I typically shoot about 600-1200 shots on a trip. Out of those, I will often choose about 10 or 15 of those for possible processing. From those I might actually decide to fully process 3 or 6 of those, to post on mine, or other FB pages. Of those, maybe 1 or 2 might make it too my flicker page. Prime example; I took 12,000 shots on my last cross country trip. 60 made it through multiple cullings, all the way to my Flickr page. All of this said < A LOT more of these shots "could have been used"... but if I have 10 shots, all sharp, good pose, good light, etc, obviously, I only need one of those.
Thanks for this post ! i've only been doing wildlife photography for two years, have now taken about 40,000 photos. Maximum frame rate 3 per sec. I cull my photos over months. My first pass is the quickest and easiest, I sort into three categories of quality. Then I let them sit for a week, for a fresh perspective. Then I review about a month later in which time I've taken another 2,000 photos. Many times of a same bird and similar setting. So I categorized them by setting and bird. Then I show some of the best to others for feedback, as many times I cannot decide which of several shots is best. I keep about 70% of my shots I guess because of the effort it took to get them. But the ones I separate for publish I tried to keep to under 10%, I realize no one wants to see all those pictures as they haven't the time or the trained eye to appreciate the differences
This is an excellent video. I started off with film photography and was happy to get one shot I liked out of a 36 exposure roll of film. The combined price of a roll of Velvia and processing was about $20.00. A keeper for every $20.00 seems so bizarre these days! I recently digitized my slides and kept maybe one in ten. That works out to one decent photo for every $200.00! Crazy to contemplate. So glad we have digital these days!
That does sound pricey! For discussions sake though, I'd hazard to guess that if the price of the cameras/lenses were considered in the comparison, there'd be many people (especially non experienced photographers) who are buying the latest and greatest tech that are paying similar or higher rates for nice photos with digital. The one silver lining of course, is that the cost of these nice photos would always decrease over time as you gain experience & refine the craft.
This is a great piece of information! Please don’t stray from your open thoughts on photography. It’s your opinion and be aware that some just want to over analyze it. Your photography has inspired me for the last few years. I have definitely improved and I am very proud and excited about it. I like the excitement you have going back through your photos from this year. I now understand why when you get an image that all comes together we love sharing it with friends. Keep it up and thank you you sharing with us.
Great video, and let me start off by saying, your images are better than mine. but i continue trying. second, let me say that i went to a Nat Geo photography exhibit, i think it was titled 100 years of photography, or something along those lines. in it, they had a video, and were interviewing one of their famous photographers. now, i should mention, that most of his work was film. he said, in a 'good year', out of 100,000 images, he gets 1 good shot. its about standards. his are obviously higher than mine. i shoot mostly birds, with an a1, and i shoot at 30fps, so I come home from a morning shoot with somewhere between 1000 and 3000 images, although i've been known to shoot over 6000 in a morning on rare occasions. when i cull, i give 1-stars to approx 10%, and that's my keeper rate. i then continue culling to 2-star images, and that's usually about 20% of the 1-stars, so now i'm down to 2% of the images. then i give 3-stars and that's maybe 1/4 to 1/2 of the 2-stars, so i'm down to 1%. That's what I'm willing to share. I'm thinking my images are not as good as yours, but my goal is mostly to share with my fans the beauty of nature. i think the ratios i offer above, are the result of psychology, and have little if anything to do with how good they are. i cruise along looking at my photos, and about every 10th shot, i give it a star. sometimes i go 50 images before giving it a star, and sometimes i give stars to 2-3 in a row. i don't know if there's going to be a better shot of that species down the road, so i want to save it (give it 1-star). then when i start giving out 2 stars, I'm just picking the best of the 1-stars. the whittling process always seems to wind up with the same (plus or minus) 1% that's share worthy. its psychological, or method, and not really about whether i had a great day or a disappointing one. print worthy shots are more rare. out of the 1% shareable, i might get 1 in 100 that i would consider a wallhanger. art shots are more rare than that, but then it starts really getting wonky as to what is considered art. i can't provide numbers on that. and contest shots, that i can tell you, its zero. i used to enter some really minor ones, until several people wrote me and told me that the contest i had just come in 2nd in, was rigged, that i should have won that, but it was a popular vote sort of thing, and the winners friends all voted for him. i haven't entered anything since. but beyond that bad experience, contest shots are way rare. i might rate some of my shots 4-stars, but i have no 5s. those are aspirational.
In addition to keeper numbers, you bring up several points that photographers deal with; capturing images, culling images, processing images, and using those images. Each has its own pitfalls and successes. I know I keep FAR more than I will ever process. I typically will cull my day's images and separate them out into categories, go through them as categories so they are all grouped together for a better overview perspective. I often go back through folders and cull aggressively days or months after the shoot when time clears my head, and I am not so attached to the photos. With rare exceptions, my keepers came from planning. I went to a specific area and knew that the conditions were good, then it was a combination of skill and luck that the planets all aligned for success. Some days everything falls into place, and I bring home a bonanza, other days I struggle to get a few decent photos.
I think each person's trip/evolution as a photographer is different, I know mine has been, from watching this video. Predominantly wildlife with some landscape thrown in, starting back in late 2019. Three cameras and a lot of gear later, i'm just getting to where I'd like to be. 140 posts on Instagram, and in that time (2020 till now), one contest level photo. Even then, I didn't think it was a good enough image to place but a couple of judges thought so. If you don't enter, you'll never know. That being said, I'm always striving to up my game and maybe one day it'll be 5 pictures a year that I can take extreme pride in, and that's what keeps me moving forward ! Print worthy, in 3 years, maybe 10. Shots per year, 7500. Thanks for the work you do Scott, excellent video as always !!
Wildlife photographer here. My keeper rate used to be much higher, because my expectations were much lower. These days, 2% sounds like a good number. Always setting my bar higher and higher.
That’s a really good point, that our keeper rate probably drops as we get better and our standards increase. Raises the point that there are a number of factors that influence the keeper rate, I guess because they affect the denominator.
Really interesting video Scott. Thanks!! Two observations first. One - higher frame rate cameras are a blessing and a curse! The blessing is being able to capture the exact moment - wing position or whatever. The curse is that for that exact moment you have maybe 20-30 shots, or more, that "missed" the moment. It makes what would have been incredibly lucky shots in the "old days" less lucky now. But I know that for me, that really boosts the cull rate since my camera is always set to the highest frame rate I have (in my case about 12/second). Second, we have ZERO control over our subjects. We can do everything right - location, lighting, camouflage, field craft, camera gear and settings - whatever. If the animals don't cooperate, we won't get those great shots we are after. Wedding photographers, portrait, even landscape - they would all be out of business of they had the success rate of wildlife photographers. But that is the joy of it, isn't it? The opportunity to interact with wild animals and observe and photograph their behaviour. I much prefer that to wedding or portrait photography! I have gotten a lot more "brutal" in my culling, especially since nearly all of my shooting is done in the same small marsh where I have already gotten a lot of great shots over the last few years. First cut typically culls about 90% and the second pass takes that down even more - hard drive space is finite after all. I post to a local community group dedicated to protecting the marsh and adjacent urban forest. For some perspective, my last post was 24 shots. These were taken in almost 15 visits to marsh over a month or so - probably about 40+ in total, sitting, watching, waiting. The number of shots taken on each visit varied from maybe 200-300 on a quiet day (cursed burst mode!) to 1500 - 2000 when there was a lot happening. So, 40 hours of time, 10,000 - 15,000 shots taken to post 24. There are 3-4 of those that I would consider really good, but none competition worthy. Most were posted because they help tell the community the story of what is happening in the marsh, which is my objective.
