How much post processing does your average pro do?

[BertieTBE]

Just curious to hear members views on this...

As a beginner, I tend to take a lot of shots of the same scene, play around with different settings to see what I get, then review them all on the big screen and see what my computer can add to a selection of the best. This slightly machine-gun approach is fine when photography is a hobby, but I'd imagine, completely impracticable if you are going to have to pick out those special few from a set of 1000s, with a view to selling them.

So for the pro-shooters out there, how many shots do you take on an average shoot (I know, how long's a piece of string...lets say you are shooting stationary boats on a sunny day, easy conditions but tricky angle)?

How do you like to review you images? Do you instantly delete anything that won't do there and then? Or do it all at home?

I'd also be interested to know, how much do professionals use post processing to enhance their images? Does it become less and less as you gain experience, or is it a consistent part of the job, even when you become very skilled?

Look forward to reading your replies.

Many thanks.

 

[Pookeyhead]

As for actual processing, someone like Dave Hill or Red Saunders will do loads. Someone like Donovan Wylie or Edward Burtinsky will do almost none. There is no "correct" amount for a pro: It depends what kind of work you do and what effect you are after. One thing is certain though, a professional like Red Saunders will not be using processing to correct anything. He'll be using effects that give him the results he wants. Professionals do not need processing to fix things... or very rarely anyway.

As for how much they shoot... again, it depends what you do. If you shoot weddings, or sports, or press, then you'll take loads, and edit through them. I've often gone on a job and taken 3 or 4.. rarely more than 10 perhaps, because I have a clear idea of what I want, and have planned for the shot.


When I edit, I do it all at home. I rarely look at images on the camera, because it's an annoyingly tiny screen and doesn't tell me much, and when I do it's to check the histogram if lighting conditions are awkward. I actually have all my cameras set to not display images after they have been taken... it's a distraction. Pre digital, professionals could get superb results every time without having a screen. Also... with 36 shots on a roll (10 if you were shooting 6x7 medium format) you didn't machine gun anything... you got it right because you knew what you were doing. Imagine every time you pressed the shutter, it costed you money... you'll soon stop machine gunning

As for deleting shots on the fly.. a sports or wedding photographer may edit on the fly because there's a real element of luck involved in capturing the right moments, and especially with sports where things happen so fast, and it's so competitive, you may want to check you have what you thought you had.....

....there really is no one, accepted, or "professional" way.

As for your example of boats on a sunny day... it depends... if it was just for my record of a holiday... I'd take a shot from a range of angles and positions, then move on. If it was a professional job, I may not take any.. I may look at it and decide that I need to come back in the morning when the sun is in a different position.... and then again, take a handful only... because I'd planned for it. If you're machine gunning the scenery with multiple shots with different settings, then that's because you don't know what settings you need. That comes with A) Practice, and B) Photographic knowledge.

Practice.... and study.

 

[KIPAX]

a sports or wedding photographer may edit on the fly because there's a real element of luck involved in capturing the right moments, and especially with sports where things happen so fast, and it's so competitive, .

excuse me ? would you like to kindly explain what part of my job as a sports photographer is luck ?... I pray the wedding photogrpahers dont see this


to the OP .. the question is too wide open aimed at professionals... I cant spend a lot of time editing when I sending pics live from the side of the pitch.. Other events wiht more time at home I simply crop, straighten and maybe auto soemthing... a minute on each pic maybe.. every professional that responds might have a different answer... wedding photogrpahers will take a lot more time than i do at sports.. a landscape photogpraher even longer... gawd only knows wiht portraits

 

[Pookeyhead]

excuse me ? would you like to kindly explain what part of my job as a sports photographer is luck ?... I pray the wedding photogrpahers dont see this

Not luck in the way you think I mean. I'm not saying you shoot a million shots in order to get one that may be acceptable, but during a burst of action, you'll rattle off a few frames, and choose the best one... or are you going to tell your lightning reflexes allow you to capture that decisive moment when one player tackles another with just one shot Even back in the day, you'd have had a fast motor drive on your film camera. Basically... you're not telling people what to do.. you're not posing anyone... it's up to you to be observant, and be able to react to that quickly... you may know your sport well and like most sports photographers have an ability to predict what is likely to happen... but in the end, you've no idea until it does. As a result, you'll take a lot of images at a football match.. yes?


