about 10 pictures, how many of those pictures are "excellent" or *good* enough to post on this board?
I feel like I'm only taking 1 out of 10 *decent* pictures. But I'm 100% novice when it comes to this camera!

I ALMOST have to agree with you. However, I notice that I get fair photos only in very good lighting/tripod. I need to learn a lot more about exposure-n-white ballance that's for sure. I do get many photos that I don't think are very good. I have a few decent photos, but many of my shots are not very sharp or clear, nothing I would call excellent. I have seen some wonderful/excellent photos taken with the kit lens of the XT, but I have not come up with one of those yet. I would suggest as I am doing, is to keep trying differnt setting and learn how to use our XT. On the downside, I have read that some XT owners needed to send the camera and lens, back to Canon for re-calibration. I hope I won't have to do that. I would like a real professional photographer to take about 10 shots with my XT and see the results!

[Jwreich]

I can say this, my XT takes great pictures based on the camera settings. The creative modes are my friend and I've learned how to use them.

Regarding your questions, most of my pictures suck; the rest really suck. I always look at my images and wish I had framed just a little differently, maybe used a larger f-stop, zoomed in just a bit more, used that fill flash... I can't fault the camera for my lack of vision. If your wondering about the abilities of the Canon XT, I would like to reassure that the camera is a good tool very capable of creating stunning images.

I know of cases where my friends have had technical issues with their camera but all issues were in manufacturing and quickly resolved by Canon. Some issues include bad LCD, Damaged focus screen, poor battery contacts.

All in all I like my XT and enjoy the images it helps to create.

[Technological]

I've had my XT for a week and a half, and have taken just short of 1300 pictures. Of those, i have about 150 are "acceptible" for me to upload to my fotki site. However, of those, i'd say 10 or so are what i consider to be good shots.

Then again, i'm a super novice as well. I put 150 shots through the camera on tuesday in fairly crappy weather, and low light conditions.. all while using 100 iso.. WAY TO GO IDIOT! lol

On the upside, i just found the B-W mode on my camera.. lol Maybe i should read the manual.

[felix21685]

hey ruggerjoe..

this link didnt work www.flickr.com/photos/rugerjoe

[Catd]

Yes, it's definitely the person behind the camera. That's why I mentioned I'm *new* to the camera.
It is a learning experience. So on a scale of 1-10, 10 being a *professional* photographer 1 being a novice with a digital XT . WHere are on that scale and what is your % when it comes to pictures. I can see why I have a low %... because I'm still learning the camera.
Editing pictures helps a lot. I am harder on myself when it comes to critiquing my own pictures.

[Catd]

I've had my XT for a week and a half, and have taken just short of 1300 pictures. Of those, i have about 150 are "acceptible" for me to upload to my fotki site. However, of those, i'd say 10 or so are what i consider to be good shots.

Then again, i'm a super novice as well. I put 150 shots through the camera on tuesday in fairly crappy weather, and low light conditions.. all while using 100 iso.. WAY TO GO IDIOT! lol

On the upside, i just found the B-W mode on my camera.. lol Maybe i should read the manual.

I think your pictures came out great. I can do landscapes *decent*... but it's pictures of people (children) I need to really get good at. My % rate in the green box, sports mode, etc is ~45%. My % rate in the creative zone is 10%.

[Nidz]

Yeah It all comes down to skill.. Not every pic you take will have the wow factor.. I reckon I could roll off a whole gig of pictures and still only find about 10 worthy of posting.. I shoot nothing but RAW though.

[rabidmoose171]

1 out of 10 is by no means bad...

Im no great photographer, but if i take 200 pictures at a football game, i usualy only consider 8-10 worthy. Im picky though, and could probably find another 40 that work.

[bolantej]

I am not a good photog so I only have about 4 or 5 photos which I can be proud of in a technically photog fanatic kind of way. that's outs of like 2,000 images.

