[Mike Cash]

Two of the attachments seem not to be showing up.

The one of the yellow flowers indicates that it was shot at f1.4. Does the DA 50-200 open up that wide? Or were you perhaps using your 50/1.4? (Is that an auto-focus version?)

I can see one tiny point near the center that seems to be in focus. You have to remember that at f1.4 you have an extremely narrow depth of focus, so you would have to expect almost the entire shot to look out of focus. Very wide apertures, with their very shallow depth of field, call for very careful composition.

[raider]

Sorry...the flower is indeed shot using the FA 50/f1.4. I screwed up using bordermaker. The 50/f1.4 is an AF version.

The other 2 attachments can only be viewed when open in another browser window. not sure why they can't be displayed on the forum itself. i.e. u have to click on the link to view the picture.

Thanks for your explanation on the depth of view of the f1.4. So what would be the correct lens, its aperture and shutter speed, if I were to use other lens such as the 50-200 to achieve the same bokeh effect, but remain in good focus on the flower?

Thanks

[m8o]

I loved reading the informed replies from all the pros / advanced ametures in this thread... I subscribed to it just to make sure I catch more. Thanx all.

[Izzy]

So what would be the correct lens, its aperture and shutter speed, if I were to use other lens such as the 50-200 to achieve the same bokeh effect, but remain in good focus on the flower?

This is the technique I use every time and works like a charm. I love that 50-200 lens. I stand back and look for the "low hanging fruit" so to speak. The rose that is hanging off the edge of a bush, the thing that is seperated a little from the others like it. I make sure there is some space between my subject and and everything else. It doesn't have to be a lot, but if the rose were to be away from the bush and right up next to a house, it wouldn't work. I zoom all the way out to long end. I will back myself up if I need to. I shoot it in the program mode. I know...I know...but I have simple goals - to happy with my own shots. This won't win any prizes, but is it an example of what you want??? Was shot using the exact technique I described. Just my attempt to be of a little help.

[bt*ist]

The question you really should be asking yourself is whether you're MISSING important shots. If you're after one perfect shot and you get it on your first attempt or your thirtieth attempt, does that really make a difference? In my opinion, it will only make a difference if Time is a factor and you're missing sunsets or other photographic opportunities; or if you're spending so much time photographing that you're missing 'the moment' yourself; or if you're taking a photo that can't be repeated or re-shot (sports action, photojournalistic, etc); or if you're running out of card capacity as a result of too many 'poor' images. In any of those instances, improving your hit-rate is important.

I'm basically the Poster Child for 'statistical shooting' but I'm cheered by the fact that when I absolutely positively have to get things right first time, I can set my camera to a conservative/non-artistic setting and then I have a reasonble chance of success.

[raider]

Izzy, that post is fantastic and I am surprised it is done in P mode! I have to try that out sometime later. By the way, I can't tell which fruit are u focusing in? Seems like none is in focus?

Could u also share what is the result aperture and shutter speed as a result of the P mode? Thanks

[Izzy]

Well, I grabbed the shot for the bokeh. The "lesson" I was working on for myself that day was over exposing for the white in the snow. Plus I lied! <gasp>. I was using the 18-55mm lens. The program mode selected F8 1/350 and I over exposed .5 for the white in the snow. My bad, will look for a flower or bee or something after work that was shot with the correct lens. I'm not acutally trying to sell you my back door technique for doing what you want - just offer up a simple, if you will, way for getting what you want.

[MrTea]

Hi

Recently I took about 450 photos in an outing, only to discover later on the computer that only about 85 nos of them are "acceptable" quality. Those rejected ones are either too blurr, or just not good at all.

I am a beginner in photography and the failure of capturing more successful shots may be attributed to the lack of my skills.

I am interested to know what are your successful shots in an outing so that I can train/practice myself to meet this skill range.

Thanks!!

An interesting post...

On my recent holiday, my first with an SLR camera of any kind, I took 1200 photos and have whittled that down to about 60 which I deem to be good enough to print/post on the web.

Would that seem an acceptable hit rate to people?

Of the ones I haven't used, about 50 are due to focus errors (I was trying, unsuccessfully, to photograph birds in flight). Most of the rest are due to the composition not working, or duplicates/lots of similar types of shot, which didn't add anything to the final portfolio. I don't generally lose shots to exposure errors now.

