Check list / Logbook?

Do you keep a check list or logbook for your photo work? I find that I mess up a lot of shot when I am tired simply because I forget to set my aperture for depth of field, thus I get the subject out of focus. My father use to keep a check list and I have though about keeping one.

A checklist is one thing; a logbook is another.

For a logbook, today that's almost not necessary to create manually. The EXIF data is generally saved, so you can go back to photos you took in the past and see what you did. I just did that this last week when I was shooting high school soccer. It was the first game of the season. I shoot Canon, so in addition to the normal EXIF data, I wanted to see which AF points I used. That shows up in Canon's package Digital Photo Professional. I will say however that I do take occasional notes on things not normally captured in the EXIF data. I'll also use a separate camera to capture a few snapshots of my setup if it is new or unusual. Without the additional information however, the camera saves almost everything you might want to use.

For a checklist, if I'm shooting one setup, I simply set the camera before the event. There are times however when I'm doing a couple setups, such as if I'm doing video and still photography with the same camera on the same session. For that I will bring a hand-written checklist for settings.

I also do a full checklist for equipment for virtually every shoot I do. When I have multiple, similar events that occur over a couple months, the checklists are easy as they're essentially the same from one event to another. No matter though, I still do it to ensure I've packed everything, set everything, charged the necessary batteries, and downloaded, backed up, and reformatted the memory cards.

Neither a logbook nor a checklist is any good if you don't use it. For a logbook, use the EXIF data as needed. Take additional notes as needed, and keep the notes where you can easily find them. There's no need to start from scratch every time you shoot. For a checklist, use whatever you need at whatever level you need. If it helps to have a checklist you run through before a shoot, go for it. It's your photography.

I used to keep notes on most outings with my negatives. LR is a lot easier to search. EXIF is a lot more thorough than my notes ever were.

I agree, a logbook is no longer necessary unless you're still shooting film. But if you're having trouble recalling settings when setting up for a shot, a checklist can be very handy, especially for things you may not do often.

Cheers,
Bryan

I use a log book to document my photos as I travel. Things like location, activities etc... So that when you get back home after a month you have details of what was going on...great for documentary for shows or blogs.

Depends on what I'm shooting. For the museum, we have a set procedure for setting WB and metering the light setup while in the studio, as well as a standard processing workflow. Whether a workflow is the same as a checklist, I leave it to you to decide for your individual case.
Again, in the studio, we log shot settings and the specific lighting setup (different lights and tables/platforms yield slightly different colour balances), as well as the specific objects (and views) we shoot. So there, we keep logbooks. When there's a rapid capture operation underway, we include the barcode in the picture and rely on the EXIF for the rest of the data but otherwise it's a paper-based process.

In the field, I let EXIF and geotagging take care of logging my shooting information. Then I use Geosetter or Map Utility, and Downloader Pro, to fill in the place names. If it's an event, I pick up a program to backfill identifications.

I used to keep a log book of all my settings back in the 1980's when I first started in photography. Especially when I used to buy bulk B&W film and process it my self. In those days, I used to experiment with ±1 stop, ±2 stops etc. Since I could not see the results until I got back to the darkroom (my bathroom ), the log book was useful to remind me of the settings used.

Fast forward to digital cameras. Now the metadata of the image contains all the parameters I used to write down plus a lot more. Also, I can immediately see the histogram after each shot and so there is no need to keep a log book.

Back in the film days, every frame was expensive and precious. I had to think about every image so as not to waste the film and I know it made me a better photographer. As I've grown older, I have got lazier and tend to take many times more digital photos than I use to with film. And after looking at them on a big monitor, I'd probably discard 95% of them. I suspect my "keep-to-discard" was probably higher in the film days but since I take so many more photos, my net result is I have more good photos now.

I only use a log boot to keep track of locations as when I travel its usually for six or seven weeks at a time and I like to know where this specific waterfall or some other information such as the time of day as my camera might not have the correct time zone.