How many shots is enough?

[dshootist]

obviously, in the digital age, it could be thousands during a wedding shoot, but suppose you were to actually formulate a number for each stage of the day? most people i've encountered like to hear large numbers when they ask you how many proofs they get to look at, but aren't nearly as excited when they realize that they'll have to sit around and figure out which ones to pick. so the question is, how many is considered enough?

ps-i've done some research online and the numbers vary quite a bit, hence my curiosity with this issue...

[cmM]

depends on how many hours of coverage, and your shooting style.

[kampphoto]

When shooting a full day of wedding coverage - ie 10am - 10pm or so I usually shoot the better part of 2000 pictures... once I go through and sort out the shots I don't like, or shots that are fairly duplicate, the couple usually gets about 1500-1600 pictures... of course those are all on CD i print them a couple hundred proofs dependant on the package they choose.

[peterdoomen]

I take about 300, depending on what the couple has asked me...

but I'm willing to take thousands, if they want.

P.

[staciecd]

As a hopeful bride once day, I want as many as possible. I rather have too many than too few and risk them not turning out.

Stacie

[JeffJensen]

We average 1200 for full day coverage, delivering anywhere from 400 - 700. I think we may be getting to the point that we're overwhelming our clients.
But -- What you shoot we definately depend entirely upon style and length of coverage.

[tim]

On similar thread on fm, the average number of photos was about 100 per hour, which is about what I do. I hope to reduce this number as my skills improve. Remember not to underestimate the post processing time for such huge numbers of photos.

[Wilt]

As photographers we THINK we are doing our wedding clients a FAVOR(?) in giving them thousands of photos. Think again, guys'n'gals! Our daughter got married and was provided over 3000 photos, and it took them MONTHS to get the proofs (the guy had to postprocess them a certain amount for presentation, not necessarily fine tune to final quality level) and almost as long for the new bride and groom to look through all the photos and then choose!

[tim]

Shooting 800 images in RAW, using CS2 I can have proofs done in 2-4 hours, so people can see their proofs the next day on the net. If they wanted printed proofs, and didn't mind paying for them, add 2-3 days.

[TSEE]

For my BIL and his bride I shot about 700 photos that day and we had a reshoot with the two of them (lack of time between ceremony and reception to do formals of them so we decided to try again at a later date for some more) and ended up with about 150 more.
I usually just shoot away, better have to many than to few IMO. But I doubt I'd had out 1000's of proofs for the couple to look at, I'd select the best one out of each pose I'd done and the better ones from the pre-wedding, ceremony and reception and then let the B&G pick and choose which ones they wanted in their album. But that's just me and I'm new to this so take my opinion with a grain of salt. =oP

[DocFrankenstein]

It really depends on your shooting style.

I heard for "newspaper PJs" it's customary to shoot 5 exposures of every scene. This can easily give you 5k of pics...

On the other hand the "classical wedding photographers" using medium format had it mathematically precise. 10 rolls of film. Clients get 120 5*5 proofs.

IMO it's harder to shoot less, and it's more professional to do so. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

[dshootist]

When shooting a full day of wedding coverage - ie 10am - 10pm or so I usually shoot the better part of 2000 pictures... once I go through and sort out the shots I don't like, or shots that are fairly duplicate, the couple usually gets about 1500-1600 pictures... of course those are all on CD i print them a couple hundred proofs dependant on the package they choose.


what size are your shots if you get 1500-1600 on one CD? i give my clients a CD with each shot (usually around 400-500 for ceremony only) and each image is set to 4x6 at a resolution of 72 dpi. i'll crank out as many of the CDs as they want, but they wouldn't be able to get quality prints made. i've gone back and forth as to whether or not this is such a hot idea, but my clients like the portability of the CD and these days all of my customers have decent enough PCs with monitors capable of displaying good color.

BTW- i'm shooting with the 10D and my RAW files end up around 18MB after conversion.

i also forgot to mention that i go over the amount of shots that will be taken during the initial meet-n-greet with the BNG. this is usually determined by how long they've got me for. however, shooting photojournalist-style, i end up with more than originally quoted which isn't too bad because it allows for more to choose from on my end. mostly, i was curious as to what others did...

[buffalophotographer]

I generally shoot 500-800 for a full day wedding. I give the couple all the images in low quality so they can pick images for their albums then.