Just culled photos from 2016 through 2022 to conserve some hard drive space. Went from 64,000 photos to a little over 800. I started photography in 2016 and culled very few of images other than 6 of the same things. I'd guess I probably have 3-5 "contest" images. The rest are good enough for social media etc... Mostly perched birds. I can't wait to get back to some of the same areas and see if my updated gear changes the game for me. I already feel like I'm composing better, and with some longer lenses I'm getting way better photos.
As you were scrolling, I kept wanting to see the image expanded of the grackle. Maybe just a portrait, but those yellow eyes are a big draw peering out of the shadows!
Thats an interesting one, highly edited (not manipulated digitally just color and burning). The original looks nothing like the final. Might be a good video, I did a thing on my subscription site when I sent a group the raw file and they competed their edit against mine. Was fun!
Good subject, and big thank you for being honest scott My keeper has increased since I went mirrorless from canon 7dii to R7. The eye detection really increases the keeper rate. I do not shoot thousands of images, perhaps a few hundred on a day out. So I have less to go through at home. I would not use my R7's 30 fps as I do not want the time and effort to check each one. This is a hobby for me not a profession. I have displayed my images in galleries and sold some framed fine art prints. My method is my calculated, opportunity shots, or well planned shoots as I do not have rough time to check each image on the PC.
Nice video Scott. I probably throw out 90% after a day out... so 10% in focus and such. Of those, 10% might be edited to make the post worthy. Of those, I might get a contest shot once every 100 or so. But there's another issue worthy of thought. I've been wildlife photography for about 10 years now, and got serious for the last 5 years. My eye... my ability to discern what's good and what's not has been evolving that whole time. I look back and see things that I thought were great a few years ago that I now see as mediocre at best. So how do you develop an ability to discern what is "art"? How do your learn how to judge quality and how does that evolve over time? That seems like an interesting topic. It's all tied into the concept of shots being keepers, post-worthy or contest-worthy
I’m about the same rate; but often feel what’s ‘good, for me’ is still not always worthy to post. I see so many others’ photos that are way nicer, so I shy away from sharing publicly. However, being my own harshest critic is what pushes me to do better. It takes time… I’m only about 1.5 years into wildlife!
Thanks for another thought-provoking video, Scott. It's a bit complicated. I use a double cull system. In this case I go through initially and get rid of all the bad images, and also try to pick the best two or three out of a group. I do a lot of birds in flight and obviously, you throw a lot of stuff away - out of focus, bad wing position, etc. etc. So maybe I end up keeping 5% 10% of those. As far as posting, I post a lot in our local FB site and these are not necessarily the greatest images, but they're important because maybe rarity was seen in the area, or I'm trying to show a particular point, birds on a particular trip. But for more serious FB sites, I probably only post 1/500. As far as contests go, I don't really enter contests that much. But I have really really good images that I would print or put in my annual calendar, that sort of sums it up 12 images a year maybe 20. Of the style that would win a contest that's a good question I've never I've only won 1 many years ago.
I'm a bird photographer, on a recent shoot, I took 810 photos, of which about 15 made it into fully developed "keepers". So my "keeper rate" is about 1.85% from that recent shoot. Something I see happening to help improve this percentage is the pre-capture setting on bodies like the Panasonic G9mkII and similar. I shoot Canon, so this isn't an option for me, but if I had it, I think I might feel more confident to only press the button when I thought action was happening, knowing that my camera had already stored several shots prior to my pressing the shutter, knowing I had the shot. As it is, I have to rely on timed groups of bursts that rack up photos quickly because I'm working to ensure that I don't miss the action. The other thing is, I have a Sigma 150-600 and an old 7DmkII, the focusing on it isn't terrible, but it's a far cry from RF/red-ring-EF with eye tracking and all the other AF IQ magic. As a result, I often have a lot of shots with just barely missed focus, which is annoying when you have a burst of action and only 2 out of the 40 frames you caught are actually properly in focus. All of this dramatically increases the amount of photos I take, and as a result, drives my keeper rate down to as low as it is.
For me it is not about the literal clicks (obviously). Its easy to be waiting for a nice shot of a kingfisher for example, and just end up taking a bunch of images even though you know that none of them will be keepers. One of things I've learned as I mature as a photographer is to identify that you are doing so and stop.
I can relate to that! Sometimes I am sitting there shooting and I know that none of these are going to be decent, sharable shots, but I am there, and I have been sitting there for an hour waiting for something to happen, so I feel like I need something to shot for it!
Great video Scott. I take lots of photos but shots that go beyond ok or good are few and far between. Of course we are our own worst critics, others think my photos are terrific but I don’t see it. Picking one or two shots to post on social media that I consider worthwhile takes a lot of soul searching . Like you I look for those shots that go beyond and could be considered “Art” I enter a Fine Arts show each year and honestly it usually comes down to two or three images that are possibly worthy of someone wanting to display on their wall. So I guess I’m with you on this, thousands of images, 20-30 that are what I would consider “good” and maybe 2-3 that go beyond that. For me it’s that search for those few worthwhile images that provide the joy of photography.
I'm pretty sure, no, I know that I don't delete nearly as many as I should, so my keeper rater is way up there. Depending on the images, it's very common for me to delete 10-30%, at least, right off the top, and it's very common for me to keep many that will never see the light of day otherwise. I'm definitely not shooting as much as you Scott, and I have a wide variety of subjects from family stuff, to landscape, to wildlife, etc. Took at look at my LR catalog and I've got about 17.5K for 2023 to far, which means easily 20K+ shutter actuations. Now, if only a few of those were actually high quality.
Great discussion !!!! I am a professional sports Photog on west coast CA, I was just thinking this on a recent assignment, after this upcoming weekend shooting NCAA LAX I’m goin* to do that math……. I’ll let you know & again great discussion !! / cheers
As a photographer that has been at it for a very long time (59 years since my first B&W photo) I have to say that a) my 'share worthy' photo rate has gone up to maybe 0.5% of my total images and b) I keep way too many lousy image files. Some of that can be attributed to digital photography and the much higher frame rate when shooting wildlife. Some of that can also be attributed to the ability to change ISO on the fly. I did a 6 week trip to the Costa Rica rain forest in 2000 and took 30 rolls of film with me, but didn't realize how dark it was in the rain forest and only brought a couple of rolls of 800 ASA film. Not nearly high enough for those dark environments under the dense canopy. A couple of years ago I went down to Panama for a few weeks and had a fantastic 'share ratio' with the images that I captured there, and that is where digital has been a real boon to photography. One issue for me is that I have very rarely deleted my files, although I have often thought that I should. I suspect that moving forward I will start deleting those files that are never going to see the light of day. I have a couple of NAT storage devices in RAID configuration with over 10 TB of storage, but I can see that it's starting to get out of hand. I think delete is my take away from your video Scott. By the way, have you been to the Bosque del Apache wildlife reserve in NM? I spent a week there a couple of years back and got some of my most amazing bird photography shots there, especially of the Sandhill Cranes. One shot in particular is my favorite of a silhouette of three sandhill cranes in front of the full moon. Now that was one lucky shot! Thanks for the discussion Scott, I appreciate your no nonsense straight talk. It's very refreshing.
