Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS General Gear Talk Data Storage, Memory Cards & Backup 
Thread started 04 Sep 2017 (Monday) 20:16
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Keeping every photo vs just the selects?

 
Moose408
Senior Member
878 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 727
Joined Jan 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Sep 04, 2017 20:16 |  #1

I have been in the camp of keeping every photo I've every taken. The result is I have over 500K photos taking up about 11Tb of storage. My backup strategy is a mess because of the amount of data. So I'm considering reducing the number of photos, only keeping the ones I've selected from the shoot.

For a typical shoot I will take 1500 photos, then come home and narrow it down to 100-125 keepers, and then further narrow that down to 1-10 that get edited and published. So there are a lot of photos there that will probably never get looked at again.

Logically I can reason that I should just delete them and reduce my storage needs to only 10% of what I currently require. But that is so against my nature that I'm having a really hard time making that leap.

So what do you do? Keep everything? Or delete the majority and just keep a few?


Canon 5DmkII | 24-105mm f/4.0L IS | 24-70mm f/2.8L | 17-40mm f/4L | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS | 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS | 50mm f/1.8
Photography Blog (external link) | 500px (external link) | Model Mayhem (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
54,244 posts
Likes: 1633
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Sep 04, 2017 20:27 |  #2

WOW!!! I moved out of the "keep every photo" like day 3 of having a digital camera. I also shoot way less then you do. I'll take maybe 500 to 1000 for a wedding but otherwise if I come home with 100 pics, it's a lot. From those 1/2 pretty much get deleted right away and I'll process just a handful from the rest. I've done a lot of cleanup over the past couple of weeks and got everything to fit on a 1tb drive.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Alveric
Goldmember
Avatar
4,451 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 971
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Canada
     
Sep 04, 2017 21:05 |  #3

I do cull my photos. Why keep something that's blurry, badly exposed, or useless? Even those images that have sentimental value get culled.

That being said, I still end up keeping more than just the 'keepers'. Some images can be used as alternates or backups (not data backups) or examples for future reference.


'The success of the second-rate is deplorable in itself; but it is more deplorable in that it very often obscures the genuine masterpiece. If the crowd runs after the false, it must neglect the true.' —Arthur Machen
Why 'The Histogram' Sux (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Archibald
You must be quackers!
Avatar
6,455 posts
Gallery: 220 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 7197
Joined May 2008
Location: Calgary
     
Sep 04, 2017 21:36 |  #4

My practice is evolving over the years. Currently I cull down to about one in four, on average, right after the shoot (usually the evening of the same day). It is not a rule or anything, it is just what works with the amount I shoot and how I shoot.

The 1 in four that I keep is really still too much, but I want alternative shots just in case.

Not too long ago I decided to go back to previous years to come to terms with forgotten folders to see what I still need. And i have been amazed at the crap I was saving. I usually manage to delete another three quarters of what is there. I also usually discover a small number of gems that were overlooked before that are worth spending some time on.

The reason for going back to zap unnecessary files is that it takes more effort to manage a bigger body of files. They take more time and space to back up, and it becomes harder and harder to find things.


Pentax Spotmatic F with 28/3.5, 50/1.4, 50/1.8, 135/3.5; Canon digital gear
C&C always welcome.
Picture editing OK
Donate to POTN here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Moose408
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
878 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 727
Joined Jan 2006
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Sep 04, 2017 21:37 |  #5

Alveric wrote in post #18444663 (external link)
I do cull my photos. Why keep something that's blurry, badly exposed, or useless? Even those images that have sentimental value get culled.

That being said, I still end up keeping more than just the 'keepers'. Some images can be used as alternates or backups (not data backups) or examples for future reference.

I do delete blurry, bad exposed, etc. But if it is otherwise a well exposed/composed photo then I keep it.


Canon 5DmkII | 24-105mm f/4.0L IS | 24-70mm f/2.8L | 17-40mm f/4L | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS | 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS | 50mm f/1.8
Photography Blog (external link) | 500px (external link) | Model Mayhem (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
12,729 posts
Gallery: 1114 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 8161
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Sep 04, 2017 21:40 |  #6

After each session, I rate the ones I wish to look at again in the initial sweep. I cull anything that doesn't make the initial cut then. Then through the 2nd pass, I again rate the ones I want to actually potentially process and potentially share. I then cull the rest. I end up keeping a handful of images from a session. If you keep up with it as you create it, it's easier, than going back months later and going through thousands. I don't worry about 'going back to edit again in the future' kind of thing. I keep the RAWs of my definite keepers though.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Naturalist
Adrift on a lonely vast sea
Avatar
5,158 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Likes: 387
Joined May 2007
Location: Tallgrass prairies of northwest Minnesota
     
Sep 04, 2017 22:28 |  #7

Cull your images and if they do not meet the cut, get rid of them.

Your intention should be to show your best, not show everything you took, for better or worse.


Doug
My Gear List
http://www.douglasbrow​nsr.com (external link)
Entered: 2-16-84 Passed: 5-22-84 Raised: 6-19-84

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Alveric
Goldmember
Avatar
4,451 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Likes: 971
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Canada
     
Sep 04, 2017 23:32 |  #8

Moose408 wrote in post #18444685 (external link)
I do delete blurry, bad exposed, etc. But if it is otherwise a well exposed/composed photo then I keep it.

Other images I delete are those that look so similar that can count as repeats—hand of subject in a slightly different position, slightly different facial expression, car passing by, &c.

Other than that, you just learn to live with thousands of images; and backing them up religiously.