[pyterps]

I played around with some math one day and with an 8hr day of shooting and getting 2K-3K of shots one would have to take a picture about every 4 seconds. I just wonder what one would shoot every 4 seconds. I generally get 4-6 hundred images.

[sapearl]

Excellent point! I'm on the brink of going digital, so I'm still using medium format: 11 to 13 rolls of 24 exposure for about 8 - 10 hours of wedding coverage. By the time I end up tossing the shots that either I don't like or are just plain repetitive, the couple ends up getting around 280 or so very attractive, carefully selected, thoughtfully edited 5x5 prints, nicely presented in a preview book.

The fact is you DON'T want your client to see EVERY single photo you shoot that day. At worst, some of the shots will be just plain boring, while many will be simply uninspired and mundane if you are concentrating on volume in place of selective quality. You want your work to look its best, and I really don't believe you will be achieving that by shooting everything in sight with very little mental editing. You are shooting the bride with a fine dSLR tool, not an M16 set on full auto.

Selecting, editing and choosing your shots should take place in your head before you trip the shutter. Yes, I realize there's hardly any extra "material" cost involved when you're burning flash memory instead of film, and just providing CD proofing instead of real photos, but why do you want to bury the client in information? IMHO I just feel that 1000+ photos of the wedding day is just nuclear overkill.

Stop and consider: What really makes a better presentation to the bride and groom - (1) More than a 1000 ok images mixed in with some pretty good shots that will take a lot of time to review, or (2) just 200 - 300 carefully edited, really super photos that will really standout in the book?

I often have to phone the newlyweds a couple of times just to get them to return their final order to me in less than two months, and thats with less than 300 proofs. Why would I want to make this any more painful? Obviously this method works very well for me and your mileage may vary. But if you are not getting your orders back in a timely fashion, or if you are getting no reorders at all, then you may want to rethink your approach. End of rant.

As photographers we THINK we are doing our wedding clients a FAVOR(?) in giving them thousands of photos. Think again, guys'n'gals! Our daughter got married and was provided over 3000 photos, and it took them MONTHS to get the proofs (the guy had to postprocess them a certain amount for presentation, not necessarily fine tune to final quality level) and almost as long for the new bride and groom to look through all the photos and then choose!

[BLINN]

Hey people, my 2 cents. Any one who shots more then 1500 images is nuts. I don't care who you are, your nuts. I have shot at the most 900 fames, and even then I only gave the client 350-400 images on CD to chose from for an album. However I do not want to reprint 4x6,5x7 or 8x10's. The client paid for the package so they get the HIGH RES images on DVD to do with what they want. Of course I am obligated to print a couple of hundred and some larger print sizes (i.e. 16x20, 11x14), but own the images. Hopefully they will tell their friends about what the got and suggest me for they photography need.

Can't over welhem the clients, if it is too hard for them to choose this could look bad on your part. Like "He/she doesn't know what to shoot ,so they just took pictures of every thing; even the empty beer bottles..." Just remember this .... K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Stupid)

[SuzyView]

I usually take around 200-300 per location.

I have taken lots of pictures in the rain, which sometimes, are the best pictures. :)

SuzyView
20D, 10D, EOS 3, 550EX and great stuff

[sapearl]

I've seen the proofs of what you've just described: Frame #1 - Nice shot of bride, Frames 2-14, same as #1, bride barely moved, Frame #15 - shot of bride with groom, Frames 16 - 24, same as #15 very slight changes in pose. I could go on, but that would be just a waste of shots, I mean text.

It's so easy to blaze away with no planning, sense of composition, or imagination. It's much harder to be creative and choose your shots; during the course of a wedding day you may in fact have created some highly polished gems for the bride and groom, but they will be obscured amongst a thousand common pebbles.

End of second rant - more likely to come (gotta' knock off the caffeine this late in the day....:twisted: )

I played around with some math one day and with an 8hr day of shooting and getting 2K-3K of shots one would have to take a picture about every 4 seconds. I just wonder what one would shoot every 4 seconds. I generally get 4-6 hundred images.

[sapearl]

Are you printing the proofs yourself, do you drop a CD at the local lab, or do you ftp the files to a service bureau for output? Just curious how you've got your workflow arranged. Thanks.