[jesusdelallata]

Catd, I think it's important to note that photography is subjective. What is great for one person might be crap for another. Technically speaking, the Rebel XT is a good camera. Everytime I download my pics and I think some are terrible, I look at the data and it reveals to me that it was my error. I used a film SLR for five years before going to a digital SLR. This, for me has really made a big difference. I learned as much as possible about the technical side of photography. The other side is your eye for capturing outstanding images. You have to master both. It's an ongoing quest.

I've shot three weddings this year on film, where there was no room for error. I was fortunate that the clients loved the photos I presented to them (approximately 9 out of every 10 shots were given to the couple). Some that I thought were crap were some of their favorites. Personally, I am my worst critic.

The beauty of digital SLR's is that you can shoot withought the expense of film, review your photos, look at what you did right or wrong, share with others in this forum so they can critique, and go out and shoot better and better every time.

Most of all, it should be FUN. Keep on shooting.

[lostdoggy]

I think your pictures came out great. I can do landscapes *decent*... but it's pictures of people (children) I need to really get good at. My % rate in the green box, sports mode, etc is ~45%. My % rate in the creative zone is 10%.

Catd you must be a great photographer. I shall bow down to you with 45% keepers. In the pass year I fired off over 10,000 shots maybe 100 are keepers that is 1%. As for kids I have an 18 month old running around the house and they are very hard catch but every now and then I get a winner.

[cdesperado]

Just to throw in my 2cents here....

The percentage of keepers should not be a concern to you, in any way. It depends not only on your experience, your familiarity with the camera, and your creative abilities, but more importantly - it depends on WHAT you are shooting.

Candids, Weddings, Sports, Fashion, Artistic, Underwater... they are all extremely different. It's like having different types of cars. All of them will get you from Point A to Point B.

Don't worry about your "keeper ratio" - forget about it, it means nothing, absolutely nothing. Just keep practicing, keep learning, keep reaching out.

[chrishunt]

hey ruggerjoe..

this link didnt work www.flickr.com/photos/rugerjoe (http://www.flickr.com/photos/rugerjoe)
He spelled his handle wrong in the link :)

Try this:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ruggerjoe

[sboerup]

Just to throw in my 2cents here....

The percentage of keepers should not be a concern to you, in any way. It depends not only on your experience, your familiarity with the camera, and your creative abilities, but more importantly - it depends on WHAT you are shooting.

Candids, Weddings, Sports, Fashion, Artistic, Underwater... they are all extremely different. It's like having different types of cars. All of them will get you from Point A to Point B.

Don't worry about your "keeper ratio" - forget about it, it means nothing, absolutely nothing. Just keep practicing, keep learning, keep reaching out.

Just as he said, it depends on your experience and what you are shooting. Looking at your signature, you will be a lot more satisfied with your photos if you had better lenses. I've owned a number of lenses (one just like your 75-300 canon) and I have produced good images, but nothing like switching to really good lenses. Remember, cameras don't take pictures, lenses do. Cameras just store the light. True that the camera does make a difference, but the lens quality will make a HUGE difference. Just my .02 cents.

[Mitcon]

I'm very happy with my 350D/XT, when I first started using it I used the basic mode for a day or 2 and was lucky to get 6 shots I liked out of almost 350 lol. Now I'm using the creative modes only and I have about 90-97% keepers, there is a down side to this. I take way too many shots and need to work out a better system for storing all these dang photos. I hate having to look for a image I've saved now, it's such a pain going through 90 CD's and almost 31 DVD's. How do you people store and catalog your images ?

[Hellashot]

Yes, it's definitely the person behind the camera. That's why I mentioned I'm *new* to the camera.
It is a learning experience. So on a scale of 1-10, 10 being a *professional* photographer 1 being a novice with a digital XT . WHere are on that scale and what is your % when it comes to pictures. I can see why I have a low %... because I'm still learning the camera.
Editing pictures helps a lot. I am harder on myself when it comes to critiquing my own pictures.

You are shooting RAW and staying away from auto modes including P, right? I only started getting good images when going into creative modes to TELL the camera what settings to use. Makes a huge difference.

[Catd]

Catd you must be a great photographer. I shall bow down to you with 45% keepers. In the pass year I fired off over 10,000 shots maybe 100 are keepers that is 1%. As for kids I have an 18 month old running around the house and they are very hard catch but every now and then I get a winner.

