Re: Just one tip
Stay out of addictive photograpy discussion groups and get out there taking pics:) rg
Re: Just one tip
I hope you will permit me to add to this thread. When shooting with the camera on a tripod (and always use a tripod when you can) don't let the tripod cramp your photographic vision. Take the camera off the tripod and walk around looking at the subject from different perspectives and angles (childs height, from ground level, from above, etc.) and then set up the tripod from the perspectives that you found pleasing. Charles Braswell
RE: Just one tip
Herb Chong wrote: > like i said, Malcolm, are you sure it wasn't her camera you opened? You may well be right :-) Malcolm
Re: Just one tip
Hi, Tom, Technically acceptable? Most of them. Not 100%. But then, for the most part, the ones that aren't technically acceptable are ones that I know are going to be tough to get. Like ones with bright light and deep shadows in the same shot. Ones that I know likely won't turn out. Ones that I bracket, and ~none~ of them are good. Ones that I have no business trying to take, but do anyway, just for the hell of it. So, yeah, I guess it's close to 100%, from a technical point of view. Composition is another story... Point taken. cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Just one tip Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:09:01 -0500 What percentage of your photographs a technically acceptable? Should be close to 100%. Anyone's who is not getting that needs to work on it (of course I have reached the point where I can blame it on senility, but that beats blaming the camera ). A photo that grabs your guts? That is a lot harder to get. -- _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: Just one tip
"frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >It's one thing for a fashion or studio photographer to realistically want or >expect a near 100% "hit rate" (that's a new term for me). It's quite >another thing for a nature photographer (especially one shooting >unpredictable animals) or a PJ or someone doing reportage to expect any more >than a few shots per roll. > >Apples and Oranges. > >Personally, if I get a couple of decent shots per roll, I'm happy. I think the biggest variable is the quality standard of the photographer doing the shooting. People who really demand a lot of themselves will, by definition, have fewer "hits" per roll. Someone with lower expectations (or needs) might shoot the same 36 frames and find all of them acceptable. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Just one tip
What percentage of your photographs a technically acceptable? Should be close to 100%. Anyone's who is not getting that needs to work on it (of course I have reached the point where I can blame it on senility, but that beats blaming the camera ). A photo that grabs your guts? That is a lot harder to get. -- frank theriault wrote: Mr. Rittenhouse (I think) has already said it, but maybe it bears repeating: It's one thing for a fashion or studio photographer to realistically want or expect a near 100% "hit rate" (that's a new term for me). It's quite another thing for a nature photographer (especially one shooting unpredictable animals) or a PJ or someone doing reportage to expect any more than a few shots per roll. Apples and Oranges. Personally, if I get a couple of decent shots per roll, I'm happy. If I get an absolute Zinger, I'm ecstatic! Some rolls are better than others - the subject matter was just "there" or for whatever reason, I was in a groove, and just "seeing things" well, if you know what I mean. I shot a roll last March where almost 1/2 were keepers; maybe my best day ever! Then again, right now, the vast majority of what I do is street photography (doesn't count snaps of the kids). Were I a wedding photographer, I'm sure a couple of shots a roll wouldn't make me happy. cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: "Bucky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Just one tip Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 22:25:02 -0800 Natinal Geographic is, therefore, full of incompetent photographers. Perhaps that gives you an idea of the weight you can attach to Tom's opinion on that issue. _ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com "You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway."
Re: Just one tip
I have to agree with Frank. Great shot. I don't know exactly why it's great, but it's one of those I wish I had taken. Nice work. On Dec 31, 2003, at 3:25 PM, frank theriault wrote: That is a freaking amazing shot, tom! From: "tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.bigdayphoto.com/larson/after/larson-0521bwj.htm Well, crap, I wasted 5 frames looking for that one. Now my ratio is in the toilet. Now, that's not the greatest shot in the world, but that's the sort of shot that makes me me, whatever that's worth. It's a little detail that sets off the other shots, adds a little variety. The other 2 shots are more interesting set next to that one. _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en- ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgma rket%3den-ca
RE: Just one tip
That is a freaking amazing shot, tom! You're being modest with your comment re: "that's not the greatest shot in the world" (which of course it's not, but it's pretty damned good in my books!) You are, however, being honest when you say it's "what makes you you". It's typical of what I've seen of your wedding work, and it's what sets you apart from the run-of-the-mill hacks out there. Wonderful work, that. (loved the one with the kids, BTW) cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: "tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.bigdayphoto.com/larson/after/larson-0521bwj.htm Well, crap, I wasted 5 frames looking for that one. Now my ratio is in the toilet. Now, that's not the greatest shot in the world, but that's the sort of shot that makes me me, whatever that's worth. It's a little detail that sets off the other shots, adds a little variety. The other 2 shots are more interesting set next to that one. _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