When shooting a full day of wedding coverage - ie 10am - 10pm or so I usually shoot the better part of 2000 pictures... once I go through and sort out the shots I don't like, or shots that are fairly duplicate, the couple usually gets about 1500-1600 pictures... of course those are all on CD i print them a couple hundred proofs dependant on the package they choose.

[kampphoto]

yes i take a lot of pictures... i like burst mode... good for the folks that only take 400 shots... thats your style, not mine.

my work flow is as follows, i cover everything when i shoot, and end up with alot of shots. first pass of the photos i rate them using the good ol' star method in bridge. from there I eleminate the shots i don't like.

from there i break the photos down into categories - pre-ceremony, ceremony, formals, dinner/candid, dance/cake cutting/garter, first dance

so from the categories i go to work... most work going into the formals and the pre-ceremony.

from there i take the best photos from each section and make that a CD or three as the case may be. This turns into the couples main prints discs, makes their lives easier. The rest of the photos are put on CD and the couple can view / print as they please... sure there are alot, but they already have the best shots seperated.

[kampphoto]

oh and forgot to add... I take the shots for printed proofs to a local pro lab

[tjburns]

so your customers print all their own pics off the cds? or am i misunderstandint something...


sorry, i looked at ur website, so they order everything from your site, but just veiw from the cd?

[kampphoto]

they are able to either purchase prints from the online store - or if they choose to pay for a high res version of the images on cd-rom they can print themselves.

[richardj7]

When I took weddings with negative film, life was easy. I shot approximately 12 rolls with my Hasselblad, got them developped and proofed, no corrections, of course except those made by the lab. Shots were done more carefully. They chose an average of 24 - 8 x 10 our 10 x 10 for their album (up to 60 sometimes), and they would keep the proofs, after I removed the ones that were not good. Some would buy parent albums, and a 16 x 20 or above. Minimal corrrections, if any. End of story.

Now, with digital, the mentalities have changed. I average about 600 shots during the day. Of course, some of them want all the proofs on CD, some with the intention of reproducing them without paying pro prices for enlargements. The problem is that with digital, you want your photos to represent your quality work, and since they will be showing your photos on the net or even show their consumer lab reproductions to other people, it's your reputation and calling card for other potential brides. So, you end up working lots of (unpaid) hours to process them to the quality you want to project knowing what they will do with your proofs. This can represent anywhere from 10 to 30 hours additional, after the wedding day. So you have two options.

You watermark your proofs to prevent them from reproducing unretouched or semi-retouched proofs. They are usually not too happy with this option. Or you have to deal with budget-minded brides who will want full resolution CDs or DVDs at ridiculous prices, and small 8 x 10 orders for their album, if any. This is happening because lots of wedding photographers are weekend photographers, hoobyists with secured jobs whose only aim si to make an additional $200 or so per weekend. Since those brides will never see the difference between semi-pro quality, and pro quality, most of them will be content with the results.

So, quantity is self-defeating, unless you have a very good signed contract stipulating how many 8 x 10 (or other sizes) will appear in the album. You are just creating additional hours of work in post-production for yourself, for not much in return. I've recently changed my price list to give high-res CD and DVD options to compensate for lost profit in printing, and album. If they want a high-res CD and DVD, I've priced it at about 1/2 price from printed photos. I put a watermark on the proofs. I ask them what size they want on the high-res CD or DVD, including Web size, and charge accordingly.

The best solution, of course, is to go after medium to high-end brides where the output revenues are proportional to work performed, and quality delivered.

[Wilt]

richardj7,
Amen!
I have not yet shot a wedding on digital (except as a guest at friends' daughter's wedding) because I am not yet convince that digital is that panacea.
1. I used to show up for the wedding, the exposure latitude of color neg compensated for a lot of non-optimal exposures (including gross overexposure!)
2. Labs used to adjust the exposure on printing, do negative and print retouching time (I pass on the costs to the client), and all I would do is card the negatives for cropping as desired.
2d. For digital, Me (or hired help) sits in front of a PC to adjust the RAW for the exposure sins (and god help you if you overexpose any!), crop, sharpen, de-noise, and then 'retouch'

Less forgiving, more time spent, copying issues (which you mentioned). Hmmm, sounds like a big pain in the b*tt to me! Admittedly, digital has saved the bacon when a film exposure was hopelessly underexposed. And having the luxury of instantly switching to ISO1600 with digital can be a saviour. But the reliability of TTL film exposure is lost to erratic results with Canon ETTL, and I can't use Auto with a softbox on the Metz flash, so I have harsher light to contend with. Weddings and digital...I am not convinced!