Culling is sometimes a process some might tend to postpone, and this sometimes interferes with backups ("I'll back them up after I've gone through them and culled them, don't wanna back up rejects, then I'll have to hunt them down in the backup unit and kill them too..." or something like that goes the thought and reasoning). Don't let this happen to you. I recently had one of my photo drives take a nose dive and I'm still going back and forth with the data recovery lab trying to salvage years of files.


'The success of the second-rate is deplorable in itself; but it is more deplorable in that it very often obscures the genuine masterpiece. If the crowd runs after the false, it must neglect the true.' —Arthur Machen
Why 'The Histogram' Sux (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tdlavigne
Senior Member
Avatar
329 posts
Likes: 99
Joined Mar 2015
Location: Los Angeles, CA
     
Sep 05, 2017 01:08 |  #9

I just keep the selects, no point in keeping things that don't pass muster. I usually have about 25 or so from a shoot. Every once in a while I'll keep a sub-folder of raws (I call em B-Sides) that could've possibly made the cut, just in case I ever want to revisit the set. Even then there's at most 40 images per shoot. For client work, I'm not a storage service...and I advise them all to back up their files. That stuff is deleted after 90 days...no need to keep 1000 raws from an ecom shoot, at least not for me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,923 posts
Likes: 334
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Sep 05, 2017 13:12 |  #10

I think you've identified what you need to do - only keep the photos that you will print, or maybe one step out from that, the photos you are sure you'll want to see again. That should reduce your storage by 90%.

One strategy I use sometimes is if I'm not sure I convert my RAW to medium jpeg, 2000 pixel Q8. I can still print it, process it, see it, but storage is 80% less than a RAW. I process all images before I convert though, because RAWs have more processing latitude.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
f8andBeThere
Member
Avatar
77 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 20
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Memphis
     
Sep 24, 2017 17:20 as a reply to  @ tim's post |  #11

I'm mainly an event shooter. I shoot everything RAW+jpg; I've been keeping RAW files only of keepers, but I keep the all the jpgs. As my archive grows, I've realized I may need to get more ruthless, but so far this works for me.


5D Mark IV, 5D Mark III, 6D, 7D, 40D, 16-35mm f2.8 II, 16-35mm f4 IS, 24-70mm f2.8 II, 24-105mm f4 IS, 50mm f1.4, 85mm f1.8, 135mm f2, 70-200mm f2.8 IS, Sigma 15mm f2.8 fisheye, Sigma 35mm f1.4A, 430 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MarcoEos
Member
Avatar
130 posts
Gallery: 106 photos
Likes: 475
Joined Sep 2017
Location: Netherlands, Utrecht
     
Sep 25, 2017 02:18 |  #12

I keep only the keepers ;)


"To know what you know and what you do not know, that is true knowledge."
Confucius
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Wilt
Reader's Digest Condensed version of War and Peace [POTN Vol 1]
Avatar
40,241 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2040
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Belmont, CA
Post edited 10 months ago by Wilt. (2 edits in all)
     
Sep 25, 2017 08:56 |  #13

Alveric wrote in post #18444663 (external link)
I do cull my photos. Why keep something that's blurry, badly exposed, or useless? Even those images that have sentimental value get culled.

That being said, I still end up keeping more than just the 'keepers'. Some images can be used as alternates or backups (not data backups) or examples for future reference.

^
I cull immediately those shots that are out of focus, or exposed clearly beyond rescue of RAW recovery effort.
I keep 'alternative' shots because sometimes someone has better expression in that shot, even if they did not look so great in the 'chosen' shot...you never know if there will be a need for that alternative later. Since I usually do not shoot in multishot mode, I don't have 3 to 5 of every shot taken!

But the general methodology does vary dependent upon the type of subject...product shots vs. architectural vs. portraiture vs. events, for example.


You need to give me OK to edit your image and repost! Keep POTN alive and well with member support https://photography-on-the.net/forum/donate.p​hp
Canon dSLR system, Olympus OM 35mm system, Bronica ETRSi 645 system, Horseman LS 4x5 system, Metz flashes, Dynalite studio lighting, and too many accessories to mention

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Left ­ Handed ­ Brisket
That's my line!
Avatar
8,472 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 1698
Joined Jun 2011
Location: The Uwharrie Mts, NC
     
Sep 25, 2017 09:15 |  #14

Moose408 wrote in post #18444627 (external link)
Logically I can reason that I should just delete them and reduce my storage needs to only 10% of what I currently require. But that is so against my nature that I'm having a really hard time making that leap.

the thought of going back over half a million photos makes me sick to my stomach.

This is much more reasonable:

tim wrote in post #18445154 (external link)
One strategy I use sometimes is if I'm not sure I convert my RAW to medium jpeg, 2000 pixel Q8. I can still print it, process it, see it, but storage is 80% less than a RAW. I process all images before I convert though, because RAWs have more processing latitude.

Just set up a batch processing action and start processing thousands of images at a time. Once the images are processed into smaller files and backed up in a proper manner, delete the originals. This will also give you the opportunity to reorganize the archive/backups as you go along.


PSA: The above post may contain sarcasm, reply at your own risk | Not in gear database: Auto Sears 50mm 2.0 / 3x CL-360, Nikon SB-28, SunPak auto 322 D, Minolta 20

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
35,572 posts
Gallery: 127 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 4233
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Sep 25, 2017 11:42 |  #15

I keep all my raw files for my personal work. For clients I keep all of the processed files and raws for 2 years.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1,794 views & 3 likes for this thread
Keeping every photo vs just the selects?
FORUMS General Gear Talk Data Storage, Memory Cards & Backup 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is jaredheai
448 guests, 272 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.