Re: Just one tip
I bracket in 1/3 or 1/2 stops when I shoot cars on transparency film. Half a stop can make a considerable difference in color accuracy and saturation. When I shoot fashion or portraits with studio lights I use negative film, and I don't bracket. With negative film a half a stop plus or minus doesn't matter a hoot. When I shoot on the street with my Leica screwmount camera I don't even meter, save perhaps once for general reference in shadows or interiors. When I shoot on the street with my LX I use aperture priority autoexposure, but I keep an eye on the light and use exposure compensation as needed. So I guess I'd have to say that I bracket only on those rare occasions where it's necessary to get a perfect exposure on transparency film. On Dec 31, 2003, at 12:49 AM, Ann Sanfedele wrote: Shel Belinkoff wrote: Bracketing? What do you photograph that you've got time to bracket exposures? Are you using one of those new cameras with automatic bracketing, that do it all for you electronically? If so, what's changed when the camera brackets - aperture or shutter speed? BTW, your "band camp" intro is really annoying after all this time ;-)) scb Kevin Waterson wrote: I still go with that, sometimes 2 per roll if its a good day. For me, a roll of 36 is only 13 shots with bracketing. Of those, 1-2 is usually printable. annsan replies to shel I bracket changing aperature 1 stop up one stop down - when shooting slide film on the road in a natural surrounding... or when I'm not sure what I want to concentrate on, and when the light meter I'm using seems to be disagreeing with my instinct... sometimes I bracket up and down more than that. Not with every thing I shoot of course. If something is really captivating I bracket and change filters, too - as quickly as I can, so I can decide what effect I like best in a leisurely fashion. Kevin , I'm guessing , is a nature photog :) annsan
Re: Just one tip
> - but as Tom said "anything less than 100% means that I am incompetent" as a > photographer. What do you (and others) think IS a realistic goal to aim > for? It partly depends on the usage of the images. I was taking some shots of honey bees for a local beekeeper. I was using an MZ-S with Tamron 90mm f2.8 Macro and either FG360 flash or a manual ringflash. It was quite a difficult subject what with the bees moving, trying to get the right angle, and me being in a beekeeper's outfit with the netting, gloves, and such like. Bracketting was out of the question. I took 2 films of 36 exposures, and from a photographic perspective considered I had 3 keepers, one of which has actually done quite well for me in a number of competitions. However the beekeeper was delighted with about 50 of the slides and uses them in his lectures about bees. You see, the ones I considered poor photographically due to the bee being partly out of focus actually were good for him as they showed the number of hairs on the legs or some other such feature. When taking close-up natural history shots, particularly insect, I'm happy with just 1 or 2 keepers from a roll. Cheers Nick
Re: Just one tip
Tanya I'll go on record as agreeing with the sentiment that your keeper rate goal is unrealistic, for event photography. 22 out of 24 for formal studio work I could buy, but not shooting an event. Unless you're a telepath or psychic you can't anticipate everybody's every move. And you do good work. There is no reason to apologies to your self for not being good enough or to think you're not worthy of your fee. Butch Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Re: Just one tip
On some jobs, just getting a shot or two that can be considered decisive or definitive moments can be enough to earn a living. Len --- * There's no place like 127.0.0.1 From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Just one tip Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 14:46:18 +1000 I totally agree graywolf, which is why I think my "strike rate" needs improving. At the moment, like I mentioned, I am getting probably 18 salable images from a roll of 24 exposure film. Of those, probably 4 of the rejects are due to eyes closing/subject moving etc. The two remaining are usually rejects due to being underexposed, or out of focus etc. Even though the bulk of the "rejects" are usually due to the "subject did something the photographer has no control over", I still consider this my fault as I should be able to "predict" or at least "anticipate" these things, and make allowances for it. I still stand by my original goal - when I get to consistentantly producing 22 salable shots per 24 roll, I will be "happy" to some degree with my own competency level. But until then, I still think, basically that I'm not worthy of people's tan. - Original Message - From: "graywolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 11:26 AM Subject: Re: Just one tip > Maybe I should clarify this. I am speaking specifically about event photography. > > graywolf wrote: > > > You were thinking of works of art, Tanya is thinking of salable > > pictures. There is a big difference. Any pro who does not get a salable > > picture with every shot except where the subject did something the > > photographer has no control over is not very competent. > > > -- > graywolf > http://graywolfphoto.com > > "You might as well accept people as they are, > you are not going to be able to change them anyway." > > _ Working moms: Find helpful tips here on managing kids, home, work and yourself. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/workingmom.armx
Re: Just one tip
Lon Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Don't let tv touch your equipment. Wink. Oh TV himself is fine with equipment. He pays assistants to drop his gear for him! -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Just one tip
like i said, Malcolm, are you sure it wasn't her camera you opened? Herb - Original Message - From: "Malcolm Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 2:22 AM Subject: RE: Just one tip > LOL! It's just gone off to work with her for the third day in a row, but > I'll remember that for future reference!
