Interesting to see another person's shooting style...

I was helping my girlfriend with her job performing a show for an 8 year old child's birthday party (not as a photographer, just a helping hand). The mother of the child also happened to be a photography enthusiast and had her camera in hand the entire time (a Nikon I'm sad to say ). My photography is my sole source of income and yet I'm rarely ever offered the opportunity to watch other enthusiasts shoot (she had no idea that I was a photographer). I tend to be quite conservative with my shooting style and I imagine that goes back to shooting with film. On the other hand, this gal was firing off frame after frame of her daughter in "machine gun" style for almost the entire party. I've often wondered how a photographer can walk away from an event saying that they have 3000 photographs.....I now know It was interesting to watch, I just kept thinking what a nightmare she's creating for herself in PP
My style is to watch through the viewfinder, anticipate a moment and capture it once, maybe twice for safety if it lasts. Once I know I have that moment captured, I wait for the next. Every time I release my shutter, I have a specific reason or vision I'm attempting to capture. This obviously yields less images but a higher keeper ratio IMO.
I'm in no way "putting down" the style of shooting a huge amount of frames, in fact, I'm sure it has it's advantages in that there are lots of photos to choose from along with the fact that shooting this way makes it far more likely that you'll get "lucky" and capture something awesome. I wouldn't say that it's better or worse....just different from how I shoot. In fact, it's got me thinking that maybe I should stop being so stingy with my shutter.
So, this has me wondering, how many frames do you guys/gals capture per hour when covering an event (either pro or rec)? On average, I'll capture about 75-100 per hour and I've never had a complaint that I don't deliver enough images.

I am a hobbyist and I remember when I started out 2years ago I shot like 1000photos/day for 6days when I went to Sydney... I went home with almost 7000photos and probably less than a 100 that I would consider as keepers. When I got home I was sooo tired just thinking about how many photos I shot haha

Lately I have been averaging 200-300/day when I go out and about 500 if I try to shoot birds. Its much more enjoyable to think about what you're shooting beforenyou click the shutter plus the fact that its easier to go through the photos at the end of the day

I tend to not care about shot count. If the consistency is there, it really doesn't matter how many shots I end up with. That's said, it's never a crazy amount like that.

150-175 per hour (when working at a wedding)... sometimes more... sometimes less.

When I shoot a burst I do so as I'm looking for that tiny difference between a good smile and a great smile. When I'm in post culling I sail through selecting based on those subtle differences which to be honest a lot of non-photographers wouldn't notice. I may take 10 photos sometimes of what some would consider to be the same shot but I'm looking for that one which is just a bit more special than the others. I find most people have one slightly lazy eye... lagging just a fraction of a second behind the other. With a smile it can make all the difference to the picture.

Personally I'm not too fussed about my keeper ratio as I'm more concerned with the quality of those I do keep. Not so much technical quality but more emotionally, aesthetically etc.

It is all about personal shooting style and I'm all for trying to get an image which is that little bit extra special. As a lot of my images include people from a distance I always want them to convey as much emotion as possible. I often bin otherwise perfectly good photos when people are walking etc if don't like how there foot may be in the stride etc.

Jason, first of all, I want to commend you for not feeling compelled to castigate the gal at the birthday party, as if you are just "a little bit superior". Too many people fall into that "syndrome", and it really isn't attractive.

Who knows what she was after? Maybe she is an "enthusiastc snap shot shooter" who was coming from film and is just blown away by what digital offers! And it truly offers a lot!

Maybe she is "serious" about capturing quality images, and has, like you said, a "style" of shooting, wanting to get the "best". And, depending on the dynamics and conditions of things, burst shooting could fit the bill.

I've shot events where things are moving "slowly", although I often shoot in bursts of 2-3 to give me a bit more to choose from in post. I've also shot in fast-moving scenarios where I end up with a lot more shots -- more bursts covering more actions.

Anyway, it's up to you to get a "feel" or "style" of shooting. Like I said, a lot depends on the scenario, the synamics and the conditions, and then what you find works for you. And you know, people who are opinionated and biased for one thing and against another (think "forums") are not going to be best to make your mind up for you!

I came up through the film era as well. For any commercially shot jobs I would use medium format as it just blew 35mm out of the water when it came to quality, imo. So much like the OP you planned your shots, made sure your settings were bang on as you didn't want to waste money processing shots that were substandard. A full day wedding I might shoot around 600 shots and still was able to give the bride a proof book with around 450 shots to review. Then along came digital......