My youngest will be 2 next week.

What lens should I be using? It seems like the lens that came with the camera you have to get close, the one I bought you have to keep a little distance. I need something in between.

I also realized last night how much I shake! I'm going to need a new tripod. Would the batter grip help when I want to move around with the camera?

[thebrewer]

When I started out with the 350 in May, I was getting 1 or 2 out of 10. Now it is more like 5-7 out of 10 that I am happy with. Practice makes perfect! Keep at it! Hard drive space is cheap and bad shots can be erased. Take advantage of that and when in doubt, take the shot. The more you shoot, the more you will learn. :)

Rich

[Sageg]

First post here. :)

I get some good pictures, some bad pictures. But the bad pictures are not the result of the camera--just user error. I shoot manual, so I only have myself to blame if they don't turn out. :)

It's a good camera. I've also spent time learning the limitations of my lenses (no L yet), which I thought important.

[Neilyb]

When I first got my XT I was running images off left right and centre....in JPG format. And I would maybe like 5-10 % of them, mainly as I was playing around freely since I didn't need to develop a film anymore.

THEN I discovered RAW....can anyone tell me, since I had this argument with the GF at the weekend, if RAW is cheating? Basically you can over or under expose, then adjust in you program of choice. You can (and have to ) up your saturation, Hue and sort out the White Balance. Now the camera normally does all that for you when the JPG is saved, and RAW files come out with no adjustments....so its not cheating in my book, JPG's are as you are doing the work not an automatic processor.

But if you were to forego, lets say, an ND grad filter and instead export two images from RAW files (one underexposed) then composite them in Photoshop to get the effect of an ND grad filter....is that cheating? Does it affect the quality of the image in any way doing this exposure on your computer?

I know you can't make a bad image into a good image, but you can make a reasonable image look alot better by RAW processing, cropping and Photoshop..... so I suppose my hit rate has increased alot, maybe to 20-30%, but I will still on USE a few of these images to put on the web or send to magazines or enter comps.

RAW rocks:lol:

[mebailey]

Dont worry about your keeper percentage. Just try to learn something from your errors or the cameras shortcomings. Hey now that you are digital you can throw alot more away with less financial adversity!

[lostdoggy]

My youngest will be 2 next week.

What lens should I be using? It seems like the lens that came with the camera you have to get close, the one I bought you have to keep a little distance. I need something in between.

I also realized last night how much I shake! I'm going to need a new tripod. Would the batter grip help when I want to move around with the camera?

I been shooting alt with 50f1.8 at home because it is fast and cheap, around $75. As for shake a faster lens helps, I use Av mode and natural lighting when possible if not a Sigma EF500 DG Super flash. Shaking has alot to do with technique in holding the camera. I ike to brace my left elbow against my body and hold my breath when I'm ready to fire. Alot like fire a gun. You can test this by shooting a still subject like a can goods w/ label and then enlarge to see if what you have focus on is sharp or blurred. Prints are good way to find out if ts the camera or you.

Here is my little boy: http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b381/lostdoggy/Dufus%20Monkey/CRW_0221PSWebbed.jpg

[lostdoggy]

When I first got my XT I was running images off left right and centre....in JPG format. And I would maybe like 5-10 % of them, mainly as I was playing around freely since I didn't need to develop a film anymore.

THEN I discovered RAW....can anyone tell me, since I had this argument with the GF at the weekend, if RAW is cheating? Basically you can over or under expose, then adjust in you program of choice. You can (and have to ) up your saturation, Hue and sort out the White Balance. Now the camera normally does all that for you when the JPG is saved, and RAW files come out with no adjustments....so its not cheating in my book, JPG's are as you are doing the work not an automatic processor.

But if you were to forego, lets say, an ND grad filter and instead export two images from RAW files (one underexposed) then composite them in Photoshop to get the effect of an ND grad filter....is that cheating? Does it affect the quality of the image in any way doing this exposure on your computer?

