lol omg..what did i get myself into? too many snaps!

[Keebler]

Hey folks,

i have small problem - bought a pentax k100 with 2 lense kit and i love it. of course, it's a new toy...been reading the manual and playing with settings....
and the problem?

oh man have i been snapping pics. i took 325 of my kids jumping into the play pool in the backyard - just yesterday!! now of course, many are copies, but i'm trying to get the perfect splash and jump. i snapped a ton the other night just playing too. tonight i took 64!

am i nuts? i realize this is a new weapon in my arsenal of tools to capture memories, but does it slow down? i know it can depend on the person, but i'm thinking with the almost 3 or 3 frames per second of dslrs + 1+ gigabyte cards, i see how easy it is to snap a ton.

i'm a good boy in the backup department and i have been weeding the pics prior to saving them.

if anything, i thought some of you may get a laugh out of me going nuts with the new camera.



Cheers,
Keebler

 

[bluefiberoptics]

It's better to overshoot than to undershoot, provided you have the space capacity.

 

[fuzzwud]

Yes, it's very easy to take too many pictures. I ended up taking 500+ pictures at a friend's wedding. I edited it down to 400 but still that's a lot.

Just a word of advice, don't forget to actually enjoy yourself with your kids. Put down the camera once in a while and just enjoy the moment. Photos can't always capture that sense.

 

[compuwar]

I've always said the difference between a good photographer and a great photographer is in the shots a great photographer *doesn't* take. Strive to work on timing and composition enough to not just clack-clack-clack away like a machine gun. You'll improve if you ration your shots- if you just continue to spray and pray you won't likely make as much gain.

 

[Doylem]

I'll second fuzzwud: put the camera down, after you've taken a few shots, and enjoy the moment. You're 'dad', after all, not just some guy hiding behind a camera. I'll guess your kids will get tired of 'performing' before you get tired of clicking. And, yes, capturing the 'decisive moment' is better than just firing off loads of shots simply because you can.

But, hey, you've got a new toy, and you're enjoying the freedom of 'shooting from the hip'. In time you'll maybe settle down to shoot, say, 20 shots, and edit down to 5 'keepers'. In the meantime you're enjoying the freedom of digital. Just imagine how many $$$ you'd have spent these past few days if you had to buy film!

 

[Abstract]

Don't worry, I think you'll slow down.


In case you don't.....

I've always said the difference between a good photographer and a great photographer is in the shots a great photographer *doesn't* take. Strive to work on timing and composition enough to not just clack-clack-clack away like a machine gun. You'll improve if you ration your shots- if you just continue to spray and pray you won't likely make as much gain.

.....then I agree with the above. I went to Japan for almost 3 weeks last year, and I took around 400-500 photos. Yes, I deleted many of them at night (don't do it while you're shooting, as you'll be missing the action), but I couldn't have taken more than 800 in total. Out of the 400-500 photos I brought home with me, I went through them and deleted the bad photos. I have around 250 photos from the trip, which is enough. Pretty good success rate if you ask me.

If you find yourself taking 350 photos of your kids playing in a pool next summer, then you have a problem: You forgot to work on your photography skills.

However, I think that by the end of this summer, you'll shoot around 30-60 photos of your kids, and keep around 15-20 photos that are actually worth keeping.

 

[Doylem]

I can remember being handed a huge pile of family shots to look through, by someone who said "I don't know which ones are best, so here's everything". These are some of the most discouraging words in the Engish language...

The pix you take aren't the problem, it's the ones you pick to show around. Anyone will be happy to see your ten or twenty best shots, but a hundred might be pushing friendship too far...

Out of a series of pix, I try to find the one that 'says it all'... and delete most of the rest.

 

[hana]

Every year around summer vacation and Christmas holidays, people ask me what the best camera is for them to buy. I always tell them the following:

1. The best camera is the one you can use.
2. Always buy extra battery and a really large memory card.
3. If you're buying it to help commemorate a special occasion (going on vacation, graduation), take at least 100 shots before that special occasion setting up the sort of shots you'd take so you can take those better shots at that special occaision.