Re: Just one tip
Tanya, i am a nature photographer and i consider 20% hit rate quite acceptable for filling in stock. very few of my rejects are outright bad photos. they tend to be the ones of the kind where something went wrong and i left the camera in the wrong setting or such. the 80% that doesn't make it more or less because i decided they were only OK and not as good as i wanted. most of my non-photographer friends would like to be able to shoot as well as my rejects, but i know that because i am selling to a stock photography market, my standards have to be higher. it has to be more than good exposure, it has to be perfect exposure, so when i shoot film, i bracket 1/2 stop on Provia and 1/3 stop on Velvia. sharpness has to be very high most of the time, but luckily i shoot f11 and and smaller most of the time anyway. exceptions of course when i choose selective focus or out of focus entirely. some of the differences are trivial differences in composition but one feels better than the others in the set. it boils down for me to shooting the best i can all the time and choosing not to accept more than 20% pretty much no matter how good the rejects are. out of this 20%, i choose about 1/4 to print and put into my portfolio and fine art display. aiming to make every shot count is needless stress. allowing the B&G to see the shots at the same time as you do make it more stressful. someone bumps you and you take a picture of your foot. do they really need to see that or hear your explanation? even if you are giving them everything, prints and negatives, what if the processing screws up? you had better know first and not at the same time as they do. Herb - Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, December 28, 2003 12:58 AM Subject: Re: Just one tip > Bill said:"Tanya, that is bullshit. What it means is that you shoot an extra > couple of rolls of film on any given job to get the number of hits you > need," > > - that is exactly what I *do* do now Bill, it sucks though, cause I really > wish that I could be confident that I could open the package straight from > the lab and know that it would be ok if my client was sitting over my > shoulder looking at them as I was, and not feel that I need to "hide" any > from them...
Re: Just one tip
i find 1 stop bracketing as the older cameras do is totally inadequate for something like Velvia. half stop is better and 1/3 stop even better. bracketing using the aperture ring or shutter dial doesn't do this. using exposure compensation does, but why bother when auto bracketing respects the mode you are in. if you are in Av, only the shutter speed varies. if Tv, then aperture. if P, then the camera does what it wants. Herb - Original Message - From: "Ann Sanfedele" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 12:49 AM Subject: Re: Just one tip > annsan replies to shel > I bracket changing aperature 1 stop up one stop down - when shooting slide film > on the road in a natural surrounding... or when I'm not sure what I want to concentrate > on, > and when the light meter I'm using seems to be disagreeing with my instinct... > > sometimes I bracket up and down more than that. Not with every thing I shoot of > course. > If something is really captivating I bracket and change filters, too - as quickly as I > can, > so I can decide what effect I like best in a leisurely fashion.
Re: Just one tip
This one time, at pdml camp, "Tanya Mayer Photography" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > - easier said then done. I feel really bad expecting people to pay for my > mistakes, so generally, I just "wear" it, and hope that I continue to > improve... I agree here to a point, then I look at Peter Lindbergh___s Pirelli calendar of 2002 and the shot for december of Julia Stiles with a pizza growing out of her head. Sometimes what you consider to be a mistake, maybe interpreted differently from others. See the offending shot here http://www.wildcherry.com.au/december.jpg When photographing musicians or other live acts, there is no right or wrong. With the strobing lights and bouncing subjects it is often hit or miss, just keep shooting. Then adjust the cost per 'good' capture to reflect the total cost. > - but as Tom said "anything less than 100% means that I am incompetent" as a > photographer. What do you (and others) think IS a realistic goal to aim > for? In the above scenario, a 10% success is not uncommon in my experience. An old fave of mine was a Sydney band 'psychotic turnbuckles' and you would think to give up after 5 minutes. In the studio or in nature shots where bracketing is required/recommended you have immediately reduced the success rate to a maximum of 33%, or, if you are bracketing 1/2 and 1 stop then you are down to 20% before you start to weed out shots where the model sneezed or tumbleweed blew in your face. A mentor of mine in Sydney once told me "only take the good shots" but I now realize that the good shots are not always on offer, so you use your skills to take the shots that are put before you. Kind regards Kevin -- __ (_ \ _) ) | / / _ ) / _ | / ___) / _ ) | | ( (/ / ( ( | |( (___ ( (/ / |_| \) \_||_| \) \) Kevin Waterson Port Macquarie, Australia
Re: Just one tip
- Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" Subject: Re: Just one tip > What do you (and others) think IS a realistic goal to aim > for? > If we are talking weddings, your hit % is a lottery. There are just too many factors at work. I have had perfect shots ruined by things that are completely unpredictable, and uncontrolable. Don't beat yourself up if some bald head causes a flash flare to ruin a shot of the bride walking up the aisle. It happens, and you probably didn't see the jerk kneel down right in front of you because you had the camera to your eye. It's happened to me. Look at the factors you can control, and minimize the potential for failure. Keep your equipment simple to operate. Be aware of how much film you have left, and change it out when you have to, not when it runs out. Become a student of human behaviour, and learn to anticipate what people are going to do based on their body language. Don't repeat your mistakes. I shot half a dozen wedding in the same church one