I know you can't make a bad image into a good image, but you can make a reasonable image look alot better by RAW processing, cropping and Photoshop..... so I suppose my hit rate has increased alot, maybe to 20-30%, but I will still on USE a few of these images to put on the web or send to magazines or enter comps.

RAW rocks:lol:

Shooting in RAW is in no way Cheating. RAW allows the photog the control to adj WB and exposure after the fact. Its like pushing an pulling when developing film. It gives the Photog more control in their creativety that was difficult to master in film but made readily available in the digital realm. No darkroom needed.

[Catd]

I been shooting alt with 50f1.8 at home because it is fast and cheap, around $75. As for shake a faster lens helps, I use Av mode and natural lighting when possible if not a Sigma EF500 DG Super flash. Shaking has alot to do with technique in holding the camera. I ike to brace my left elbow against my body and hold my breath when I'm ready to fire. Alot like fire a gun. You can test this by shooting a still subject like a can goods w/ label and then enlarge to see if what you have focus on is sharp or blurred. Prints are good way to find out if ts the camera or you.

Thanks for the advice.

I picked up some prints today at Costco... this time I say 'no' to their auto thingy. Made a HUGE difference in color. I was trying to compare them with Walgreens, Target and other digital places. Those were horrible.
My landscaping pictures came out very good, but it's the kids' pictures I want the 'wow' effect with.

[ssim]

Dont worry about your keeper percentage. Just try to learn something from your errors or the cameras shortcomings. Hey now that you are digital you can throw alot more away with less financial adversity!

I agree with this attitude alot. What defines a "keeper", you and only you.

We see alot of the "I took 60,000 shots last year and I only kept maybe 10%". If you got a brand new film camera do you think we would be shooting as many frames as we do. Hell no. Speaking for myself, I try some weird stuff hoping that it will work out or look ok. If it doesn't I don't worry about it brining my "keeper ratio" down. The advent of digital allows to shoot to our hearts content and learn alot from it. If you are having fun doing photography then you have come a long way. If you come home and download your card and say "why am I doing this", perhaps you need another hobby. For me it is all about having fun. Photography has given me alot of personal reward and I don't care how many keepers are in it.

In order for me to post a picture here, I like it to be sharp and generally have a good overall color balance. It helps if there is a bit of a story behind it. I view alot of the photos in the share section but only comment on the ones that really grab me. I would rather not post than to post an overly soft or out of focus shot unless that was the look that I was going for.

Don't sweat the keepers versus the number of times you press the shutter. Go out and have fun.

[lostdoggy]

Thanks for the advice.

I picked up some prints today at Costco... this time I say 'no' to their auto thingy. Made a HUGE difference in color. I was trying to compare them with Walgreens, Target and other digital places. Those were horrible.
My landscaping pictures came out very good, but it's the kids' pictures I want the 'wow' effect with.

Do you Photo Shop them before printing?

[lostdoggy]

Thanks for the advice.

I picked up some prints today at Costco... this time I say 'no' to their auto thingy. Made a HUGE difference in color. I was trying to compare them with Walgreens, Target and other digital places. Those were horrible.
My landscaping pictures came out very good, but it's the kids' pictures I want the 'wow' effect with.

There is a thread on Costco printing, where they were talking about print option when uploading defaulting option is auto adjustment. If you PS then that eeds to be off.

[mackb]

It's all up to the user. I've taken about 8000 pictures so far but would only pick out a dozen or so if I actually had to make a portfolio. I take pictures for my organization (mainly sports) and put up about 90% of my football shots on my website just to make everyone happy (the fact I took a picture of them and put it on my site). My target audience is every other FSA around Texas which is probably about 1000-1500 combined, so I usually put up whatever pictures I take unless they come out really blurry.

I have only posted about 10 or so out of over 10,000. I'm learning everyday, today I read an article on mt E-TTL 550 for flash photography, wow ...........even after all these pictures I have a way to go!

Good question for a thread

[Catd]

There is a thread on Costco printing, where they were talking about print option when uploading defaulting option is auto adjustment. If you PS then that eeds to be off.