[sapearl]

Maybe I'm missing something here and confess to being old school with my MF film, but seriously, how does the bride and groom react when they are handed a box of 1000+ loose proofs? Is this the new trend? And how long does it usually take for the bride and groom to return the final order when choosing from a large selection?

I have some customers that are overwhelmed when I hand them a proof book containing only 300 shots.

For whatever reason, very few people in my area have asked for preview CD's or web display services. So I continue using preview books to present my work in an organized and convenient format; keeps the shots in sequence, protects the work, and nothing gets lost. It also makes it easier for me to double check the order later on when I'm assembling the main album or other finished work.

I try to be open to new ideas and innovation, but not if it's going to make more work for me or overwhelm the client.

[richardj7]

When they have a lot to choose from, they are overwhelmed, more critical, take more time to choose, and have the impression that it's inexpensive because it projects the "it's cheaper by the dozen" mentality. You're right. It is unfortunately a new trend.

I tend to agree that it's better to present a print album to choose from than a Web site, UNLESS you have proven purchases from friends and families out of that Web site. In that case, the Web site sells more for you.

Another alternative that works well, it to actually sit with the couple for an hour or two in front of a large screen to show them possibilities of albums with an album design software. You've done your screening and sequencing prior to that meeting, of course. It's much harder to "remove" photos from a nice layed-out screen album, than to "not choose" single proofs on a Web site. Album design is really where to money is after the wedding.

If they were cheap on the front end, you can recapture some equitable money in the album design process. However, if it's only a CD they want, and you make no effort to show them what the album could look like were they to change their mind after the fact, you're not going to have a flourishing business.

[Zepher]

Wow, a lot of you take a lot of photos. I thought my friends took a lot of photos, about 800 to 1500 per event depending on how many people are at the reception, and they shoot all RAW.
I guess since each shot doesn't cost anything, people just shoot as much as they can.

[kampphoto]

the way i think of it... better to many then to few

[Zepher]

the way i think of it... better to many then to few
you are right, but my friend keeps complaining about the massive amounts of space they take up and the amount of time it takes her to sort through them, correct them if they need it, backing them up for safe keeping while she works on them etc....

[Kristy]

I want to know about Tim's workflow in doing 800 photos in 2-4 hours... that is pretty quick, isn't it?? I don't have CS2, but am using RSE and PS7... am I missing something? I don't edit 800 photos of anything ever, but I'm sure it would take me at least 10 hours... what am I doing wrong?

[tim]

I want to know about Tim's workflow in doing 800 photos in 2-4 hours... that is pretty quick, isn't it?? I don't have CS2, but am using RSE and PS7... am I missing something? I don't edit 800 photos of anything ever, but I'm sure it would take me at least 10 hours... what am I doing wrong?

Practice and experience, and not being too fussy. It's just for proofs. White ballance is batched. I hit 1-5 very quickly and don't 2nd guess myself. Exposure is usually left alone unless it's way off, in some situations I might use auto. Once people choose the photos they want I process them individually and carefully.

[kampphoto]

Batch processing is definatly the way to go. Saves you TONNS of time.

[tim]

Batch processing is definatly the way to go. Saves you TONNS of time.

I didn't realise there were any other options! If you have 800 pictures and don't batch it's going to take you days to get through everything. I could now confidently finish shooting a wedding at 9pm, get home, and easily have a proof DVD ready for a couple by the next morning after getting a good nights rest. It just takes time and practice to get your speed up.

[Kristy]

It's a nice lesson... I always try to make the proof look very nice and offer different coloring options, sepia, B&W, desaturated, etc.... So rather than doing that, you just post a basic version of the photo and the client can tell you what special touches they want on them... I'm a visual person so I always think it's nice to show different versions of the same photo. Takes too much time though and then they don't order everything from the shoot, so it's a huge waste of time.

I'm only doing maternity and newborn, so it is a much smaller scale that what you do, but I will take about 100 - 150 shots in a 2-hour session. (many breaks for poopy babies, and breastfeeding, etc....)