year. There was an incredible shot of the couple from a certain spot behind the alter. I shot the same damned shot at every one of those six weddings, and every time, the shot was ruined because I was shooting over top of lit candles, and the heat from them caused weird optical things to happen. I suppose I should have figured it out after the first time. So it goes. I think a hit rate of 30 shots per 36 exposure roll is pretty good for weddings. Not every one is going to be a masterpiece, but they at least shouldn't be embarrasing. There does need to be a couple of masterpieces per album, and the bride had better figure big in them. I recall a wedding I shot where the bride was quite a homely lass and nervous in front of the camera, but the Maid of Honour was a real beauty, and had done some photographic modelling. Guess what? I didn't make any friends in that brides household. So it goes. If you are shooting tabletop, everything changes. You have pretty much full control, but you will still shoot excessive amounts of film, becuase you have to be sure that you have left enough bleed room for the layout, and you have to bracket your exposures, and you have to shoot enough film to cover processor damage, and the client may just have a gut feeling that for what they are paying you, they want to see 72 chromes, even though you know you nailed the shot in the first 12. Thats life. If you are trying something new, that you haven't tried before, your hit ratio might well be zero. But thats how we learn. Look at what didn't work, figure out why it didn't work, and don't do it again. Do something else instead, and see if that works. A realistic goal is to not feel the need to have a quota system when you go out shooting. Just do the best you can, and try to learn something from every job. William Robb
RE: Just one tip
The problem here is obviously one of standards. You're talking about great shots, where the subject's pose, the focus, exposure, and timing all come together perfectly. She's talking about shots that are properly focused and exposed, and where the main subjects have their eyes open. Not necessarily incredible works of art, but good, salable photos. chris On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, J. C. O'Connell wrote: > You cant be serious. If a photographer gets even a couple good sellable > shots per 24 exposure roll, he's doing very well. You actually expect to > get 22 really good sellable shots per 24 exposure roll? That absurd in > my honest opinion > JCO > >J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com > > > -Original Message- > From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 11:46 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Just one tip > > > I totally agree graywolf, which is why I think my "strike rate" needs > improving. At the moment, like I mentioned, I am getting probably 18 > salable images from a roll of 24 exposure film. Of those, probably 4 of the > rejects are due to eyes closing/subject moving etc. The two remaining are > usually rejects due to being underexposed, or out of focus etc. Even though > the bulk of the "rejects" are usually due to the "subject did something the > photographer has no control over", I still consider this my fault as I > should be able to "predict" or at least "anticipate" these things, and make > allowances for it. I still stand by my original goal - when I get to > consistentantly producing 22 salable shots per 24 roll, I will be "happy" to > some degree with my own competency level. But until then, I still think, > basically that I'm not worthy of people's $$$$.... > > tan. > > > - Original Message - > From: "graywolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 11:26 AM > Subject: Re: Just one tip > > > > Maybe I should clarify this. I am speaking specifically about event > photography. > > > > graywolf wrote: > > > > > You were thinking of works of art, Tanya is thinking of salable > > > pictures. There is a big difference. Any pro who does not get a salable > > > picture with every shot except where the subject did something the > > > photographer has no control over is not very competent. > > > > > > -- > > graywolf > > http://graywolfphoto.com > > > > "You might as well accept people as they are, > > you are not going to be able to change them anyway." > > > > >
RE: Just one tip
Natinal Geographic is, therefore, full of incompetent photographers. Perhaps that gives you an idea of the weight you can attach to Tom's opinion on that issue. > -Original Message- > From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 27-Dec-03 21:59 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Just one tip > - but as Tom said "anything less than 100% means that I am > incompetent" as a > photographer.
Re: Just one tip
Bill said:"Tanya, that is bullshit. What it means is that you shoot an extra couple of rolls of film on any given job to get the number of hits you need," - that is exactly what I *do* do now Bill, it sucks though, cause I really wish that I could be confident that I could open the package straight from the lab and know that it would be ok if my client was sitting over my shoulder looking at them as I was, and not feel that I need to "hide" any from them... "increase your prices to compensate the extra material cost, and get on with life." - easier said then done. I feel really bad expecting people to pay for my mistakes, so generally, I just "wear" it, and hope that I continue to improve... "When your hit percentage increases to where you want it to be, which is unreralistic at the moment, but you'll either figure that out on your own, or you'll slit your wrists, you can cut back on the amount of film you have to shoot," - but as Tom said "anything less than 100% means that I am incompetent" as a photographer. What do you (and others) think IS a realistic goal to aim for? "raise your prices again because you are a better photographer, and put the extra money towards something nice." - like, maybe a certain DSLR and then, I could shoot as much as I wanted without regard to cost?!? ;-) " At least thats what I think anyway." - thanks for your thoughts Bill, they are both appreciated and respected. I will never turn down genuine constructive criticism and always take it as it in the nature that it is intended. tan. >