OMG! So impressed with the photos you shown in this video. Since I do mostly landscape, I take far, far less photos. No idea what percentage I keep. Even so, not that high. You are very diligent in examining and culling images, but I wonder how many people spend the time, and it is time intensive to go through and examine each photo. Somewhere I have read of someone giving advice to not spend the time culling images, and just keep all of them. That is just wrong. Excellent video as always.
Hi Scott I am primarily birds % keepers depends on situation. Was shooting Eiders feeding on crabs. 2 long sessions ended up with 3 keepers when the bird threw the crab in the air. Hence very low %.. Find mammals often much higher % due to slower movement
Really interesting discussion, and the comments . My problem is I keep too many that I will never do anything with. After watching this I think I am inspired to do a cull to declutter.
Great discussion! I've been watching my hit rate the last few months and feeling a bit of a loss of confidence. Using your definitions, my keeper rate (for birds) is 5- 10%. For example, I was out for an afternoon a couple of days ago and I took 670 shots. Of those, I kept 35 and deleted the rest. Of those 35, I thought 4 were good enough to show friends. That's a bit less than 1% of my total shots. None of them were good enough to print or send off to a contest. I would feel very fortunate if I got one or two of those in a year! That's why I was feeling a bit down. But listening to your discussion buoyed me up. I'm sure the ones you delete are better than the 1% I show off, but your percentages (up to print or contest level) are in a similar ballpark. That means to me that I may someday reach the point where I have something really good. Thank you for the confidence booster!
Even in perfect conditions it sometimes takes 200 to 300 images to get a really good artistic image or maybe two on a good day. 12 portfolio bird picture in a year is pretty good. You have to pick these 12 out of maybe 100 really good images that anyone else would probably would probably enter in a contest. Then 1 to 3 of the 12 will be printed and entered in a contest. But this year was different. I had a stroke at the end of July. My voice was greatly affected and I don't have have much stamina and I'm not that steady on my feet. But I'm going to enter three printed and framed bird images in a contest for Feb..
My keeper rate for birds have been around between 5-10% for the last 10 years but it´s much due to that i mostly shoot migrating birds on the fly and that I´m to 80% shoot birds in the same area (A not very big area, maybe 0,5 square kilometers) that is good for migrating birds. In that area (a nature reserve) i probably shoot around 30 000 -50 000 images a year. I publish around 1/1000 of them.
My wife and I both have OM1s and mostly shoot birds at 30 or 50 fps. from a recent two week trip to the Outer Hebrides we took around 50 to 60 thousand photos 😮. We culled every evening to get rid of anything not looking, out of focus, and not the best in the burst taken. We brought home over 10 thousand photos but have only done an initial cull whilst away. I’m now going through a day at a time and are getting 5 or 6 images from each day we can put on our Facebook page to tell the story of our trip, but our audience is mostly friends and family so we can post accordingly and even say “a rubbish photo but we saw a ……. today” The weather on this trip was generally wet so conditions were not favourable for photography but when I do manage to get through all the images we will probably have just 5 or 6 images each that will be printable for our wall. So on a 2 week photography trip in bad weather approximately 60,000 taken 10,000 brought home 60 or 70 posted on Facebook for friends and family 10 printable
Great topic, I was just out on a shoot, out of 2000 images I’ve kept 230 so far, of those I only tagged 10 as favorite. I have met some good professional wildlife photographers and they have said they are hoping to maybe get 4-5 great images in a year.
Thanks for another thought provoking video, Scott. I'd estimate that I shoot 3-5K frames per week (likely so high because I mostly use a 40 fps camera). I probably get around five images per week that I'd post, and maybe five per year that are good enough and unique enough to consider for a contest. You mentioned that songbird images don't tend to do well in contests. I've noticed that too. Why do you think that is?
My goal is to try to come home with one keep-able image each time I go out. Sometimes its 0, sometimes its 2 or 3 but I am happy if I make one shot I like. Id estimate that outs me at anout 0.5% or so. That said, if I shoot a burst if the same subject there may be 50 frames in there I “would” keep but I only keep one of them.
Hmm, I maybe have two photos I would say that are contest worthy - maybe. But my keeper rate is pretty bad. I get unlucky a lot and most of the time I realize at home on my computer that a photo that looked great on the back of the camera isn't that great. I would say that my keeper rate is maybe 0.1%. BUT I also have to say that 1) I am always a mix between a photographer and a birder, I still sometimes just try to get a photo so I can identify the bird at home (I am a birder beginner) 2) the z9 is fast, so one you hit the release it will be more than 1 photo anyways.
Great video, Scott. What I would love to see is a video where you give us your thoughts on WHY certain photos (yours) are "just" postable vs wall art vs contest worthy. And keep up the great work! 20:30
Great suggestion! YES I need ideas and this is a good one. I have done that on my subscription site and I try to add value there for paying members. So I am careful not to overlap but I think I can come up with some ideas for RUclips.
Totally agree - mine is nearly the same, I just got back from Rocky Mountain National Park, took 4,ooo images - posted 10 - my best shot was the very last one I took and I printed that one.
Your edit rate is way higher than mine. I might edit 1 in 200 or 300. The time I spend in the field per possible image is more like 4 hours per image. A full time job is 2048 hours per year (minus a couple weeks vacation). If you’re only spending 200-300 hours and can make a living, that is phenomenal! I suspect there are missing pieces to that story.
I made a video on how I make money with wildlife. While I dont give out my W-2, I do talk about how people make money and the struggles with each method.
First time here and I agree with you on the numbers. I shoot wildlife and some landscape. The rate I discard my wildlife photo's is really high because they actually hurt my eyes especially with blurry backgrounds.
I enjoyed this presentation very much, thank you. I love to photograph wildlife, mostly birds, a good bit of alligators, and some macro like images. I go out once or twice every week, and will come home with between 1000 and 3000 images each trip. Many of them are out of focus, have botched composition, the bird is cut off, just not good. I think on average I move 100 images from the memory card to the PC. Of those, I post 7 to 12, maybe the best 1 or 2 of each species. Sometimes a series of 5 or 6 images that storyboard a cool experience I captured, an alligator catching and eating a bird, or a squirrel locking eyes with a hawk then the hawk dives and eats an earthworm instead. I share the images on my personal social media pages and in local or state wide bird photography groups. I would say I have so far in my two year journey into this hobby, and that's what this is for me a hobby, I have perhaps 2 images I would not be embarrassed to enter into a contest. One image that was really challenging that I was very happy with a local artist asked for permission to recreate as a painting and one photo someone asked to buy a print of. I'm no professional so I just sent that person a print for free, just because I was flattered they wanted to put my photo on their wall. I have printed about two dozen for myself, mostly because a particular photo reminds me of the experience or challenges I went through to get that image. That's why I started photography, I needed a creative outlet to contribute to my self development and balance all the physical activity I was doing to improve myself. Wildlife photography is awesome because it lets me be creative and get exercise at the same time and has played a part in going from 402 pounds to 280 in 2 years.