Same for weddings... while the formal shots are fully under your control... a great deal of stuff can spontaneously happen at the reception that is indeed luck, yes.

 

[KIPAX]

but during a burst of action, you'll rattle off a few frames, and choose the best one...

Sorry but how on earth is that luck?

or are you going to tell your lightning reflexes allow you to capture that decisive moment when one player tackles another with just one shot

no.. not even going to suggest that thank you.. so dont put words into my mouth not even with a smile on the end..

it's up to you to be observant, and be able to react to that quickly... you may know your sport well and like most sports photographers have an ability to predict what is likely to happen... but in the end, you've no idea until it does. As a result, you'll take a lot of images at a football match.. yes?

yes.. but I am still waiitng for you to quantify what I take as a complete and utter insult.. wheres the luck ?

Same for weddings... while the formal shots are fully under your control... a great deal of stuff can spontaneously happen at the reception that is indeed luck, yes.

I dont do weddings..but I owuld say no..its not luck.;. its your paragarpah above.. knowing what your doing.. knowing to anticipate and being ready and able to take a shot quickly.. maybe a burst and pick the right one yes..

but lucky shots? sorry but i find your comments insulting that sports photogrpahy is luck

 

[Pookeyhead]

but lucky shots? sorry but i find your comments insulting that sports photogrpahy is luck

You still misunderstand me. I'm not saying the photography is luck.. I'm saying the EVENT is luck. You have no control over events. You know the sport, you are able to predict what will happen, and then you have a very short space of time to react, so you will not be taking just one shot like a landscape photographer... you'll rattle off frames while the EVENT unfolds. You'll then edit through the sequence.

I've no idea what you're getting upset about.

 

[alix]

You still misunderstand me. I'm not saying the photography is luck.. I'm saying the EVENT is luck. You have no control over events. You know the sport, you are able to predict what will happen, and then you have a very short space of time to react, so you will not be taking just one shot like a landscape photographer... you'll rattle off frames while the EVENT unfolds. You'll then edit through the sequence.

I've no idea what you're getting upset about.

im afrayed your wrong as in the motorsports i take photos at i have a good bit of control over the type of shots i can get but it involves walking the course and spotting areas that you know will give wheel life or drifting and so on just last weekend on last stage i left my bag and gear in the car and walked to part of the stage with just my cam only to relize i had almost filled my car so have room for 1 - 2 shots per car and each shot i had action in as i know that spot would produce it so not luck but knowledge

 

[KIPAX]

I've no idea what you're getting upset about.

its taken me years to get to the level wher I am at (whatever that is.. intermediate probably ).. its been hard work.. lots of cold tueday nights..long days.. blah blah...according to you its luck I dont particularly like reading a comments..such a blanket comment telling me my profesion is based on luck.

 

[KIPAX]

knowing the sport.. knowing how to anticipate action.. knowing the right place to be. knowing your camera good enough so you can make setting changes in an instant.. being able to see a good sports picture .. knowing when to use a burst and when not.. theres lots of things to get good sports pics and I am sure applies to weddings... I really dont see where luck comes into it..

luck can... the most famouse boxing picture is a shot of boxer a standing over boxer b.. the photogrpaher allocated space at one side gets the front shot.. the photogrpaher allocated space at the other side gets the back... maybe thats luck of the draw...

but a blanket like this ? "a real element of luck involved in capturing the right moments, and especially with sports where things happen so fast, and it's so competitive" sorry but thats not only complete and utter rubish..its insulting..

 

[Pookeyhead]

im afrayed your wrong as in the motorsports i take photos at i have a good bit of control over the type of shots i can get but it involves walking the course and spotting areas that you know will give wheel life or drifting and so on just last weekend on last stage i left my bag and gear in the car and walked to part of the stage with just my cam only to relize i had almost filled my car so have room for 1 - 2 shots per car and each shot i had action in as i know that spot would produce it so not luck but knowledge

its taken me years to get to the level wher I am at (whatever that is.. intermediate probably ).. its been hard work.. lots of cold tueday nights..long days.. blah blah...according to you its luck I dont particularly like reading a comments..such a blanket comment telling me my profesion is based on luck.