Re: Just one tip
- Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" Subject: Re: Just one tip > - when I get to > consistentantly producing 22 salable shots per 24 roll, I will be "happy" to > some degree with my own competency level. But until then, I still think, > basically that I'm not worthy of people's Tanya, that is bullshit. What it means is that you shoot an extra couple of rolls of film on any given job to get the number of hits you need, increase your prices to compensate the extra material cost, and get on with life. When your hit percentage increases to where you want it to be, which is unreralistic at the moment, but you'll either figure that out on your own, or you'll slit your wrists, you can cut back on the amount of film you have to shoot, raise your prices again because you are a better photographer, and put the extra money towards something nice. At least thats what I think anyway. William Robb
Re: Just one tip
Shel Belinkoff wrote: > Bracketing? What do you photograph that you've got time to bracket exposures? Are > you using one of those new cameras with automatic bracketing, that do it all for > you electronically? If so, what's changed when the camera brackets - aperture or > shutter speed? > > BTW, your "band camp" intro is really annoying after all this time ;-)) > > scb > > Kevin Waterson wrote: > > > I still go with that, sometimes 2 per roll if its a good day. > > For me, a roll of 36 is only 13 shots with bracketing. > > Of those, 1-2 is usually printable. annsan replies to shel I bracket changing aperature 1 stop up one stop down - when shooting slide film on the road in a natural surrounding... or when I'm not sure what I want to concentrate on, and when the light meter I'm using seems to be disagreeing with my instinct... sometimes I bracket up and down more than that. Not with every thing I shoot of course. If something is really captivating I bracket and change filters, too - as quickly as I can, so I can decide what effect I like best in a leisurely fashion. Kevin , I'm guessing , is a nature photog :) annsan
Re: Just one tip
Here's a way to reduce the number of rejects caused by closed eyes. I've used this with formal groups numbering in the 20's - works particularly well with wedding groups. Get the group assembled as you want them, all looking in the direction of the camera, then have them all close their eyes and open them when you tell them. Take the pix when you see the bride's eyes open. Do a dry run with the group so they get the hang of it, then do the real thing. You get an opportunity then to relax the group by gently teasing the person(s) who couldn't follow instructions. Paul - Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 10:46 PM Subject: Re: Just one tip > I totally agree graywolf, which is why I think my "strike rate" needs > improving. At the moment, like I mentioned, I am getting probably 18 > salable images from a roll of 24 exposure film. Of those, probably 4 of the > rejects are due to eyes closing/subject moving etc. The two remaining are > usually rejects due to being underexposed, or out of focus etc. Even though > the bulk of the "rejects" are usually due to the "subject did something the > photographer has no control over", I still consider this my fault as I > should be able to "predict" or at least "anticipate" these things, and make > allowances for it. I still stand by my original goal - when I get to > consistentantly producing 22 salable shots per 24 roll, I will be "happy" to > some degree with my own competency level. But until then, I still think, > basically that I'm not worthy of people's > > tan. > > > - Original Message - > From: "graywolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 11:26 AM > Subject: Re: Just one tip > > > > Maybe I should clarify this. I am speaking specifically about event > photography. > > > > graywolf wrote: > > > > > You were thinking of works of art, Tanya is thinking of salable > > > pictures. There is a big difference. Any pro who does not get a salable > > > picture with every shot except where the subject did something the > > > photographer has no control over is not very competent. > > > > > > -- > > graywolf > > http://graywolfphoto.com > > > > "You might as well accept people as they are, > > you are not going to be able to change them anyway." > > > > > >
RE: Just one tip
You cant be serious. If a photographer gets even a couple good sellable shots per 24 exposure roll, he's doing very well. You actually expect to get 22 really good sellable shots per 24 exposure roll? That absurd in my honest opinion JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2003 11:46 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Just one tip I totally agree graywolf, which is why I think my "strike rate" needs improving. At the moment, like I mentioned, I am getting probably 18 salable images from a roll of 24 exposure film. Of those, probably 4 of the rejects are due to eyes closing/subject moving etc. The two remaining are usually rejects due to being underexposed, or out of focus etc. Even though the bulk of the "rejects" are usually due to the "subject did something the photographer has no control over", I still consider this my fault as I should be able to "predict" or at least "anticipate" these things, and make allowances for it. I still stand by my original goal - when I get to consistentantly producing 22 salable shots per 24 roll, I will be "happy" to some degree with my own competency level. But until then, I still think, basically that I'm not worthy of people's tan. - Original Message - From: "graywolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 11:26 AM Subject: Re: Just one tip > Maybe I should clarify this. I am speaking specifically about event photography. > > graywolf wrote: > > > You were thinking of works of art, Tanya is thinking of salable > > pictures. There is a big difference. Any pro who does not get a salable > > picture with every shot except where the subject did something the > > photographer has no control over is not very competent. > > > -- > graywolf > http://graywolfphoto.com > > "You might as well accept people as they are, > you are not going to be able to change them anyway." > >