It's so easy to take a lot of digital shots, huh?
In my opinion, too many digital shots would be at the point where you and your kids weren't having fun together!

 

[Father Jack]

You must be ruthless .. weed out everything that is not good.
Digital cameras are a great way to learn as it doesn't cost you anything.
Your technique will improve as you learn from your mistakes ...
In the mean-time enjoy.

 

[miloblithe]

I've always said the difference between a good photographer and a great photographer is in the shots a great photographer *doesn't* take. Strive to work on timing and composition enough to not just clack-clack-clack away like a machine gun. You'll improve if you ration your shots- if you just continue to spray and pray you won't likely make as much gain.

I'd offer a possible exception is the broad category of event photography. Anything that isn't ever going to happen again, it's a good idea to take a lot so that you improve your odds. Good timing and composition (and all other elements of understanding how pictures work) also improve your odds with the machine gun effect. Certainly just taking lots of pictures alone isn't what makes taking lots of pictures effective.

 

[compuwar]

I'd offer a possible exception is the broad category of event photography. Anything that isn't ever going to happen again, it's a good idea to take a lot so that you improve your odds. Good timing and composition (and all other elements of understanding how pictures work) also improve your odds with the machine gun effect. Certainly just taking lots of pictures alone isn't what makes taking lots of pictures effective.

While I get what you're saying, I'll argue that improving your timing and framing are just fine without machine-gunning it. Spray-and-pray is good for when your timing isn't up to hitting something exactly- like explosions, but even with things like high-speed motor sports, diving, etc. a well-aimed shot at the right time beats spray-and-pray better than 9 times out of 10.

Watch a pro wedding shooter who's nailed his craft, you'll see them spending more time setting up to hit that once-in-a-lifetime moment than shooting it.

Shoot medium or large format for a couple of months and watch how your rate of fire decreases, but your rate of excellence increases.

In my photographic element, I'll shoot slow and I'll nail it. Out of my element, I find myself shooting more quickly and missing things because of it. Well-aimed shots also give you the luxury of looking beyond the viewfinder between shots to gain more chances.

 

[Doylem]

Yeah,... if you keep your finger on the shutter and shoot in a continuous burst, you're not really upping your chances of getting THE shot. Partly 'cos the camera's aperture will be closed for longer than it's open. Also you're not learning how to hit the 'decisive moment'.

 

[Keebler]

i'm kind of bummed out - i had sent a nice big reply with many thanks to you folks, but that post didn't work ..weird.!

anyhoo, in case it does pop up, this might be a repeat..BUT...

i did want to say thanks!
compuwar: great advice. i'm working on capturing the right moments. i ordered a few books for pointers too.

father Jack: been paring them down too. i had the same thought - if i don't start on good habits now, i'm screwed and will end up with a massive library of nothing (or mostly nothings

to the advice about putting down the camera at times - good point, but fear not. I'm such a Mr. Mom that i put michael keaton's character to shame honestly...it's bragging to the heart of it, but i've been a stay-at-home Dad for 6 years now and while that doesn't make me perfect - i've done it all!
swimming lessons; baking; reading groups; playgroups (full of mommy cliques though); bike rides; tons of grocery shopping; puzzles; massive block towers (which have reached the ceiling); reading (TOTAL bragging here, but i must have done something right b/c my 6 year old has been reading since before JK and he's now reading at a grade 5 level and my 3 year old is starting on the same things..although a bit behind at this stage) and i've even taught them to sort laundry. heck, i even took the 6 year old deer hunting last year which i know might be a debatable point on a number of levels, but i'm a teacher and a BIG kid at heart so it's all good.