[tim]

I convert to B&W in RAW, and I typically include a couple of each type of effect, to show what can be done. That only takes 10 minutes to do.

[Wilt]

>>how many is considered enough?
ps-i've done some research online and the numbers vary quite a bit, hence my curiosity with this issue...<<

1 shot per hour is enough to not go over the limit for an extended period on the blood test...Oh! you didn't mean shots of liquor!

[CyberPet]

Last wedding portrait I shot, I shot about 120 images during 1.5 hour portrait session (almost none looking exactly the same) and picked out 60 of those as keepers that I let the B&G pick from. They did pick out half of them and did order prints and enlargements from those. I doubt that they would have picked out 50% if it was a whole day coverage though. But so far (only 6 weddings under my belt) the average is 50% of the images I post as my approved proof''s.

[BLINN]

Kristy I'm on your wagon. I pick the best out of all the frames taken and process those fully before giving them to the clients. My clients know that it can take up to three months for the processing to be complete,because I work full time and this is a side job/hobbie. I also don't make any money on reprints. I give the client all original images and the "Enhanced" images on CD at high res for them to do with what they want. This is a huge selling point. The pros around here only offer images at 4x6 on CD. Of course I live in northern Ontario and there is no where to get an 11x14 or 16x20 printed. So I tell them that if they want those sizes I will get it for them. I charge 2 times my cost for those prints.

[sapearl]

Mike, wedding and event work is my second job also (31 years). But whenever I do a job, I always want to make sure that I make a fair market wage and the client gets good value for their money. If I'm happy with what I earn, I keep shooting. If they're happy with what they receive, they keep sending me referrals.

Since you are giving them all of your "negatives" and they can then make as money prints as they want (ie. - you've given away your reproduction rights), I hope you are charging enough up front to compensate yourself? I typically charge a package price that covers all of my costs and time, up front, that guarantees me a profit on each job. Most of the pros in my area operate this way. If I get a reorder, that's icing on the cake. And my wife loves cake ;) .

Good clients do realize that quality work takes a goodly amount of time. If your surrounding pros only offer 4x6 on CD, you can offer something special by selling beautiful finished, hardcopy enlargements. I guess the type of service varies by region because most pros across the pond from you here in Northern Ohio offer finished enlargment albums and mounted portraits.

If convenient lab service is an issue, you have several alternatives. I used to take my material to a local ma & pa place until they went out of business. Now the UPS driver is my best friend and the new lab actually gives me faster service with a wider range of digital (and analog) services than the old place, even though they are in another city.

Kristy I'm on your wagon. I pick the best out of all the frames taken and process those fully before giving them to the clients. My clients know that it can take up to three months for the processing to be complete,because I work full time and this is a side job/hobbie. I also don't make any money on reprints. I give the client all original images and the "Enhanced" images on CD at high res for them to do with what they want. This is a huge selling point. The pros around here only offer images at 4x6 on CD. Of course I live in northern Ontario and there is no where to get an 11x14 or 16x20 printed. So I tell them that if they want those sizes I will get it for them. I charge 2 times my cost for those prints.

[sapearl]

I think we have a new photographic phenomena: "Digital Inflation". The greater the number of photos received by the client, the smaller the perceived value and effort that goes into each image, by said client. Yes, unfortunately a new trend.

When they have a lot to choose from, they are overwhelmed, more critical, take more time to choose, and have the impression that it's inexpensive because it projects the "it's cheaper by the dozen" mentality. You're right. It is unfortunately a new trend.

[Wilt]

>>I think we have a new photographic phenomena: "Digital Inflation". <<

The frequent perception is that you merely need to put a digital camera in the hands of a trigger finger and you will capture lots of valuable images, and additional images are 'for free' ! No perceived value to the artistic eye of the photographer or that there is a brain needed behind that eye and trigger finger. Little value is given to the act of composing and capturing the photo, and that is further diminished when hired photographers with digital cameras provide many many hundreds or thousands of photos.

That underlying perception is the reason why brides put disposable cameras on tables and hope to get lots of candids, etc. Then, when they come back with few if any 'keepers' the reality that a photographer has skill and an artistic eye finally is driven home.

