DSLRUsers.com

I was wondering how many keepers people take these days compared to total shots taken.

One of the things about digital is that I suspect we all don't think as much about taking a shot. The 'great' thing about film is that we really had to think about our shot before we took it. A bad shot actually cost money so I know I used to worry much more about getting it right.

So i reckon i take about 1 keeper for every 50.

What's your ratio?

Around 8 out of ten - I still have a film mentality after 8 years of digital

Cheers

Chris

One of the reasons for going digital, As a beginner ,I'm spending heaps of film developing and only getting crap.

Its worth the investment now only print the keepers or albums.

MATT

Me too, about the film mentality that is. I only have a 256mb card, I shoot raw, I go out for an hour and I always come back with shots up my sleeve. As far as keepers, I keep them all unless they are blurred or out of focus but I would only be happy to show 1 in 20

Yeah... Shots I happy to show is about 1 in 10,
Shots I am happy to print (dont always though) is about 1 in 60

I'm definitely laying off the "digital mentality" in past months. Every shot may not cost film, but it still costs in shutter actuations. Keepers generally 85-90%, good enough to show online probably 30-40%, good enough to print about 30%, enlargements to A4 I've only ever done 5 in 11,000 shots.

Great thread!!!

It’s made me sit back & look at my situation after 4 years with a Digital cam.
I think I have gotten over the “wow factor” after haveing the 5700 for some time before the D70, walking around shooting at anything that moved or had any interesting features to it.
I have gone back to the film thinking mode & look at things first before committing to the image.
I was starting to worry I was loosing interest but this thread has made me think of why I don’t push the shutter as much as I did

I find there’s more keepers than there once was, so that has to be a good thing!!!!

Cheers
Ray

I keep most of the shots inmy library and review them later then ditch the really bad ones.
Average 1in10.
Starting printing out in A4 and A3 some real good photo after PP, the rest of them on to the DVD.

Depends on what I'm shooting.

However, when I took it in the studio, it was about 2 for every ten.

Define "keeper"

Strictly speaking, very little gets deleted. Storage is cheap - far cheaper than, say, somebody's son's cellphone bill.

Images that are technically serviceable - correctly exposed, good density, focussed appropriately, etc - 99%+.

Images that I'm happy with is nother story altogether; maybe 1 in 300. It's not (just) that I shoot a lot of crap. I am quite critical of my own work, and I'm very difficult to satisfy.

Printing of images these days is very much a rarity for me.

I have given some thought to the bigger issue here.

Digital is fantastic, no cost shooting (other than very slowly wearing out the camera, but let's face it, we probably want an excuse to buy a new one at some stage anyway)

When I was shooting film, I would be happy to print a few from the average 36 proof sheet. With transparencies, I was a brutal editor knowing how quickly people viewing slides will lose interest.

However, I am trying to find a balance between being able to shoot away with no downside, and producing images with which I am happy. I need to remind myself when the camera is in my hand that shooting 20 fair images is no substitute for shooting one good one. I still take lots of shots, just try to keep quality in mind.

My "keeper" ratio is low and needs work

(And like Gary, I actually keep everything)

Yes... and as time has gone on my reasons for rejection have changed...

Less and less it is due to poor exposure etc and more and more due to mistakes with the artist due to rising expectations!

Ie composotion etc...

gstark asked to define 'keeper'.

What I really meant is how many good shots do we take (I think this is how everyone reading the post took it) because I keep about 90% of my shots as capacity is cheap and I press delete there is no return.

Maybe an analogy is how many would you be willing to print A4 because there is a real cost (ink, paper etc) associated with doing that.

I worry some times that digital makes me lazy. I can just shoot off ten shots of the same thing in the hope that in one of them the composition is perfect. In these instances I think that good composition is more of an accident than a skill and this worries me.

Philosophically I believe that the truly great shots require lots of thinking, planning and knowledge of the subject matter and communicate some kind of message to the viewer. I think sometimes with digital there is a danger of 'shoot first think later'.

Cheers

and sometimes they dont... something "happens" and you photograph it... and even if the photograph is not the most technically excellent photo you have taken that something that just happened makes it special

[quote="ajo43"]gstark asked to define 'keeper'.

In these instances I think that good composition is more of an accident than a skill and this worries me.

Philosophically I believe that the truly great shots require lots of thinking, planning and knowledge of the subject matter and communicate some kind of message to the viewer.

I both agree and disagree with the above statement - no one should ever be worried about accidental composition - it happens. Then again when you look at the works of, for example, Man Ray one sees why this photographer was so highly regarded as his composition is brilliant. In saying this one has to consider that some of these compositions may have been accidental!

With regard to thinking, planning, knowledge and subject matter we would never have had some of the greatest shots in photojournalism, in particular shots taken during war time - most of these had to be immediate. So when we shoot we have 3 methods: 1 studio shooting where composition can be a major factor. 2 everyday walkabout shooting where composition can be a factor depending on circumstances and 3 - that immediate grab shot that can never be replicated and could earn the photographer a lot of money.

Cheers

Chris

I was waiting for someone to mention photojounalism.

That is clearly a photographic skill. Luck must play an element in composition but the skill of the photojournalist is being in the right place at the right time and getting a shot which captures the moment. I'm amazed at how well some photojounalists compose photos given the situations they must be in.

Just look at last years' winning photojournalism photo (http://www.worldpressphoto.nl/contest/winner.jsp). Amazing shot capturing feeling and with great composition.

But photojournalism is different to artistic photography. I suspect most of use dabble in both disciplines. Sometimes artistic sometimes capturing the moment.

My concern with digital is that the artistic shots can become less well thought out and more just a hail of shutter clicks in the hope that one of them is actually artistic.

yikes... I can see why it won... that stirs some pretty strong emotion!

I must be missing something here...I can't find the "keeper" setup anywhere in the menu...is it a button or something? Must be well hidden in the instructional manual.

Matt, what's worse is I know my camera has a keeper menu, but it only becomes operational when someone else uses my camera

Wish I could find the 'keeper' setting on the D70 !!!
So far I'm thinking my ratio of keepers is approximately 0%.
All a bit sad really... and probably due to a combination of high expectation, low expertise, and very little time to practise.

The "keeper" setting is not on the camera; it's on the user.