Pro tip: Your camera’s shutter count is stored in the metadata of every image you shoot so you can get your starting point by just looking at the shutter count on your first photo of the year
@@Chris_Wolfgram its counting "actuations" (aka number of times your camera has recorded an image to the sensor) (note, I'm actually not sure what it does for video)
Okay, so my keeper rate is 11% to 12%, for years, steadily. Of every 115 photos out of a 1000 shots, I'll post 2 or 3. That's not a lot. Good topic you have there :).
Nice video, don’t think that I ever thought about it. A day for me is about 4 hours. Rarely got more than 100 pictures. 90% usually got deleted. Out of those left 1-2 got edited and posted. Rarely got better rate. Many times no good picture at all. Had no contest worthy picture this far, so my rate here is not so great 😃. I think it’s still possible to get amount of clicks - I might be wrong, but think that Nikon stores current shutter count in each RAW file exif.
I love your video this morning and I have been doing photography as a hobby since retirement , it gets me out of the house and keeps me moving. At first i kept far to many photos and now I am happy if I get say 1 to 3 or 4 keepers after an outing so i think I can say I would delete 90 to 95% and some days all get deleted. You mentioned you save jpegs and I have been saving raw, now I have no plans to be a pro and wonder why I'm saving so many photos. Do you have any advise for a 77 year old hoarder.
I keep good records, so this was easy to figure out. Looks like I take about 120 bursts for every one post on Instagram. My bursts average 8.7 photos each, so it's actually over 1000 photos per IG post. I've taken just over 250k photos this year and have done 250 IG posts. So that's my posting rate. (This is for bird photography.) I don't delete as much as I should, so I won't even bother speculating on "keeper" rate.
I would say you're pretty spot on. What's good or bad is so objective. Back taking pics after 50 years. Digital has open new horizons from film as I hated darkroom work. The better I think I get the less keepers I have 🤬 . #wb2pics
I mainly take close up and macro, my keeper rate is maybe 30% Of these I process about 1 or 2 % I dont have any online account to post to. I just take images for myself I would like to see you do a closeup/macro series, including some gear reviews as I really like your gear comparisons
I did a review on a Laowa lens, I feel more awkward with macro reviews as I am not an expert. Macro is a hobby and while I think I take some pleasing images, I dont feel as empowered as I do with birds. Birds I know lol.
I used to keep more than I culled, but now I cull much more than I keep. I may keep 10%, but post 1/2%. I have higher expectations. And I also think it depends on the amount you are out taking photos. You have more opportunities to get something different if you are out more.
A very interesting discussion indeed to be put into perspectives with all post « testing » keep rate without considering the final keepers. A cold technicians approach versus a photographer’s way of thinking.My point is that new cameras offering crazy high speed rate (30 to 40 frames/second and pre-shoot function), you take a crazy amount of photos but the absolute keeper rate remains very low. From my side, when shooting birds, I guess I don’t exceed 5-2% keepers.
been photographing for 3+years by now from the very clueless beginnings all the way to putting in some effort nowadays. Having pressed the shutter around 100k++ times (it is what it is nowadays w 50fps mirrorless though. 50k was w d500 . ), I have zero images i would consider great, I have several I consider pretty decent that i do not mind to gift to someone or hang on a wall. my lightroom contains 6k images, most of which i consider unsatisfactory, but I have no time to do the cleanup :)
this is not sarcasm. and ill try to read the reply (or email me). I like to understand psychology of people. if you spend 3 years doing something and never got a great image, why still do it? and again this is a legitimate question about motives. I just recorded a video on this topic.
Great video! One of your best! I shoot marco, nature, wildlife, and fine art. I prefer fine art. In the fine art ( from nature) maybe one in 10,000 is acceptable. I will post more just to see the followers reaction. So for me “ art worthy “ is determined my followers reaction more than my reaction.
Great content. You have many terrific images! Interesting story, a group goes to the Amazon. A bunch of great photographers, and one National Geographic guy ( I don’t have the details or names on the top of my poor brain). Everyone shoots a couple hundred images a day, some over a thousand. The NG guy shoots 30. And his thirty match or exceed everyone else’s hundreds Back to the real world. For me, if I get 5% keeper I’m pleased. Of the 5% there might only be 10-20 bird images. Landscape is higher
Having done some numbers of my recent work, I would say out of 100 shots, I would usually keep about 20/30 out of them. I would use about perhaps 10 for media posts. Of that 10, I would like to have 2-3 keepers that I would happily print and ,excuse my bragging but say to people, "Have a look at these. I used to belong to a photography club and during that time entered competitions but judges have their own agenda and their comments were sole destroying and I nearly gave up photography as a hobby. Fortunately, I didn't cause I left my point is I don't do competitions.
My numbers very similar to yours. Regardless on total, lucky if l keep 5%. Maybe 1% or less worth printing or contest worthy. Regardless, your photos are much better than you give yourself credit for… amazing!!!👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
90% keeper rate is the stuff of dreams. I guess it comes down to how many pictures you're taking and how big your hard drive is.....As the years go by, I end to be much more picky. I don't need 100 shots of a male Mallard.
for me its about 1 in 100 are what I call amazing another 50 are probably keepers (I am not real picky) but photography is subjective so I could delete a photo that someone finds to be art and the majority of my photos are birds and I entered 1 photo to my counties wildlife photography contest this year, we will see if they find it just as amazing as I did and this year I started at 18,700 and am at 21,750 (that camera is at Canon for testing) then my back up started at 87,600ish and is now at 90,124 so if my math is right 5600ish photos this year.
I don't know how you can even consider a keeper rate when you have a camera like the Z9. If a person only posts their best images, the posting rate should go down because they should be getting better. When a photog starts their expectations are low so they post a lot. Once they realize what good is, the keep fewer and post fewer.
My keeper rate is about 3%... that being said some of that is what I call documentation photos... not great shots but something I never saw before. Discounting those shots I'm at 2% but barely
I take 1000 - 2000 photos before I get a photo worth processing. But... there are those special days I get 5 keepers in 500 shots so this brings the average up, so really it ends up being 1 photo per 200 shots is my guess
@@WildlifeInspired No! Not that at all, it’s just that I find those excellent for maybe another purpose than that of pure art such as science magazines for instance
![Twenty One Pilots - The Line (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XCz7WUotXs8/mqdefault.jpg)
I typically shoot about 600-1200 shots on a trip. Out of those, I will often choose about 10 or 15 of those for possible processing. From those I might actually decide to fully process 3 or 6 of those, to post on mine, or other FB pages. Of those, maybe 1 or 2 might make it too my flicker page. Prime example; I took 12,000 shots on my last cross country trip. 60 made it through multiple cullings, all the way to my Flickr page. All of this said < A LOT more of these shots "could have been used"... but if I have 10 shots, all sharp, good pose, good light, etc, obviously, I only need one of those.