Aidan

[option]

"Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop." -Ansel Adams

"Over a three week period in the Falklands, South Georgia and the Antarctic Peninsula I shot 7,024 frames totaling 182 Gigabytes. I shot roughly equally with the Canon and the Hasselblad. (More on this below). I ended up with some 92 frames which I consider worth printing, and a dozen which are portfolio / exhibition grade. Three of these are among the best work which I feel that I have ever done." -Michael Reichmann, The Luminous Landscape

[LeoTaylor]

I'm a novice in Photography so I take 100-200 shots on a typical day trip to make up for my mistakes. I'm happy if I have 15-30 worthy of keeping. My failures (gross focus/exposure errors) are getting fewer each session, most of the keepers are one of 3-5 shots of the same object.

I use the Kit Lenses, especially the 50-200. I reduced bad focus shots considerably by switching to spot focus. Sure, a true artist would not want the subject dead center every time, but at least the camera focuses on exactly what I'm pointed at! This helps with flower shots when adjacent flowers or stems can confuse a multispot focus.

[aabram]

Sometimes I don't take a single photo during entire outing and sometimes I take loads.

But I too feel that the question is not so much "how many you take?" but instead "how many you need to take to get a good one?". That, in turn, depends where you set your threshold. I've set mine progressively higher so I may end up with 150 shots which I discard all because I've failed to convey the feeling I want. Technically good, but bland in respect of interestingness. I'd rather keep two excellent photos per month than two hundred mediocre ones.

Just today I browsed through a set of wedding photos I was offered to look at. There were 500+ of them. Luckily on the web. Pics after pics after pics, most taken carelessly. Bride having a tree growing out of her head, groom having his toes cut off, reverend cut vertically in half, dog walking in and out of picture, etc etc. Photographer had been so busy pulling the trigger that most of the time she had neglected the composition and framing altogether. She was not a pro but she could've done at least a bit of pre-selecting before drowning us with 500+ shots. In comparison I have another set of wedding pics taken few weeks ago on another wedding by another girl. She's no pro either, but I can see that she has pulled the trigger when the scene is ready, as opposed to just when she, the photographer, is ready. Having fifth gear doesn't mean you have to go on it all the time. Perhaps she took 50 and delivered all 50 or perhaps she took 500 pics too and still delivered 50. I will never know and frankly I don't care. She gave us 50 of her best and these are good. I don't care if her success ratio is 1 in 20, that's her business, but if she can deliver one pic that you'll want to frame and hang on your living room wall, then it's a no-brainer. You will not frame 500 mediocre shots and hang them out to display.

While I agree that it's better to take too many than too little pictures of the subject, I also find that just firing away without waiting for the moment may ultimately end up being a waste of time both for photographer and viewers. THE moment may come just after you've filled the buffer with meaningless shots.

Both, a machine gunner and a sniper will hit the target, the differences are in the amount of mess they have to sort out later. That all being said - there are days when I'd rather sort out the mess than moan over possible untaken shots

[Peter Zack]

I've been shooting both film and digital for over 25 years now. I once attended a seminar with Sherman Hines who is a fantastic professional photographer Sherman Hines and another with Courtney Milne Courtney Milne - Photographer

Both photographers felt that getting one 'great shot' out of a roll of film was a successful shoot. I find that I'm pretty much on par with that myself. About 1 in 20 or 30 are what I wanted. It's not about shooting 30 pics of the same subject and hoping one will somehow turn out well if i'm lucky. It's much more about experimentinng with the subject at hand. Trying a different angle/ composition/ exposure and so on. The thing I love about a digital is the EXIF data. In the film days it was compose/set exposures and shoot. Then with a notepad record the shooting info. Wait a week for the slides and then go back over everything to see what worked and what didn't.

So IMHO a successful shooting ratio is very low. If you can get 3-4 great shots out of a hundred and one of those is going in the file of "the best I've taken" then you are doing well. Lots of the other shots may be technically well done but don't convey a feeling or grab your attention. I find that when i'm shooting macros the success rate is much better but it may take up to 10 minutes or more to take each shot. With general landscapes or other shots there may not be that much time available per shot.

I posted a thread with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 Di and called it "First image from Record holding lens". Well truth told that shot was one of 18 frames taken. I took several from different angles/crops. With and without the tractor and so on. Each was OK but I liked this one much better than all the rest.