LOL

Guys... I'm not saying sports photography is luck. I KNOW you can choose your position on the track and compose the shots you want, based on years of knowledge and skill. I KNOW a football photographer can, and does all the same thing. I KNOW the ability to get great shots, with good exposure and tack sharp focusing is honed over many, many years... I KNOW all this...

...now please... ignore your egos for a minute, and listen...


The EVENT you are photographic is NOT under your control, and if F1 car A's front wheel touches F1 car B's rear wheel during an overtake, the net RESULT of that will be luck. YOU as a photographer did not make car A launch into the air did you? Your skill is being able to react quickly enough, and to be in the spot on the track where that will happen.. based on knowing the track, and knowing that's the most likely overtaking spot. You then have to ensure the shots are well exposed and sharp... THAT isn't luck no... that's SKILL, but the EVENT is utter, and complete luck.. and you'll be rattling off frames during the event... you'll then edit through that sequence to find the best one - net result? You shoot more frames than a Landscape photographer.

Anyone reading this will be able to fully understand the point I'm making. Yet again, a thread trashed through argumentative, pedantic crap.

 

[KIPAX]

...now please... ignore your egos for a minute, and listen...

--- 8<---

Anyone reading this will be able to fully understand the point I'm making. Yet again, a thread trashed through argumentative, pedantic crap.

you mean you have done this before ? someone should have a word with you

 

[Pookeyhead]

You're an idiot.

 

[KIPAX]

You're an idiot.

So am I

 

[Pookeyhead]

KIPAX
This message is hidden because KIPAX is on your ignore list.


That's better

 

[ianmarsh]

By this kind of reasoning what for of photography isn't just down to "luck"? Who knows whether the wedding photographer will get a killer smile? Who knows whether the sun will be perfect for a landscape photographer? Who knows whether the model will have a good day and deliver the perfect look? Seems silly to single out sports photographers here.

 

[Pookeyhead]

I'm not. My point is... as for editing out shots... a sports photographer will do more... because he takes more.

I fail to see the issue here.

As for your other points... whether a wedding photographer will get a killer smile does contain an element of luck yes. Perfect weather for a landscape?.. yes.. luck...

What's your point?

The fact is, wedding photographers will shoot hundreds of frames... landscape photographers won't. Why? Because a wedding photographer is capturing a series of unfolding events that are more often than not, NOT under his/her control. A landscape photographer sets up, waits, and the light either happens or it wont... that's luck too... but you don't need to shoot 300 frames to find out.

Seriously... what is WRONG with you lot? LOL

 

[KIPAX]

Even after all the back peddling from pookyhead.... I am still not having this "a real element of luck involved in capturing the right moments" aimed at sports and wedding photogrpahers.. ..its the wrong message to be giving someone as an answer to the question.. As i say.. certain situations you can bring luck into it.. but generally no .. if a person smiles or doesnt.. you cant call that lucky photography..

 

[KIPAX]

I'm not. My point is... as for editing out shots... a sports photographer will do more... because he takes more.

I totally agree wiht that

I fail to see the issue here.

its the bit where you make a blanket statement saying sports and wedding photogrpahers have a real element of luck in there photogrpahy... not the other bits.. just that ..

Seriously... what is WRONG with you lot? LOL

Probably the bit where we dont like you saying its luck and then you trying to change it to amount of frames.. theres no denying we will all take different amounts..i dont disagree with that.. I bet i take more then a wedding photogrpaher.. theres still no way its down to luck..

 

[alix]

The EVENT you are photographic is NOT under your control, and if F1 car A's front wheel touches F1 car B's rear wheel during an overtake, the net RESULT of that will be luck. YOU as a photographer did not make car A launch into the air did you? Your skill is being able to react quickly enough, and to be in the spot on the track where that will happen.. based on knowing the track, and knowing that's the most likely overtaking spot. You then have to ensure the shots are well exposed and sharp... THAT isn't luck no... that's SKILL, but the EVENT is utter, and complete luck.. and you'll be rattling off frames during the event... you'll then edit through that sequence to find the best one - net result? You shoot more frames than a Landscape photographer.