Thanks for this post !
i've only been doing wildlife photography for two years, have now taken about 40,000 photos. Maximum frame rate 3 per sec. I cull my photos over months. My first pass is the quickest and easiest, I sort into three categories of quality. Then I let them sit for a week, for a fresh perspective. Then I review about a month later in which time I've taken another 2,000 photos. Many times of a same bird and similar setting. So I categorized them by setting and bird. Then I show some of the best to others for feedback, as many times I cannot decide which of several shots is best. I keep about 70% of my shots I guess because of the effort it took to get them. But the ones I separate for publish I tried to keep to under 10%, I realize no one wants to see all those pictures as they haven't the time or the trained eye to appreciate the differences
This is an excellent video. I started off with film photography and was happy to get one shot I liked out of a 36 exposure roll of film. The combined price of a roll of Velvia and processing was about $20.00. A keeper for every $20.00 seems so bizarre these days! I recently digitized my slides and kept maybe one in ten. That works out to one decent photo for every $200.00! Crazy to contemplate.
So glad we have digital these days!
That does sound pricey! For discussions sake though, I'd hazard to guess that if the price of the cameras/lenses were considered in the comparison, there'd be many people (especially non experienced photographers) who are buying the latest and greatest tech that are paying similar or higher rates for nice photos with digital. The one silver lining of course, is that the cost of these nice photos would always decrease over time as you gain experience & refine the craft.
This is a great piece of information! Please don’t stray from your open thoughts on photography. It’s your opinion and be aware that some just want to over analyze it. Your photography has inspired me for the last few years. I have definitely improved and I am very proud and excited about it. I like the excitement you have going back through your photos from this year. I now understand why when you get an image that all comes together we love sharing it with friends. Keep it up and thank you you sharing with us.
very kind!
Great video, and let me start off by saying, your images are better than mine. but i continue trying. second, let me say that i went to a Nat Geo photography exhibit, i think it was titled 100 years of photography, or something along those lines. in it, they had a video, and were interviewing one of their famous photographers. now, i should mention, that most of his work was film. he said, in a 'good year', out of 100,000 images, he gets 1 good shot. its about standards. his are obviously higher than mine. i shoot mostly birds, with an a1, and i shoot at 30fps, so I come home from a morning shoot with somewhere between 1000 and 3000 images, although i've been known to shoot over 6000 in a morning on rare occasions. when i cull, i give 1-stars to approx 10%, and that's my keeper rate. i then continue culling to 2-star images, and that's usually about 20% of the 1-stars, so now i'm down to 2% of the images. then i give 3-stars and that's maybe 1/4 to 1/2 of the 2-stars, so i'm down to 1%. That's what I'm willing to share. I'm thinking my images are not as good as yours, but my goal is mostly to share with my fans the beauty of nature. i think the ratios i offer above, are the result of psychology, and have little if anything to do with how good they are. i cruise along looking at my photos, and about every 10th shot, i give it a star. sometimes i go 50 images before giving it a star, and sometimes i give stars to 2-3 in a row. i don't know if there's going to be a better shot of that species down the road, so i want to save it (give it 1-star). then when i start giving out 2 stars, I'm just picking the best of the 1-stars. the whittling process always seems to wind up with the same (plus or minus) 1% that's share worthy. its psychological, or method, and not really about whether i had a great day or a disappointing one. print worthy shots are more rare. out of the 1% shareable, i might get 1 in 100 that i would consider a wallhanger. art shots are more rare than that, but then it starts really getting wonky as to what is considered art. i can't provide numbers on that. and contest shots, that i can tell you, its zero. i used to enter some really minor ones, until several people wrote me and told me that the contest i had just come in 2nd in, was rigged, that i should have won that, but it was a popular vote sort of thing, and the winners friends all voted for him. i haven't entered anything since. but beyond that bad experience, contest shots are way rare. i might rate some of my shots 4-stars, but i have no 5s. those are aspirational.
In addition to keeper numbers, you bring up several points that photographers deal with; capturing images, culling images, processing images, and using those images. Each has its own pitfalls and successes. I know I keep FAR more than I will ever process. I typically will cull my day's images and separate them out into categories, go through them as categories so they are all grouped together for a better overview perspective. I often go back through folders and cull aggressively days or months after the shoot when time clears my head, and I am not so attached to the photos. With rare exceptions, my keepers came from planning. I went to a specific area and knew that the conditions were good, then it was a combination of skill and luck that the planets all aligned for success. Some days everything falls into place, and I bring home a bonanza, other days I struggle to get a few decent photos.
Lots of struggles. Made a video out soon, "why do we do this?" stay tuned
I think each person's trip/evolution as a photographer is different, I know mine has been, from watching this video. Predominantly wildlife with some landscape thrown in, starting back in late 2019. Three cameras and a lot of gear later, i'm just getting to where I'd like to be. 140 posts on Instagram, and in that time (2020 till now), one contest level photo. Even then, I didn't think it was a good enough image to place but a couple of judges thought so. If you don't enter, you'll never know. That being said, I'm always striving to up my game and maybe one day it'll be 5 pictures a year that I can take extreme pride in, and that's what keeps me moving forward ! Print worthy, in 3 years, maybe 10. Shots per year, 7500. Thanks for the work you do Scott, excellent video as always !!
Wildlife photographer here. My keeper rate used to be much higher, because my expectations were much lower. These days, 2% sounds like a good number. Always setting my bar higher and higher.
That’s a really good point, that our keeper rate probably drops as we get better and our standards increase. Raises the point that there are a number of factors that influence the keeper rate, I guess because they affect the denominator.
Really interesting video Scott. Thanks!! Two observations first. One - higher frame rate cameras are a blessing and a curse! The blessing is being able to capture the exact moment - wing position or whatever. The curse is that for that exact moment you have maybe 20-30 shots, or more, that "missed" the moment. It makes what would have been incredibly lucky shots in the "old days" less lucky now. But I know that for me, that really boosts the cull rate since my camera is always set to the highest frame rate I have (in my case about 12/second). Second, we have ZERO control over our subjects. We can do everything right - location, lighting, camouflage, field craft, camera gear and settings - whatever. If the animals don't cooperate, we won't get those great shots we are after. Wedding photographers, portrait, even landscape - they would all be out of business of they had the success rate of wildlife photographers. But that is the joy of it, isn't it? The opportunity to interact with wild animals and observe and photograph their behaviour. I much prefer that to wedding or portrait photography! I have gotten a lot more "brutal" in my culling, especially since nearly all of my shooting is done in the same small marsh where I have already gotten a lot of great shots over the last few years. First cut typically culls about 90% and the second pass takes that down even more - hard drive space is finite after all. I post to a local community group dedicated to protecting the marsh and adjacent urban forest. For some perspective, my last post was 24 shots. These were taken in almost 15 visits to marsh over a month or so - probably about 40+ in total, sitting, watching, waiting. The number of shots taken on each visit varied from maybe 200-300 on a quiet day (cursed burst mode!) to 1500 - 2000 when there was a lot happening. So, 40 hours of time, 10,000 - 15,000 shots taken to post 24. There are 3-4 of those that I would consider really good, but none competition worthy. Most were posted because they help tell the community the story of what is happening in the marsh, which is my objective.
Just culled photos from 2016 through 2022 to conserve some hard drive space. Went from 64,000 photos to a little over 800. I started photography in 2016 and culled very few of images other than 6 of the same things. I'd guess I probably have 3-5 "contest" images. The rest are good enough for social media etc... Mostly perched birds. I can't wait to get back to some of the same areas and see if my updated gear changes the game for me. I already feel like I'm composing better, and with some longer lenses I'm getting way better photos.