So don't worry about the ratio. Shoot, learn and have fun. Study your failures because they teach you a lot more than the successes do. If you try something and it doesn't work, go back next weekend and try it again with a fresh perspective.

[bt*ist]

There were 500+ of them. Luckily on the web. Pics after pics after pics, most taken carelessly. ....... She was not a pro but she could've done at least a bit of pre-selecting before drowning us with 500+ shots.

First rule of showing photographs: ONLY ever show your best. To a maximum of a couple of dozen, max. Nobody needs to know whether they're a random selection, every photo you took, or 0.1% of the total. Or, even if you tell them it's 0.1% they should at least (a) be able to admire the best and (b) be grateful that you didn't bore them.

[PDL]

My two cents.

The most difficult thing in photography in the digital age is picking which ones to keep. Take a look at the photographers of National Geographic, they take tens of thousands of images for a singe shoot, and might get anywhere from a half a dozen to 20 images chosen by the editors. The editors look at all the images - not just the ones that the photographer chooses. Some of us have spoken about one particular Geographic photographer Joel Sartore Joel Sartore Photography who was being filmed for PBS when the editor - sort of asked why did he take so few photos this time (a several week trip to Alaska) - he only shot 700 rolls of film (he has since gone digital). That was a much smaller number compared to the last article (around 950). 700 rolls of 36 shot slide film (no PP at all thank you very much) is 25,200 images as opposed to 34,200 images. These are the images that he sent in - the rejects never crossed the door.

However, Geographic’s rules on image use is that they only put the ones they publish into their archives, the photographer holds the copyright, the images are Geographic’s to use for one year after publication before the photographer can show them and any image not chosen can be used at anytime by the photographer. Look at his site - you will find many images that never graced the pages of NGM and are some of the best wildlife images around.

As for how many images are keepers? I took around 1,800 images on my vacation in Dec 06. I will keep most of them, 8 of the 12 images I have on the Pentax Photo Gallery are from this vacation and I have only converted about 240 images - some of my favorites are still in their RAW state. PENTAX Photo Gallery

I have over 700 images from my NG Workshop in Santa Fe in 05. The routine was to shoot a minimum of 3 rolls of 36 frame slide film per day. I used both digital and film. The selection process was - lay out all the images and pick the 20 best, have the instructors add/subtract images and other participants could suggest also. Then from the 20 - pick the top 5. Then the instructors and participants go into a room and select one image (sometimes two or three) from each student. So, at the end of the week each participant had 5 images that everyone voted on as being the best. That's 5 images out of a minimum of 540. Small numbers of "keepers" any way you look at it. My wife and I spent this last weekend in Victoria BC and by accident we stumbled on the Northwest Deuce Day – 700+ 1932-1936 Ford Deuce coupes and other hotrods. I restrained my self and only shot a about 150 images, after all it was a vacation getaway with my wife – not my camera. I have about 100 interesting images of cars, paint, some rust, motors and chrome. Will I keep all of them – yes – for the memories not for the quality - or quantity - of the images.

Remember, before motor drives - when real photographers had huge thumbs, or carried 4 frames of cut film around for their SpeedGrafix - photographers were capturing "the moment" just fine thank you very much. High fps, high ISO and fast zoom lenes do not make up for knowledge, skill and understanding of subject matter. Ansel may have been happy with 12 good images a year - but his sensor was 8x12 inches and his PP per print was measured in hours - that is not the same a filling a 4GB card as fast as you can drain a battery.

My issue is not taking images - it is the editing. I suggest that you find someone who will be brutal but honest. Find someone who will tell you – why it s*cks – ADF (Any D*mn Fool) can tell you it s*cks – but to make sense of why – that is what editing is all about. Try to tell a story with the images - do not just throw up (literally and figuratively) random shots. Build slide shows - 5 seconds per image and simple fade in fade out transitions. Do not rely on family members to give you an honest opinion - they will not want to ruffle your feathers or push you into places you have never been.

The late John Szarkowski (curator of photography MOMA NYC) said it best:
"The truth is that anybody can make a photograph.
The trouble is not that photographs are hard to make.
The trouble is that they are hard to make intelligent and interesting.”
John Szarkowski 2000 (died July 2007)

PDL

[wll]

Very nicely said PDL.

wll