I didn't use any software to *fix* them. I wanted to see what I was doing wrong.
I made the mistake and bought Photoimpact pro instead of photoshop. Only because of the slideshow w/music option that stood out.
I almost bought Photoshop today at Costco. But need to look around at prices. I was very happy with with the auto correction being turned off.

[Catd]

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a343/catdill1/baby.jpg


I would say this picture is ok because it's blurry by the mouth. I do like the sharpness to the eyes.

[Icecamp]

Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop.
Ansel Adams

[cdesperado]

The mouth is not "blurry"... your depth of field is shallow.

That's actually a fairly interesting image.

[Catd]

The mouth is not "blurry"... your depth of field is shallow.

That's actually a fairly interesting image.

Shallow? How could I correct that.
My daughter was standing behind me (I was sitting on that blue object). I turned around and shot the picture. Then said "yuck" because that blue chair was not sanitary.
I would've liked the blue bench to be 'sharp' too.

Well, back to my how-to book. I have so much to learn....

[jesusdelallata]

Catd, I have to agree with cdesperado...it's a heck of an image. Like I said in my earlier post: What is good for one person is crap to others. For me, this image is very nice.

[lostdoggy]

Shallow? How could I correct that.
My daughter was standing behind me (I was sitting on that blue object). I turned around and shot the picture. Then said "yuck" because that blue chair was not sanitary.
I would've liked the blue bench to be 'sharp' too.

Well, back to my how-to book. I have so much to learn....

DOF is control with the aperature setting with the aperature wide open (lower number like f2.8) the shallower the DOF. With the aperature closed (higher # like f22) the deeper the DOF. Shallow DOF means that less of the image will be in focus where as higher DOF means more of the image will be in focus. Shallow DOF is not a bad thing for example if you want to take a picture of a person the background is distracting or untidy you would want the bg to be blurred (shallow DOF). Here is an example (it was blurred in PS)

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b381/lostdoggy/Dufus%20Monkey/MuscleBeachSignedReduced.jpg

This one was enhanced in PS:
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b381/lostdoggy/Dufus%20Monkey/CRW_9030Reduced.jpg

[DocFrankenstein]

It depends on how careful I want to be with my camera. If I'm on a trip and only have 1.2 gigs and 6mp raw files, I get about 90% of the keepers, because i try to save space.

If I'm shooting a concert, I can go through a 1000 images and not get a single one the way I wanted it to be.

[kram]

The keeper ratio sometimes seems to matter - if you take only a few shots of a scene and not having a keeper is a real loss.

I normally try many different settings for the shots I really like and that way, my kepper ratio of 10-20% seems pretty ok to me.

Again, I doubt if the ratio would go up though - as my skills improve, so would the bar :)

[pc411guy]

When I first got my XT I was running images off left right and centre....in JPG format. And I would maybe like 5-10 % of them, mainly as I was playing around freely since I didn't need to develop a film anymore.

THEN I discovered RAW....
Amen. Like a lot of people here, I'm a newbie and was only getting 1 out of 10 that I "thought" were decent. UNTIL I discovered RAW! I've really spent some time learning more about Photoshop and recently discovered a "better" raw converter - Rawshooter (freeware!) http://www.pixmantec.com/products/rawshooter_essentials.html

While I still am 1 for 10 "straight out of the camera", I'm able to use Rawshooter, cropping and other PS actions to bring this total up to 5-6 out of 10. Post production truly makes a difference!

[cdesperado]

To expand on the depth of field concept, in slightly simpler terms. The DoF refers the amount of a given image that remains in focus.

A shallow depth of field means that you have a primary focal point in the image (such as those eyelashes)... then objects closer to the camera and farther from the camera appear in varying degrees of focus.

A shallow depth of field is achieved with a truly "wide open" aperture, such as F1, F1.8, F2... on to about F4 or so. This wide aperture lets in a lot of available light. The iris is more open, similar to the iris of your eye getting larger.

A deep (large) depth of field is a narrow aperture, like F16, F22, F32 etc. This enables a larger portion of the image to be in tight focus, but lets in very little light. The iris is very narrow...

Hopefully that will give you a little more perspective. Keep shooting.