That’s impressive! Good for you for going back and making such a serious effort at culling.
As you were scrolling, I kept wanting to see the image expanded of the grackle. Maybe just a portrait, but those yellow eyes are a big draw peering out of the shadows!
Thats an interesting one, highly edited (not manipulated digitally just color and burning). The original looks nothing like the final. Might be a good video, I did a thing on my subscription site when I sent a group the raw file and they competed their edit against mine. Was fun!
Good subject, and big thank you for being honest scott
My keeper has increased since I went mirrorless from canon 7dii to R7. The eye detection really increases the keeper rate. I do not shoot thousands of images, perhaps a few hundred on a day out. So I have less to go through at home. I would not use my R7's 30 fps as I do not want the time and effort to check each one. This is a hobby for me not a profession. I have displayed my images in galleries and sold some framed fine art prints.
My method is my calculated, opportunity shots, or well planned shoots as I do not have rough time to check each image on the PC.
Nice video Scott. I probably throw out 90% after a day out... so 10% in focus and such. Of those, 10% might be edited to make the post worthy. Of those, I might get a contest shot once every 100 or so. But there's another issue worthy of thought. I've been wildlife photography for about 10 years now, and got serious for the last 5 years. My eye... my ability to discern what's good and what's not has been evolving that whole time. I look back and see things that I thought were great a few years ago that I now see as mediocre at best. So how do you develop an ability to discern what is "art"? How do your learn how to judge quality and how does that evolve over time? That seems like an interesting topic. It's all tied into the concept of shots being keepers, post-worthy or contest-worthy
I’m about the same rate; but often feel what’s ‘good, for me’ is still not always worthy to post.
I see so many others’ photos that are way nicer, so I shy away from sharing publicly.
However, being my own harshest critic is what pushes me to do better. It takes time… I’m only about 1.5 years into wildlife!
Thanks for another thought-provoking video, Scott. It's a bit complicated. I use a double cull system. In this case I go through initially and get rid of all the bad images, and also try to pick the best two or three out of a group. I do a lot of birds in flight and obviously, you throw a lot of stuff away - out of focus, bad wing position, etc. etc. So maybe I end up keeping 5% 10% of those. As far as posting, I post a lot in our local FB site and these are not necessarily the greatest images, but they're important because maybe rarity was seen in the area, or I'm trying to show a particular point, birds on a particular trip. But for more serious FB sites, I probably only post 1/500. As far as contests go, I don't really enter contests that much. But I have really really good images that I would print or put in my annual calendar, that sort of sums it up 12 images a year maybe 20. Of the style that would win a contest that's a good question I've never I've only won 1 many years ago.
I'm a bird photographer, on a recent shoot, I took 810 photos, of which about 15 made it into fully developed "keepers". So my "keeper rate" is about 1.85% from that recent shoot.
Something I see happening to help improve this percentage is the pre-capture setting on bodies like the Panasonic G9mkII and similar. I shoot Canon, so this isn't an option for me, but if I had it, I think I might feel more confident to only press the button when I thought action was happening, knowing that my camera had already stored several shots prior to my pressing the shutter, knowing I had the shot. As it is, I have to rely on timed groups of bursts that rack up photos quickly because I'm working to ensure that I don't miss the action.
The other thing is, I have a Sigma 150-600 and an old 7DmkII, the focusing on it isn't terrible, but it's a far cry from RF/red-ring-EF with eye tracking and all the other AF IQ magic. As a result, I often have a lot of shots with just barely missed focus, which is annoying when you have a burst of action and only 2 out of the 40 frames you caught are actually properly in focus.
All of this dramatically increases the amount of photos I take, and as a result, drives my keeper rate down to as low as it is.
Thanks for another great video Scott. Love your perspectives, always gets me thinking. Of course I love your photos too!!!
For me it is not about the literal clicks (obviously). Its easy to be waiting for a nice shot of a kingfisher for example, and just end up taking a bunch of images even though you know that none of them will be keepers. One of things I've learned as I mature as a photographer is to identify that you are doing so and stop.
I can relate to that! Sometimes I am sitting there shooting and I know that none of these are going to be decent, sharable shots, but I am there, and I have been sitting there for an hour waiting for something to happen, so I feel like I need something to shot for it!
Great video Scott. I take lots of photos but shots that go beyond ok or good are few and far between. Of course we are our own worst critics, others think my photos are terrific but I don’t see it. Picking one or two shots to post on social media that I consider worthwhile takes a lot of soul searching . Like you I look for those shots that go beyond and could be considered “Art” I enter a Fine Arts show each year and honestly it usually comes down to two or three images that are possibly worthy of someone wanting to display on their wall. So I guess I’m with you on this, thousands of images, 20-30 that are what I would consider “good” and maybe 2-3 that go beyond that. For me it’s that search for those few worthwhile images that provide the joy of photography.
Thanks for an honest discussion.
I'm pretty sure, no, I know that I don't delete nearly as many as I should, so my keeper rater is way up there. Depending on the images, it's very common for me to delete 10-30%, at least, right off the top, and it's very common for me to keep many that will never see the light of day otherwise. I'm definitely not shooting as much as you Scott, and I have a wide variety of subjects from family stuff, to landscape, to wildlife, etc. Took at look at my LR catalog and I've got about 17.5K for 2023 to far, which means easily 20K+ shutter actuations. Now, if only a few of those were actually high quality.
Great discussion !!!! I am a professional sports Photog on west coast CA, I was just thinking this on a recent assignment, after this upcoming weekend shooting NCAA LAX I’m goin* to do that math……. I’ll let you know & again great discussion !! / cheers
As a photographer that has been at it for a very long time (59 years since my first B&W photo) I have to say that a) my 'share worthy' photo rate has gone up to maybe 0.5% of my total images and b) I keep way too many lousy image files. Some of that can be attributed to digital photography and the much higher frame rate when shooting wildlife. Some of that can also be attributed to the ability to change ISO on the fly. I did a 6 week trip to the Costa Rica rain forest in 2000 and took 30 rolls of film with me, but didn't realize how dark it was in the rain forest and only brought a couple of rolls of 800 ASA film. Not nearly high enough for those dark environments under the dense canopy. A couple of years ago I went down to Panama for a few weeks and had a fantastic 'share ratio' with the images that I captured there, and that is where digital has been a real boon to photography.
One issue for me is that I have very rarely deleted my files, although I have often thought that I should. I suspect that moving forward I will start deleting those files that are never going to see the light of day. I have a couple of NAT storage devices in RAID configuration with over 10 TB of storage, but I can see that it's starting to get out of hand. I think delete is my take away from your video Scott.
By the way, have you been to the Bosque del Apache wildlife reserve in NM? I spent a week there a couple of years back and got some of my most amazing bird photography shots there, especially of the Sandhill Cranes. One shot in particular is my favorite of a silhouette of three sandhill cranes in front of the full moon. Now that was one lucky shot!
Thanks for the discussion Scott, I appreciate your no nonsense straight talk. It's very refreshing.
I have not been there, but I am sure soon!
OMG! So impressed with the photos you shown in this video. Since I do mostly landscape, I take far, far less photos. No idea what percentage I keep. Even so, not that high. You are very diligent in examining and culling images, but I wonder how many people spend the time, and it is time intensive to go through and examine each photo. Somewhere I have read of someone giving advice to not spend the time culling images, and just keep all of them. That is just wrong. Excellent video as always.