Re: Just one tip
Bill posted: > I remember the cliff face, but hadn't heard about in front of a moving car. > > What is it about professional wedding photographers that they're always > damaging their equipment? :-) Presumably because wedding photography is very hazardous work? (next to combat photography?) I'd heard about the moving car, but not about the cliff face! ERN who doesn't do weddings OR combat
Re: Just one tip
I totally agree graywolf, which is why I think my "strike rate" needs improving. At the moment, like I mentioned, I am getting probably 18 salable images from a roll of 24 exposure film. Of those, probably 4 of the rejects are due to eyes closing/subject moving etc. The two remaining are usually rejects due to being underexposed, or out of focus etc. Even though the bulk of the "rejects" are usually due to the "subject did something the photographer has no control over", I still consider this my fault as I should be able to "predict" or at least "anticipate" these things, and make allowances for it. I still stand by my original goal - when I get to consistentantly producing 22 salable shots per 24 roll, I will be "happy" to some degree with my own competency level. But until then, I still think, basically that I'm not worthy of people's tan. - Original Message - From: "graywolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 11:26 AM Subject: Re: Just one tip > Maybe I should clarify this. I am speaking specifically about event photography. > > graywolf wrote: > > > You were thinking of works of art, Tanya is thinking of salable > > pictures. There is a big difference. Any pro who does not get a salable > > picture with every shot except where the subject did something the > > photographer has no control over is not very competent. > > > -- > graywolf > http://graywolfphoto.com > > "You might as well accept people as they are, > you are not going to be able to change them anyway." > >
Re: OT- Strike Rate (was Re: Just one tip)
- Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" Subject: OT- Strike Rate (was Re: Just one tip) > Yeah, but Shel, I am mainly referring to when shooting weddings etc, where > you need to punch out a high volume of usable prints per roll. Having only a > couple of shots per roll that you "keep" from a wedding is just not > feasible. If referring to portraits etc, I would say that the average is > higher as I generally have more control over the situation and am not trying > to shoot so quickly etc. When it comes to still-life and product shots, > such as flowers etc, then I would be more inclined to say hope for around 10 > really good shots per roll of 24 as I am much more particular about those > results... I still very much have a ways to go before I am happy with my > "strike rate"... What is considered a good success rate for a wedding photographer is much different from a fine art photographer. Weddings are a one shot deal, so pretty much every shot counts, whether or not it has some warts showing. There are some wedding shots that have to go into the book no matter what is wrong with them, and working with no professional models for the portaiture tends to lower the standard somewhat. I do know a few shooters who package as few as a dozen images for their customers wedding portfolio, out of a couple of hundred frames, but most of us are in a situation where the customer expects a certain volume of images, and we have to provide that, while staying within a reasonable material cost. So, we try to develop good reflexes. William Robb
Re: Just one tip
On 30/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >> If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, >> what would it be? > >Just thought I would pop this in Ne'er truer words spoken. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Just one tip
When I'm shooting on the street or doing landscape photography, I generally have only a few keepers per roll. When I'm shooting an assignment with setups and predetermined images, I usually hit about at a much higher percentage rate, particularly with negative film where bracketing isn't so necessary. On Dec 30, 2003, at 7:20 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Wow! Back in the late sixties, when I was hanging out with a lot of photogs, the general consensus was ONE keeper from a roll of 36. Maybe we were looking for different things then, hard to say. Looking at the contact sheets of some great and current photogs, as well as some from the fifties and sixties, it's interesting to note that often only two or three shots from a roll are chosen for publication or exhibition or some other useful purpose. 18 keepers per roll is darned good, imo. Tanya Mayer Photography wrote: I guess this is why I still don't believe that I have a great "strike rate" with my photography. I am averaging probably 18 exposures per 24 roll that I consider to be "keepers". When I get up to 22 "keepers" per roll, I'll be happy.
Re: Just one tip
You were thinking of works of art, Tanya is thinking of salable pictures. There is a big difference. Any pro who does not get a salable picture with every shot except where the subject did something the photographer has no control over is not very competent. -- Shel Belinkoff wrote: Wow! Back in the late sixties, when I was hanging out with a lot of photogs, the general consensus was ONE keeper from a roll of 36. Maybe we were looking for different things then, hard to say. Looking at the contact sheets of some great and current photogs, as well as some from the fifties and sixties, it's interesting to note that often only two or three shots from a roll are chosen for publication or exhibition or some other useful purpose. 18 keepers per roll is darned good, imo. Tanya Mayer Photography wrote: I guess this is why I still don't believe that I have a great "strike rate" with my photography. I am averaging probably 18 exposures per 24 roll that I consider to be "keepers". When I get up to 22 "keepers" per roll, I'll be happy. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com "You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway."