Anyone reading this will be able to fully understand the point I'm making. Yet again, a thread trashed through argumentative, pedantic crap.

if your at a event just to get photos of crashes then ofc its down to luck but i dont think you find meany motosport photographers that go to events just to catch a photo of a crash,

as for back on topic the processing very s for each event, as i shoot outdoors weather can make a huge dif i love overcast days as i don't have to do much editing its when the sun is in and out non stop as i shoot full manual i have to do some processing when i get home due to light changing usualy as the car comes past :bonk:

 

[big soft moose]

Even after all the back peddling from pookyhead.... I am still not having this "a real element of luck involved in capturing the right moments" aimed at sports and wedding photogrpahers.. ..its the wrong message to be giving someone as an answer to the question.. As i say.. certain situations you can bring luck into it.. but generally no .. if a person smiles or doesnt.. you cant call that lucky photography..

As a wedding shooter i'm with you on this tony - its not luck that gets you a great picture at a wedding its planning, experience and people skills.

you could say being in the right place at the right time was lucky - but you knew it would be the right place because of your experience and you reacted to the moment because of your skill

(which is probably true of every genre of photography)

returning to the OP , I try to get the basics right in camera if I can , but because I shoot in raw there is always an element of post processing. ( I do try to avoid having to do cloning etc if I can , very occasionally its unavoidable)

 

[KIPAX]

I am presuming david is banned for calling me an idiot.. which I havent made a complaint about and as you can see from my reply i took it in good spirit no matter how it was intended.. 6 of one and half a dozen of the other..so am sorry to see that happen.. but then again it might not be that..

 

[fracster]

I fully understand what David is saying, |I agree with him to a certain extent.

Lets take an example.

When Wilkinson took the drop goal to win the world cup, anybody who knew rugby, knew what England were doing, the skill in getting the shot by the photographer was that they knew what to expect.

So lets come forward a few years, Lions playing Aussies, their kicker slips and misses the shot, the photographer was taking a sequence of shots at high fps I would imagine, so gets the shot just as he slips. The photographer was using his skill,experience and knowledge to get the shot, but the action of the Aussie lad slipping was luck, nobody expected him to do that.

Another scenario, I was taking pics of peregrines, I knew that at certain times of year they behave in certain ways, that is long ,cold,horrid days watching and learning their behaviour. I know when the young are about to fledge,the adults will pass food between them to entice them to fly. So, yes,that is experience and knowledge, however getting this shot was just being in the right place at the right time. A certain amount of luck was involved as well as knowledge.



International Falconary Peregrines by Fracster, on Flickr

The landscape guy who sits for hours waiting for the right light, then just every now and again the sunlight peeks through to reveal that mystical landscape shot that he gets. Yes he sits and waits, he knows the equipment and how to use it, but he cannot control the light, that is sometimes a bit of luck.

I have also done many weddings, I defy any wedding photographer on here who has not got at least one shot that shows human nature by luck, one of those shots that cannot be staged, the one with the bride gently crying during the speeches when deceased are mentioned, one of Grandad with a single tear as his grandson gets married. To say that wedding photography is luck is silly,as any other genre of photography, but don`t tell me that you never get lucky, we all do, no matter what we photograph.

I hope that is what David means, if he did then I think he is correct. He is not demeaning any genre of photography, I think he has not explained himself properly.

Except when he told Tony that he was an idiot..............

 

[Steve]

I can see exactly what David is saying.

If I try to get a good sports photo, it will be almost entirely luck if I get a keeper.

Kipax, as an experienced and skilled sports photographer is able to use his knowledge to eliminate some of this, and reduce his reliance on luck. So he is going to get x times more keepers than me.

But, however skilled and experienced you are, there is an element of unpredictability in sport that results in an element of luck for the photographer?

 

[KIPAX]

Another scenario, I was taking pics of peregrines, I knew that at certain times of year they behave in certain ways, that is long ,cold,horrid days watching and learning their behaviour. I know when the young are about to fledge,the adults will pass food between them to entice them to fly. So, yes,that is experience and knowledge, however getting this shot was just being in the right place at the right time. A certain amount of luck was involved as well as knowledge.

Where was the luck? lucky you wasnt sat at home watching coronation st? you put yourself there at that time.. your knowledge...

if you where out walking the dog and you pointed up to take a picture of a pidgeon flying past and these got in the way then thats luck... the picture you took wasnt luck.. not IMHO

I hope that is what David means, if he did then I think he is correct. He is not demeaning any genre of photography, I think he has not explained himself properly.