Hi Scott
I am primarily birds
% keepers depends on situation. Was shooting Eiders feeding on crabs. 2 long sessions ended up with 3 keepers when the bird threw the crab in the air. Hence very low %..
Find mammals often much higher % due to slower movement
Really interesting discussion, and the comments . My problem is I keep too many that I will never do anything with. After watching this I think I am inspired to do a cull to declutter.
Great discussion! I've been watching my hit rate the last few months and feeling a bit of a loss of confidence. Using your definitions, my keeper rate (for birds) is 5- 10%. For example, I was out for an afternoon a couple of days ago and I took 670 shots. Of those, I kept 35 and deleted the rest. Of those 35, I thought 4 were good enough to show friends. That's a bit less than 1% of my total shots. None of them were good enough to print or send off to a contest. I would feel very fortunate if I got one or two of those in a year! That's why I was feeling a bit down. But listening to your discussion buoyed me up. I'm sure the ones you delete are better than the 1% I show off, but your percentages (up to print or contest level) are in a similar ballpark. That means to me that I may someday reach the point where I have something really good. Thank you for the confidence booster!
good luck Becky!
Even in perfect conditions it sometimes takes 200 to 300 images to get a really good artistic image or maybe two on a good day. 12 portfolio bird picture in a year is pretty good. You have to pick these 12 out of maybe 100 really good images that anyone else would probably would probably enter in a contest. Then 1 to 3 of the 12 will be printed and entered in a contest. But this year was different. I had a stroke at the end of July. My voice was greatly affected and I don't have have much stamina and I'm not that steady on my feet. But I'm going to enter three printed and framed bird images in a contest for Feb..
My keeper rate for birds have been around between 5-10% for the last 10 years but it´s much due to that i mostly shoot migrating birds on the fly and that I´m to 80% shoot birds in the same area (A not very big area, maybe 0,5 square kilometers) that is good for migrating birds. In that area (a nature reserve) i probably shoot around 30 000 -50 000 images a year.
I publish around 1/1000 of them.
My wife and I both have OM1s and mostly shoot birds at 30 or 50 fps. from a recent two week trip to the Outer Hebrides we took around 50 to 60 thousand photos 😮. We culled every evening to get rid of anything not looking, out of focus, and not the best in the burst taken. We brought home over 10 thousand photos but have only done an initial cull whilst away.
I’m now going through a day at a time and are getting 5 or 6 images from each day we can put on our Facebook page to tell the story of our trip, but our audience is mostly friends and family so we can post accordingly and even say “a rubbish photo but we saw a ……. today”
The weather on this trip was generally wet so conditions were not favourable for photography but when I do manage to get through all the images we will probably have just 5 or 6 images each that will be printable for our wall.
So on a 2 week photography trip in bad weather approximately
60,000 taken
10,000 brought home
60 or 70 posted on Facebook for friends and family
10 printable
Good numbers and its interesting that it roughly falls in line with most peoples experience
Great topic, I was just out on a shoot, out of 2000 images I’ve kept 230 so far, of those I only tagged 10 as favorite. I have met some good professional wildlife photographers and they have said they are hoping to maybe get 4-5 great images in a year.
Thanks for another thought provoking video, Scott. I'd estimate that I shoot 3-5K frames per week (likely so high because I mostly use a 40 fps camera). I probably get around five images per week that I'd post, and maybe five per year that are good enough and unique enough to consider for a contest. You mentioned that songbird images don't tend to do well in contests. I've noticed that too. Why do you think that is?
i think they tend not to feel "special" and maybe because they are more common and could be ethical judges assuming they are lured in?
My goal is to try to come home with one keep-able image each time I go out. Sometimes its 0, sometimes its 2 or 3 but I am happy if I make one shot I like.
Id estimate that outs me at anout 0.5% or so. That said, if I shoot a burst if the same subject there may be 50 frames in there I “would” keep but I only keep one of them.
Hmm, I maybe have two photos I would say that are contest worthy - maybe. But my keeper rate is pretty bad. I get unlucky a lot and most of the time I realize at home on my computer that a photo that looked great on the back of the camera isn't that great. I would say that my keeper rate is maybe 0.1%. BUT I also have to say that 1) I am always a mix between a photographer and a birder, I still sometimes just try to get a photo so I can identify the bird at home (I am a birder beginner) 2) the z9 is fast, so one you hit the release it will be more than 1 photo anyways.
Great video, Scott. What I would love to see is a video where you give us your thoughts on WHY certain photos (yours) are "just" postable vs wall art vs contest worthy. And keep up the great work! 20:30
Great suggestion! YES I need ideas and this is a good one. I have done that on my subscription site and I try to add value there for paying members. So I am careful not to overlap but I think I can come up with some ideas for RUclips.
Totally agree - mine is nearly the same, I just got back from Rocky Mountain National Park, took 4,ooo images - posted 10 - my best shot was the very last one I took and I printed that one.
Isnt it amazing. Also shows the value on the time, how much the experience matters as much as the results.
Very interesting and honest video. Thank you for sharing this information. this allows amateurs to put the lack of success into perspective!
Your edit rate is way higher than mine. I might edit 1 in 200 or 300. The time I spend in the field per possible image is more like 4 hours per image. A full time job is 2048 hours per year (minus a couple weeks vacation). If you’re only spending 200-300 hours and can make a living, that is phenomenal! I suspect there are missing pieces to that story.
I made a video on how I make money with wildlife. While I dont give out my W-2, I do talk about how people make money and the struggles with each method.
First time here and I agree with you on the numbers. I shoot wildlife and some landscape. The rate I discard my wildlife photo's is really high because they actually hurt my eyes especially with blurry backgrounds.
I enjoyed this presentation very much, thank you.
I love to photograph wildlife, mostly birds, a good bit of alligators, and some macro like images.
I go out once or twice every week, and will come home with between 1000 and 3000 images each trip. Many of them are out of focus, have botched composition, the bird is cut off, just not good. I think on average I move 100 images from the memory card to the PC. Of those, I post 7 to 12, maybe the best 1 or 2 of each species. Sometimes a series of 5 or 6 images that storyboard a cool experience I captured, an alligator catching and eating a bird, or a squirrel locking eyes with a hawk then the hawk dives and eats an earthworm instead.
I share the images on my personal social media pages and in local or state wide bird photography groups.
I would say I have so far in my two year journey into this hobby, and that's what this is for me a hobby, I have perhaps 2 images I would not be embarrassed to enter into a contest. One image that was really challenging that I was very happy with a local artist asked for permission to recreate as a painting and one photo someone asked to buy a print of. I'm no professional so I just sent that person a print for free, just because I was flattered they wanted to put my photo on their wall.
I have printed about two dozen for myself, mostly because a particular photo reminds me of the experience or challenges I went through to get that image.
That's why I started photography, I needed a creative outlet to contribute to my self development and balance all the physical activity I was doing to improve myself. Wildlife photography is awesome because it lets me be creative and get exercise at the same time and has played a part in going from 402 pounds to 280 in 2 years.
-120!!! best comment I read. Keep it up
Pro tip: Your camera’s shutter count is stored in the metadata of every image you shoot so you can get your starting point by just looking at the shutter count on your first photo of the year
But does it count Electronic Shutter clicks as well ? I almost never shoot with a mechanical shutter.