I think that we have all fell victim to the spray and pray approach. There was an oddity in my photography all of a sudden. I could go out and shoot and it didn't cost me an arm and a leg to process afterwards. After looking at the images on my hard drive I was finding that there were so many that were similar in nature that I could easily have called them dupes. The time to sort through these was, not necessarily as waste, but I could have done better things with them. It didn't take long for me to go back to close to my old ways of timing and making sure the shot is worth taking.

Today a wedding may involve around 800 shots if it is a more formal event. If they are after a high component of editorial style of shots they will get more as you are shooting way more originals. When I am shooting commercially time is money. I shoot alot of each wedding in jpg format. I am comfortable in my ability to get the exposure right and after several hundred weddings I trust my posing. I will switch to RAW if I am facing some challenging lighting conditions. The less post processing I have to do in my office is time that I can use to generate other income.

Is it wrong to shoot 2000 shots at a child's birthday party, no. There are few hard and fast rules in this industry. What does matter is as time moves on you should be getting more and more keepers out of the shoot. If a person has the time to commit to doing the post processing to this many images then who am I to contradict what they are doing. I am not so sure that this is indicative of a style. Partly it is lack of confidence and they take the approach that the more they shoot the more they will have to give to the customer, friend, relative or whomever the were doing this for. I think that you will find over time the same photographer will be shooting less under the same circumstances.

I also give top marks to the OP for not jumping in and trying to give advice (that may or may not be wanted) on shooting less to get the same basic results. It is tempting sometimes to give that unsolicited help. I will always help if asked by someone at an event I am working but I will rarely jump in on my own. Firstly you don't know what that persons experience level is. They could be a full time pro and this is just the way they do it. Some pros take great exception to being told that they are doing something wrong.

My guess is that the woman wants to make sure she gets that 'perfect' shot and she is a little insecure about catching the right moment.

Digital capture makes it easy to take a lot of photos. I did this for a while myself once I had a digital camera. Then I'd wade through the pile and cull most. And the reality that the pile gives you a lot of redundant shots.

I shoot a lot less now. In the aggregate this cuts my shooting an culling time a lot. I have to admit though, having the camera in hand and ready would probably yield just a few more of those really special shots, but sometimes you have to be in the event and not just spectating the event.

JeffreyG wrote in post #13331420
And the reality that the pile gives you a lot of redundant shots.

Very true, and it's also very true (as said a few posts before) that it can make the difference between a good smile and a great smile. It's hard to see the perfect moment coming.

When we sit down and go through a pile of photos, we usually delete all but one of each similar lot, and sometimes decide that there's no use even keeping the best one.

I do think there's a use for 'spray & pray' especially in the context of continuous shooting. With CS you simply are not choosing the moment; you are getting the moment that the camera was able to take the next one. You get what you get.

for some of us hobby folks the act of taking pictures is fun, and more pics can be more fun. I've backed off a lot since I first got my SLR, but even now I can feel myself trying to force shots just because I want to use the camera.

Also to illustrate, I had my best bout with a member of the PnS crowd who couldn't see the difference between my pics and hers (even in a dark basement with my shooting @1.4). I put the camera on continuous drive and told her to hold the button down. 10 seconds later she has her friend doing that Madonna Vogue thing and she is giggling like a little girl.

I tend to shoot in the "burst mode" when shooting people...it allows me to select/clone-in the different "micro expressions" that might better serve the finished image.

I tend to do alot of tripod work so i like to take my time and shoot slowly.
I'll keep a notepad handy and write down time of day and location and f/ and SS so I have reference points for later.

and portrait work i like to shoot small bursts or 2-3 frames per pose just in case the model blinks or whatever.

I wish I was like that at times. I tend to shoot 1 frame at a time and sometimes miss great shots because of little things like blinking or something distracting in the background that I don't realize until later. That being said I only take my camera out for street shots and if we go on vacation. I never had the chance to go on a photog mission and do nothing but focus on shooting or doing a particular type of shooting.

Sometimes I envy people that have the time to shoot and work on PP often...

I used to spray... a lot... when I first got into photography. I knew better at normal events, but with sports... I'd have a time culling because I captured so many images. Since then, I've discovered that I end up with more keepers by shooting less and anticipating the right moment before I hit the shutter.

A friend and I shot a wedding for a friend who couldn't otherwise afford a photographer. I went through his photos and, unfortunately, he takes the other approach. He takes one shot only... and there were a lot of missed shots because someone was blinking or hand his mouth open. Sad.

Nathan, that's interesting about the wedding pic your friend came out with.

So, assuming you are getting better results with a burst mode with those -- how many shots do you figure in a burst to get beyond those random "misses"?

I would usually hit 2-3 in a burst- any more and it just takes too long to process. But yeah, I usually shoot stuff in short bursts too. It's good insurance against odd faces and bad expressions.