OT- Strike Rate (was Re: Just one tip)
Yeah, but Shel, I am mainly referring to when shooting weddings etc, where you need to punch out a high volume of usable prints per roll. Having only a couple of shots per roll that you "keep" from a wedding is just not feasible. If referring to portraits etc, I would say that the average is higher as I generally have more control over the situation and am not trying to shoot so quickly etc. When it comes to still-life and product shots, such as flowers etc, then I would be more inclined to say hope for around 10 really good shots per roll of 24 as I am much more particular about those results... I still very much have a ways to go before I am happy with my "strike rate"... tan. - Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 10:20 AM Subject: Re: Just one tip > Wow! Back in the late sixties, when I was hanging out with a lot of photogs, > the general consensus was ONE keeper from a roll of 36. Maybe we were looking > for different things then, hard to say. Looking at the contact sheets of some > great and current photogs, as well as some from the fifties and sixties, it's > interesting to note that often only two or three shots from a roll are chosen > for publication or exhibition or some other useful purpose. > > 18 keepers per roll is darned good, imo. > > Tanya Mayer Photography wrote: > > > I guess this is why I still don't believe that I have a great "strike rate" > > with my photography. I am averaging probably 18 exposures per 24 roll that > > I consider to be "keepers". When I get up to 22 "keepers" per roll, I'll be > > happy. > > >
Re: Just one tip
Knarf, Quit yer bitching . You should try getting 4x5 B&W developed in Charlotte. $5 a negative, and they grossly under develop them for you. And here in Boone you can not have them done for love nor money. On the other hand, I have finally (today) light-proofed my bathroom and set up the darkroom in it, so now I can do it at home. I still need a print washer, and some ventilation but will make do in the mean time. Tomorrow I plan to mix up some chemicals and make some test prints. BTW for anyone who is interested: I have been trying to find something cheap and big enough to cover the bathroom window. Then the other day I had an "ah-ha" experience and realized that the sashs were actually quite small and it was easy to find some cardboard laying around big enough to cover each sash separately. I taped the cardboard up with some black duct tape. Won't last long because of moisture but I will hopefully find something more permanent by then. -- frank theriault wrote: Malcolm, Quit yer bitching. You've got a *istD! You can shoot for free now. Seriously, I know what you mean when you say developing ain't cheap. Last winter, when I was having (ahem) "cash flow problems", I couldn't afford to bring in many of my exposed films to be developed. Now that things are slightly more comfortable, I've been able to double up on what I bring in, a new one with an old one. Still have at least 1/2 dozen from last year. It's kind of fun, getting lots of surprises - "Hey, I forgot I took that one! Not a bad shot!" But, that's sort of my point. You can still find HP5+ for around $3.50 Cdn a roll. You can still shoot if you're poor, and get it developed later. Or, if I chose to, I could go to any number of photo stores to get cheap print film, processing included, for under $10Cdn. I must say, I've really enjoyed all the answers to this thread (thanks for starting it, Kevin!). It would be interesting to compile it - I bet lots of tyros could benefit from the simplicity and usefulness of the exercise. cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: "Malcolm Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Well, I've done just that! 5 rolls sent off for development last night. Development isn't as cheap though . Malcolm _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com "You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway."
Re: Just one tip
This one time, at band camp, Kevin Waterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, > what would it be? Just thought I would pop this in Bracket! Kevin -- __ (_ \ _) ) | / / _ ) / _ | / ___) / _ ) | | ( (/ / ( ( | |( (___ ( (/ / |_| \) \_||_| \) \) Kevin Waterson Port Macquarie, Australia
Re: Just one tip
This one time, at band camp, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wow! Back in the late sixties, when I was hanging out with a lot of photogs, > the general consensus was ONE keeper from a roll of 36. I still go with that, sometimes 2 per roll if its a good day. For me, a roll of 36 is only 13 shots with bracketing. Of those, 1-2 is usually printable. Kind regards Kevin -- __ (_ \ _) ) | / / _ ) / _ | / ___) / _ ) | | ( (/ / ( ( | |( (___ ( (/ / |_| \) \_||_| \) \) Kevin Waterson Port Macquarie, Australia
Re: Just one tip
Wow! Back in the late sixties, when I was hanging out with a lot of photogs, the general consensus was ONE keeper from a roll of 36. Maybe we were looking for different things then, hard to say. Looking at the contact sheets of some great and current photogs, as well as some from the fifties and sixties, it's interesting to note that often only two or three shots from a roll are chosen for publication or exhibition or some other useful purpose. 18 keepers per roll is darned good, imo. Tanya Mayer Photography wrote: > I guess this is why I still don't believe that I have a great "strike rate" > with my photography. I am averaging probably 18 exposures per 24 roll that > I consider to be "keepers". When I get up to 22 "keepers" per roll, I'll be > happy. >
RE: Just one tip
If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, > what would it be? Think. Butch Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Re: Just one tip
Jeez tom, I'd never even thought of that, that opens a whole other can of worms... maybe i really should look into a monopod, cause that is just too scry... tan. - Original Message - From: "tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 9:41 AM Subject: RE: Just one tip > > -Original Message- > > From: Tanya Mayer Photography [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > More than once, I have had a kid run past me at a rodeo and > > trip on my > > tripod, knocking it to the ground, (*tanya wonders if she > > should invest in a > > monopod for such events*) complete with camera etc. > > I'm really paranoid about using tripods around people...worried I'll > get sued when someone trips over it and cracks their skull. > > tv > >
Re: Just one tip
Kevin Waterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, > what would it be? Always carry the camera (and use it!). Gianfranco = To read is to travel without all the hassles of luggage. ---Emilio Salgari (1863-1911) __ Do you Yahoo!? Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003 http://search.yahoo.com/top2003
Re: Just one tip
Have the damn camera with you. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com "You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway."