@@Chris_Wolfgram its counting "actuations" (aka number of times your camera has recorded an image to the sensor)
(note, I'm actually not sure what it does for video)
Okay, so my keeper rate is 11% to 12%, for years, steadily. Of every 115 photos out of a 1000 shots, I'll post 2 or 3. That's not a lot. Good topic you have there :).
Nice video, don’t think that I ever thought about it. A day for me is about 4 hours. Rarely got more than 100 pictures. 90% usually got deleted. Out of those left 1-2 got edited and posted. Rarely got better rate. Many times no good picture at all. Had no contest worthy picture this far, so my rate here is not so great 😃.
I think it’s still possible to get amount of clicks - I might be wrong, but think that Nikon stores current shutter count in each RAW file exif.
I love your video this morning and I have been doing photography as a hobby since retirement , it gets me out of the house and keeps me moving. At first i kept far to many photos and now I am happy if I get say 1 to 3 or 4 keepers after an outing so i think I can say I would delete 90 to 95% and some days all get deleted. You mentioned you save jpegs and I have been saving raw, now I have no plans to be a pro and wonder why I'm saving so many photos. Do you have any advise for a 77 year old hoarder.
I keep good records, so this was easy to figure out. Looks like I take about 120 bursts for every one post on Instagram. My bursts average 8.7 photos each, so it's actually over 1000 photos per IG post. I've taken just over 250k photos this year and have done 250 IG posts. So that's my posting rate. (This is for bird photography.) I don't delete as much as I should, so I won't even bother speculating on "keeper" rate.
a numbers guy! and thats a lot of photos to go through isnt it?!
I would say you're pretty spot on. What's good or bad is so objective. Back taking pics after 50 years. Digital has open new horizons from film as I hated darkroom work. The better I think I get the less keepers I have 🤬 . #wb2pics
I mainly take close up and macro, my keeper rate is maybe 30% Of these I process about 1 or 2 %
I dont have any online account to post to. I just take images for myself
I would like to see you do a closeup/macro series, including some gear reviews as I really like your gear comparisons
I did a review on a Laowa lens, I feel more awkward with macro reviews as I am not an expert. Macro is a hobby and while I think I take some pleasing images, I dont feel as empowered as I do with birds. Birds I know lol.
The wood duck is beautiful. How do you get the water level photo's?
honestly it can be as simple as laying prone and using a waterproof pillow.
I used to keep more than I culled, but now I cull much more than I keep. I may keep 10%, but post 1/2%. I have higher expectations. And I also think it depends on the amount you are out taking photos. You have more opportunities to get something different if you are out more.
A very interesting discussion indeed to be put into perspectives with all post « testing » keep rate without considering the final keepers. A cold technicians approach versus a photographer’s way of thinking.My point is that new cameras offering crazy high speed rate (30 to 40 frames/second and pre-shoot function), you take a crazy amount of photos but the absolute keeper rate remains very low. From my side, when shooting birds, I guess I don’t exceed 5-2% keepers.
not trying to sell a service but i actually did that on another forum, its a service where i go behind the scenes more and talk more about editing.
been photographing for 3+years by now from the very clueless beginnings all the way to putting in some effort nowadays. Having pressed the shutter around 100k++ times (it is what it is nowadays w 50fps mirrorless though. 50k was w d500 . ), I have zero images i would consider great, I have several I consider pretty decent that i do not mind to gift to someone or hang on a wall. my lightroom contains 6k images, most of which i consider unsatisfactory, but I have no time to do the cleanup :)
this is not sarcasm. and ill try to read the reply (or email me). I like to understand psychology of people. if you spend 3 years doing something and never got a great image, why still do it? and again this is a legitimate question about motives. I just recorded a video on this topic.
Great video! One of your best! I shoot marco, nature, wildlife, and fine art. I prefer fine art. In the fine art ( from nature) maybe one in 10,000 is acceptable. I will post more just to see the followers reaction. So for me “ art worthy “ is determined my followers reaction more than my reaction.
Great content. You have many terrific images!
Interesting story, a group goes to the Amazon. A bunch of great photographers, and one National Geographic guy ( I don’t have the details or names on the top of my poor brain). Everyone shoots a couple hundred images a day, some over a thousand. The NG guy shoots 30. And his thirty match or exceed everyone else’s hundreds
Back to the real world. For me, if I get 5% keeper I’m pleased. Of the 5% there might only be 10-20 bird images. Landscape is higher
Having done some numbers of my recent work, I would say out of 100 shots, I would usually keep about 20/30 out of them. I would use about perhaps 10 for media posts. Of that 10, I would like to have 2-3 keepers that I would happily print and ,excuse my bragging but say to people, "Have a look at these.
I used to belong to a photography club and during that time entered competitions but judges have their own agenda and their comments were sole destroying and I nearly gave up photography as a hobby. Fortunately, I didn't cause I left my point is I don't do competitions.
My numbers very similar to yours. Regardless on total, lucky if l keep 5%. Maybe 1% or less worth printing or contest worthy. Regardless, your photos are much better than you give yourself credit for… amazing!!!👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
90% keeper rate is the stuff of dreams. I guess it comes down to how many pictures you're taking and how big your hard drive is.....As the years go by, I end to be much more picky. I don't need 100 shots of a male Mallard.
for me its about 1 in 100 are what I call amazing another 50 are probably keepers (I am not real picky) but photography is subjective so I could delete a photo that someone finds to be art and the majority of my photos are birds and I entered 1 photo to my counties wildlife photography contest this year, we will see if they find it just as amazing as I did and this year I started at 18,700 and am at 21,750 (that camera is at Canon for testing) then my back up started at 87,600ish and is now at 90,124 so if my math is right 5600ish photos this year.
I don't know how you can even consider a keeper rate when you have a camera like the Z9. If a person only posts their best images, the posting rate should go down because they should be getting better. When a photog starts their expectations are low so they post a lot. Once they realize what good is, the keep fewer and post fewer.
Ansel Adams reportedly said one good image per month.
My keeper rate is about 3%... that being said some of that is what I call documentation photos... not great shots but something I never saw before. Discounting those shots I'm at 2% but barely
I take 1000 - 2000 photos before I get a photo worth processing. But... there are those special days I get 5 keepers in 500 shots so this brings the average up, so really it ends up being 1 photo per 200 shots is my guess
Crazy how you call amazing pictures as just okay
Ive been doing this a long time and I hope I don't sound sound arrogant or offensive. Years ago my images looks nothing like what I take now.
@@WildlifeInspired No! Not that at all, it’s just that I find those excellent for maybe another purpose than that of pure art such as science magazines for instance
😅If I go out taking 200 bird images and get two 5 star keepers a day I'm happy .
Spray and pray does not help for the percentage 🤣
combined with 20-30FPS not a winning formula lol
Macro keeper rate is a few percent... even lower at 4x handheld.
NO DOUBT! My macro keeper rate is horrbily low. Handheld is incredibly hard with ultra macro.
Do you hand hold shoot or always use a tripod? That makes a big difference in the quality of the photo.
monopod for song birds, handheld if im stationary or sitting. sometimes tripod if im waiting for low birds in flight (harriers for example)
Give titul in