I respond to what people post.. not what i think they may have meant to post... and I still dont believe in luck the way he or you says.. I have conceded that luck can play a part..sometimes.. but for the most part its not... your the one there taking the picture.. unless you emant to be doing somehting different then its not luck.

Except when he told Tony that he was an idiot..............

well thats three of us agreeing then

 

[acetone]

So are we say that on a several mile track, it's your skill as a tog that decides where the tyre will explode and that's where you position yourself, or was it just that you were lucky it happened right in front of you.

 

[KIPAX]

So are we say that on a several mile track, it's your skill as a tog that decides where the tyre will explode and that's where you position yourself, or was it just that you were lucky it happened right in front of you.

it doesnt matter... if it explodes within your range you take a picture.. you adjusts settings quickly.. you focus and you take a picture.. because you know what your doing.. if it doesnt explode near you then you wernt going to get the shot anyway..

what happens happens.. if your good enough you get a good picture of it.. if your not good enough you dont... it wouldnt be luck that you got the picture..

otherwise everyhting in life is luck... out for a walk.. see a nice tree.. take a pic.. is it luck that loverly tree grew in that spot?

lucky that things happen or lucky that you got the picture?

 

[big soft moose]

you were lucky it happened right in front of you... but it was your skill as a tog that reacted to the split second chance and got a razor sharp picture

 

[KIPAX]

But, however skilled and experienced you are, there is an element of unpredictability in sport that results in an element of luck for the photographer?

I beleive in unpredictability .. i believe i ahve to be prepared for that unpredictability and i believe I ahve to be good enough to act when that unpredictable moment occurs... are we calling that me being lucky ?

big smile

 

[KIPAX]

you were lucky it happened right in front of you...

sorry but thats where i disagree.. if i was sat at home wacthing corry... looked out the window with a camera in my hand and sw it then thats luck.. but if i got myself ready.. went to the racetrack fully knowing that it could happen and be prepared for it.. then how is that lucky ?
do you see my point at all ?

 

[big soft moose]

sorry but thats where i disagree.. if i was sat at home wacthing corry... looked out the window with a camera in my hand and sw it then thats luck.. but if i got myself ready.. went to the racetrack fully knowing that it could happen and be prepared for it.. then how is that lucky ?
do you see my point at all ?

I see what you're saying, but if over 3 miles of track it could happen anywhere and it happens right in front of you by chance - then that's lucky

If on the other hand your experience tells you that a particular corner is prone to crashes and you position yourself there then it isn't luck , its skill in knowing the course

 

[KIPAX]

I see what you're saying, but if over 3 miles of track it could happen anywhere and it happens right in front of you by chance - then that's lucky

If on the other hand your experience tells you that a particular corner is prone to crashes and you position yourself there then it isn't luck , its skill in knowing the course

You can fine line it and get it down to some luck.... personaly if someone goes on an open forum and tells someone else that sport and wedding photogrpaher is a lot down to luck then i am gonna have a fit... getting it down to what you just posted..well.. thats a very thin string and NOT what was said.

 

[big soft moose]

if someone goes on an open forum and tells someone else that sport and wedding photogrpaher is a lot down to luck then i am gonna have a fit... .

oh yeah definitely , I agree with you 100% there.

As a wedding shooter nearly every good shot is planned - I don't mean that all are staged but you know that its likely that the brides mother might be crying at vows so you position yourself (or a second shooter) to make sure you get those shots - you can't predict who's going to catch a bouquet but you make sure your in position to get whoever does and so on.

The main element of luck in weddings is the weather, but even then saying "we were lucky with the weather" is hyperbole , because any competent tog will have a contingency plan and get great shots whatever the weather does.

( out of around 100 weddings I can only think of one shot that was pure luck - one where we stopped for the bride and groom shots and there just happened to be a rainbow in the landscape behind - that was pretty damn lucky )

 

[Steve]

I beleive in unpredictability .. i believe i ahve to be prepared for that unpredictability and i believe I ahve to be good enough to act when that unpredictable moment occurs... are we calling that me being lucky ?

big smile

Umm... if something is unpredictable then it is purely random or chaotic and cannot be predicted. The clue is in the un- prefix. Something that cannot be predicted.

So if it cannot be predicted how can you prepare for it. That's like saying National Lottery numbers are unpredictable, but I'm going to prepare for them.