[sapearl]

That's especially true after the bride disovers how many times the restrooms were used as "Photo Studios" by drunken guests with disposable camera in hand. :shock:



That underlying perception is the reason why brides put disposable cameras on tables and hope to get lots of candids, etc. Then, when they come back with few if any 'keepers' the reality that a photographer has skill and an artistic eye finally is driven home.

[kawter2]

depends on who my assistant is..,. how many hours.. what the vibe is..

Ive shot 16k w assistant's images on a 10 hr day and I have shot 4k w assistant's images total on 8 hour weddings. I'd say with the 18k

I am a HUGE HUGE fan of 5x's rapid fire on group shots.. it is a lot easier to edit out multiple shots than it is to swap grandma's eyeballs

[kawter2]

I think we have a new photographic phenomena: "Digital Inflation". The greater the number of photos received by the client, the smaller the perceived value and effort that goes into each image, by said client. Yes, unfortunately a new trend.


Sorry I completely disagree!!! 100%

[kampphoto]

I agree with you Kawter2... more the better

[NGrinerPhoto]

we had a meeting about this at the studio i contract for the other day. the new rule we have to follow is 100-125 images per hour. the editing was getting out of control for the proofers.

[Wilt]

Kawter, are you the supplier to the Canon retailer in your area? (judging from the list of Canon lenses and accessories in your list!)

[sapearl]

Am I to understand that you are both capturing a total of 16,000 images during a 10 hr wedding day? How long does it take you to edit that volume and what do you present to the client? Paper proofs? CD's? (again my informal survey).

Obviously this flow works for you, or you wouldn't keep doing it, so that's a success story in itself. I'm just having a real hard time dealing with the huge numbers; we must just do things differently in the midwest......

depends on who my assistant is..,. how many hours.. what the vibe is..

Ive shot 16k w assistant's images on a 10 hr day and I have shot 4k w assistant's images total on 8 hour weddings. I'd say with the 18k

I am a HUGE HUGE fan of 5x's rapid fire on group shots.. it is a lot easier to edit out multiple shots than it is to swap grandma's eyeballs

[Wilt]

<<capturing a total of 16,000 images during a 10 hr wedding day>>
At 1.5 seconds per image (and it is hard to sustain that rate!), it would take 6.7 hours just go thru the 16000 images. One either has to work for free and/or pay slave labor wages to pay for that time alone! On the other hand, it does not take that much longer to eliminate 6-10 frame sequence shot on Continuous when all 6-10 of them are badly exposed or out of focus, so 6.7 hours might be an exaggeration of the time required to review and week out before presenting to the client.

[kawter2]

At 1.5 seconds per image (and it is hard to sustain that rate!), it would take 6.7 hours just go thru the 16000 images.

Yes, as I sad that is the largest amount shot. You are right, If you are shooting a wedding for $600 it makes 0 sense to shoot that way because your overhead can not justify the expense of the edit.

[tim]

I want to know about Tim's workflow in doing 800 photos in 2-4 hours... that is pretty quick, isn't it?? I don't have CS2, but am using RSE and PS7... am I missing something? I don't edit 800 photos of anything ever, but I'm sure it would take me at least 10 hours... what am I doing wrong?

Here's an update. I shot a wedding today, 750 or so photos in 11 hours, once I had them on the computer and bridge had them cached it took 2 hours to do proofs, including about 20 minutes playing with photos in photoshop doing creative stuff.

[hemuni]

"You are shooting the bride with a fine dSLR tool, not an M16" set on full auto.

Im not a wedding photog, but this made me laugh :lol:

[sapearl]

Well, that's certainly how it strikes me - also could be considered the shotgun approach. Keep reloading both barrels and firing in the crowd's direction and you will always hit something.

Obviously this method is profitable and successful for some and the clients are happy. I can't fault that technique if the fotog is a successful businessman turning out a product that exhibits both quality and creativity.

But as I indicated before, I prefer to do my editing up front: pick and choose my shots carefully before tripping the shutter. This saves me a ton of time in PS. and also filing. Each to his own..... this is what works for me.

Im not a wedding photog, but this made me laugh :lol:

[Kristy]

Here's an update. I shot a wedding today, 750 or so photos in 11 hours, once I had them on the computer and bridge had them cached it took 2 hours (and 4 bourbons) to do proofs, including about 20 minutes playing with photos in photoshop doing creative stuff.