Re: Just one tip
BTW, I'm helping a group of girl scouts get a photography badge this Friday. I've officially started assembling a list of these "tips". ;-) Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Just one tip
Read the manual of your camera/flash etc. once a year, take it with you for those moments where you have nothing better to do. On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 04:54, Kevin Waterson wrote: > If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, > what would it be? > > I think I would say something like "try to see the image before you take it" > or something like, always take extra film/batteries > > Kind regards > Kevin -- Frits Wüthrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Just one tip
Study your unsuccessful shots as carefully as your successful shots because you can learn from both. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Just one tip
Hi, >If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, >what would it be? Don't try to be a photographer. Just be someone who photographs the stuff you're interested in anyway. -- Cheers, Bob
Re: Just one tip
Move in close and fill the frame with your subject. On Dec 29, 2003, at 10:54 PM, Kevin Waterson wrote: If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, what would it be? I think I would say something like "try to see the image before you take it" or something like, always take extra film/batteries Kind regards Kevin -- __ (_ \ _) ) | / / _ ) / _ | / ___) / _ ) | | ( (/ / ( ( | |( (___ ( (/ / |_| \) \_||_| \) \) Kevin Waterson Port Macquarie, Australia
Re: Just one tip
On 30/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, >what would it be? I already offered 'just one tip' so I won't offer anymore as it's outside the remit of the original question. However, I have a poster up on the side of one of our fridges (my wife collects them - don't ask) and it is of a native African girl in a 3rd world country somewhere looking down the viewfinder of a 16mm film camera (an Aaton I think - could be an Arri SR maybe) and she's smiling - the camera is pointed straight at the photographer's lens and the caption reads in big white letters: 'A PHOTOGRAPH IS USUALLY LOOKED AT - SELDOM LOOKED INTO' I see it every morning as I go out the door and there isn't a day goes by when I don't think about it. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Just one tip
On 30/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, >what would it be? For portraits, don't shoot until you see the whites of their eyes. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
AW: Just one tip
o Try guessing aperture and speed before looking at the meter and a second one (sorry): o Throw away bad prints before someone can look over your shoulder, saying "Oh, can I have this one?" Sven -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: Kevin Waterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Gesendet: Dienstag, 30. Dezember 2003 04:55 An: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Betreff: Just one tip If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, what would it be? I think I would say something like "try to see the image before you take it" or something like, always take extra film/batteries Kind regards Kevin -- __ (_ \ _) ) | / / _ ) / _ | / ___) / _ ) | | ( (/ / ( ( | |( (___ ( (/ / |_| \) \_||_| \) \) Kevin Waterson Port Macquarie, Australia
Re: Just one tip
Learn about light! Both in how to measure it and how to compose with it. Bruce Monday, December 29, 2003, 7:54:39 PM, you wrote: KW> If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, KW> what would it be? KW> I think I would say something like "try to see the image before you take it" KW> or something like, always take extra film/batteries KW> Kind regards KW> Kevin
Re: Just one tip
Tom wrote: > > If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, > > what would it be? > > Don't drop your camera on pavement. I did that once. But the alternative would have been an RB67 hitting my foot, lens first. OTOH it would have taken less time for my foot to heal than it took me to fix the lens. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/
Just one tip
Give up now! Get rid of all cameras. If you don't you run the serious risk of becoming enslaved to some aspect of the discipline: the equipment, the taking of pictures, processing of both kinds, and, last but no least [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Don ___ Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery See New Pages 'The Cement Company from HELL!' Updated: August 15, 2003 "Oh my God! They've killed Teddy!"
Re: Just one tip
Edit, edit, edit. Then show your favourites to others and edit some more. chris On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Kevin Waterson wrote: > If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, > what would it be? > > I think I would say something like "try to see the image before you take it" > or something like, always take extra film/batteries > > Kind regards > Kevin > > -- > __ > (_ \ > _) ) > | / / _ ) / _ | / ___) / _ ) > | | ( (/ / ( ( | |( (___ ( (/ / > |_| \) \_||_| \) \) > Kevin Waterson > Port Macquarie, Australia >
RE: Just one tip
frank theriault wrote: > Shoot Lots! > > Film is cheap. With digital, shooting lots is even cheaper > (after the initial investment of equipment and peripherals). Well, I've done just that! 5 rolls sent off for development last night. Development isn't as cheap though . Malcolm
RE: Just one tip
Take some damn pictures. -- "Ask not at whom the Chimp smirks - he smirks at you." www.smirkingchimp.com www.gregpalast.com www.monbiot.com > -Original Message- > From: Kevin Waterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 29-Dec-03 19:55 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Just one tip > > > If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, > what would it be?
Re: Just one tip
hehehe, or over a cliff face, OR in front of a moving car... tan. - Original Message - From: "tom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 2:03 PM Subject: RE: Just one tip > > -Original Message- > > From: Kevin Waterson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, > > what would it be? > > Don't drop your camera on pavement. > > tv > > >
Re: Just one tip
- Original Message - From: "Kevin Waterson" Subject: Just one tip > If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, > what would it be? Look at lots of pictures. William Robb
Re: Just one tip
> Kevin Waterson wrote: > > > If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, > > what would it be? > > With the *ist D, check your ISO and white balance before you start shooting. Bill
Just one tip
If you could impart just one tip to someone regarding photography, what would it be? I think I would say something like "try to see the image before you take it" or something like, always take extra film/batteries Kind regards Kevin -- __ (_ \ _) ) | / / _ ) / _ | / ___) / _ ) | | ( (/ / ( ( | |( (___ ( (/ / |_| \) \_||_| \) \) Kevin Waterson Port Macquarie, Australia