Re-read what I said...your skill and expertise increases your success rate, but surely you can accept that there is an element of luck involved.

So if you claim that when you are succesful at getting the killer shot, no luck is involved. Conversely, you are saying that when you miss the killer shot as you were at a different part of the pitch/track, then it was not bad luck, but a lack of skill/knowledge?

 

[Steve Smith]

The best definition of luck I have seen is when preparation meets opportunity.


Steve.

 

[Steve]

...waits patiently for someone to post that overused Gary Player quote about luck

 

[sk66]

Almost all of photography involves luck. Skill and experience will allow you to maximize on the "lucky opportunities". Time invested, planning, determination(time again really) will maximize the "lucky opportunities."
As a sports (or wedding/wildlife etc etc) photographer you use all of your experience/skill/knowledge/time to ensure you are in the right place at the right time, and prepared to capture whatever is desired/presented as well as possible...that's not luck.
And then something does happen and you take 5 frames in 1/2 a second and one of them is "perfect"...that is luck. The fact that it actually happened in the first place is luck. You were "lucky," but a whole lot less "dependent on luck" than someone else might be.
There's a big difference between "being lucky" and being "dependent on luck."
The only things that don't involve much luck are completely controlled studio shots. But even those have some "luck" involved (such as how the splash actually looks). The more variables you can control, the less you are dependent on luck and vice-versa. (and the more the photography is a technical procedure)


To the OP..."easy conditions but tricky angle"... I'd take 10 or less images; probably less. When I go to shoot the Bald Eagle congregation in the fall, after an 8hr day I *might* have taken 80 pictures; 40-50 is more typical in a day. There are others who will take 1500+ in that same time frame.
But I should note that there are times where they may get an image that I miss. I'd say "shoot with a purpose" and don't worry about "how many." It'll become fewer as you get better.
As for review. I have my reviews turned off and I'm using Uni-WB settings on my cameras (makes "image" review on camera even more pointless). I *might* delete complete crap on-site, but I don't really need to see it to know it's complete crap.

 

[KIPAX]

Some days..I wish I was a Horse.....

 

[fracster]

You are not understanding what i`m trying to say mate and I can`t explain it any better than I have tried to.

So lets leave it that pal.................

 

[RichardTaylor]

@ Bertie TBE
From just a hobbyst:

On a vacation it averages out to around 100/day so for a 6 week vacation that will be around 4200 photographs. I do not look at them 'till I get back home (except possibly to check the histogram on tricky exposures)

On a dawn shoot (first light 'till about 1/2 hour after sunrise) it will be around 100 pics as the light is continually changing, and the predawn light can be tricky . I will be checking the histogram a fair bit especially when using ND grads etc.

Shooting trackside it will be 1000-2000 per day (especially if it is raining). I only check the histogram if the light changes significantly as if you are not looking through the viewfinder you will miss the action. The only time I ever look at the pics (on the screen) is if somebody asks "did you get that".

Re the post processing (I always shoot RAW). For the motor sport pics the most time consuming part is selection the photographs I want to process. For "clients" it is fairly easy As I will only have a maximum of 20 or so for a particular vehicle (for a 2 day weekend) and sometimes none at all of a particular vehicle (if I am not shooting for a "client"). For each selected pic it is basically Crop, Levels adjustment (if needed), give it a bit of punch (LR preset), noise reduction (if needed) and final sharpening. Ocasionally I will do a B&W conversion. Normally I just publish 50-60 pics from a weekend as a sample of my work and after that it driven by driver enquiries.

---------------------------

Re "luck". I never shoot in totally controlled environments (or subjects), however by understanding light, your gear and most importantly your subject (and it doesn't matter wether it is birds, opera, landscape or motor sport photography) you will get more consistent results and the ocassionaly "lucky shot" becuse an unplanned event happened and you were prepared for it, for motor racing never remove your eye from the viewfinder even if there is just one car on the track. I can post an example if you like. If something happens elsewhere or you don't catch it then you don't worry about it. Sometimes (just once for me) you are better off not catching some unplanned events ........

 

[symmetricalOCD]

you mean you have done this before ? someone should have a word with you

he's done it countless times before and has annoyed me on many occasions with comments and frankly I'm not surprised he is now suspended, he's one of the most patronising people I've ever seen on any internet forum, let alone here.