Okay so I guess I need to come to the land of the Kiwis for a lesson on improving my workflow.. .(may I please have red wine instead of burbon). That is amazing.... again... I have so much to learn. Thanks for always sharing your knowledge. :)

How's that wedding album coming along?

[RandyMN]

How many is too many? When you answer that question then you know the answer to how many is enough. I have actually gone overboard and taken too many that the shots became repeats of others and when you looked through them it actually got boring as too many looked alike. So as many shots as it takes to make sure everything is captured without unnecessary repetiiton, that is how many I would say is enough.

[tim]

I look at every photo, but for a second or less, unless I need to compare a few then it takes more time. Remember I'm mainly rating them 1-5 in bridge, and correcting any big mistakes in exposure and contrast. I wouldn't print them, photos get individual attention before they get used for anything serious.

[CyberPet]

Tim, I did you a favor here... but I won't give it a rest in PM. ;) :D

[Overexposed]

dshootist you started this thread with a simple question "How may shots is enough?" I'm seeing responses from a few hundred to 16,000. Cameras do have the ability to take several shots a second, but were talking about a wedding here, not the final lap of the Indianapolis 500. The number of shots I take depends on the amount of time and the size of the wedding. I average between 400-600 shots with the B&G seeing around 350-450.


I was always told that quality will always trump quantity

[jbstudios]

when you guys give the couples the proofs or choices are they all different shots? my last & first wedding shot i did about 500 but i know to take the crap ones out. my question is do you give them 2 shots of themselves with the family or chose the best one for them and only ever just give the best shot?

[sapearl]

For portaits and shots for various groupings I will always take at least 2-3 allowing for eye blinkers and squirming children. If these involve the bride & the whole entourage, there will be at least a couple of dozen.

Anything with an eye blink, bad pose or miserable expression gets tossed. Afterall, you want your best work to shine which means culling the herd. If two good shots are nearly identical, I will keep one as an exhibit sample or give it out as an order "freebie" later, rather than stuff the preview album with redundancy.

Unless someone is paying me a large sum of money to deliberately shoot a huge number of repetitive photos, I subscribe to the philosophy that less is more. Such an arrangement would be spelled out in my contract.

when you guys give the couples the proofs or choices are they all different shots? my last & first wedding shot i did about 500 but i know to take the crap ones out. my question is do you give them 2 shots of themselves with the family or chose the best one for them and only ever just give the best shot?

[Bama]

Have something to say here...

In Asia, the ceremonies are very lengthy and the attendence can number in the hundreds...In my wedding years ago, there were at least 1000 people. The actual ceremony took 3 hours, this does not include the lunch, the cake cutting, the dinner (another 500 people) and the ceremonies in both bride and bridegroom homes.
My husband employed a pro and he took about 10 rolls for the wedding and all the events. There was also a wedding (actual ceremony only) video shoot but instead of the normal 3 hours, the video was shorten/condensed to 70 mins.

My hubby is a part time pro and he does weddings and although he haven't yet taken a English wedding, he has attended a few and the general comment is that it is nothing compared to what the other races or Asians do.

IMHO, it is almost impossible for any couple to look at hundreds or thousands or pictures and expect then to choose the best.
In our cultural weddings, we take what we consider are important shoots and one that portray a meaning to the ceremony. It is practically impossible to cover the whole 3 hours as this will mean a few thousands shoots.
Many of the pictures taken will be repetition of a particular event. ie in a blessing stage, there will be the endless list of relations who want to bless the couple, but then only certain pictures are taken, the cue coming from the couple or in prior discussion with them.

Most couples do not discard pictures that have already been taken unless they are inferior as such, if you do give them the entire pictures in a shoot, they will choose all if not most of it. From my discussion with them, the understanding is that they do feel "bad" that they have to discard pictures taken thus, they accept them and put them into a album or CD and it goes into a cupboard.

IMO, It will serve no purpose to take hundreds or thousands but might give the impression that we, the photographers can't truly understand a particular ceremony.
What we normaly do is, commit to only certain race/religion weddings. This is done as we understand what truly goes on, who will be where and most of all take the "emotion" pictures.

Regards
Bama

[Stan43]

I promise 300 pics. If I deliver 400 because they are all good so be it. I don't think anyone wants to review 1000 Pictures.