So thanks...no worries about me not playing with them. sometimes, i think i play too much with them and it's time to let them play without dad so they can be creative on their own.

and you'll be happy to know i've always had a camcorder and cameras around so even the 6 year old has one of those fisher price cameras and snaps alot too

Thanks again for the advice. awesome!
Cheers,
Keebler

 

[pdxflint]

A couple of things come to mind for me. First, it's a new camera, and more than that, it's a dSLR, and there's no film costs. It's to be expected that at first you'll be shooting pictures of just about anything, especially kids, dogs, chairs, messy desks, regular old yard pics, snapshots.. and changing lenses a lot...because you're playing with and getting to learn how your new "toy" works. That will slow down as a matter of time and familiarity, and once you get over your "honeymoon" period with the equipment. That's when you'll start working on your technique because the camera alone isn't giving you the results you know it can. All in all, it's a fun journey.

Second, the newer dSLRs offer a lot of control, but also the technology to just fire away and shoot snaps - for free - and generally the results are better than you'd normally expect... just not really memorable. This is when it requires slowing down, and thinking... about your "photo assignment" as if you were shooting expensive film, with a manual SLR. No programmed mode, maybe aperture or shutter preferred, but basically with you, the photographer, making the decisions (albeit with a little help from technology like great metering, some auto functions are ok.) Use the tools, exposure compensation, white balance customization (maybe a bit like understanding various color film emulsion behaviors used to be,) using depth-of-field creatively, shutter speed control for effects, filters, and of course the most important one for me - using your eye to see how various angles and points of view affect composition. Anticipate. Be ready for the shot. Learn to see the images you want to achieve, and the rest will fall into place.

Congrats on the new Pentax, and happy dSLR shooting!

 

[Mike Teezie]

While I get what you're saying, I'll argue that improving your timing and framing are just fine without machine-gunning it. Spray-and-pray is good for when your timing isn't up to hitting something exactly- like explosions, but even with things like high-speed motor sports, diving, etc. a well-aimed shot at the right time beats spray-and-pray better than 9 times out of 10.

Watch a pro wedding shooter who's nailed his craft, you'll see them spending more time setting up to hit that once-in-a-lifetime moment than shooting it.

Shoot medium or large format for a couple of months and watch how your rate of fire decreases, but your rate of excellence increases.

I don't spray and pray, but I'll take more shots than less to make sure that I have what I need. I usually end up with 1000-1200 shots from 6 hours of coverage. That includes pre-ceremony, family stuff, ceremony, reception.

Why not? Storage is cheap.

Certainly doesn't make anyone less of a photographer.

Some people do get a bit carried away, and there is something to be said for slowing down, and just looking for it.

 

[OreoCookie]

Just go ahead and don't worry about it. However, do worry about sorting your pictures and backing them up properly! I'm sure people here can help you with that.

I have 3.5 GB worth of storage and never had to use all of it. Memory cards are so cheap. I remember shooting film: I really had to decide whether it was worth it to `pull the trigger' or not. On the other hand, I think I took pictures more carefully with film …*

 

[jeffzoom91]

Simple Answer: Yes, you are ******* insane.
kidding
Complex answer: The more you take, the larger the chance you can get the "right" shot. I used to take a couple hundred shots at a time because I would play with the burst function in my XTi. Just do it, burst until the buffer is full or you get it out of your system. That being said, when you import, just kill the duplicates, compare the almost like shots, and kill those too. I take it for granted you would have already killed the bad exposures. Last bit of advice, if you do shoot raw at any time, remember, if the image is sharp, just too light or dark, all is not lost. You can brighten dark exposures quiet a bit, you will just not have the same quality as you would have had. That's not to say that it will look like crap though. The same goes with bright ones, darken them, but not too much, and boost contrast.

P.S. If you look at the pics on your camera and think they all look like crap, wait until you get to your display at home (it is even better if it's calibrated).
I can assure you they will look better. This is especially true of the Xti.

Enjoy your cam!
Don't scare anyone with it though!

 

[Keebler]

Simple Answer: Yes, you are ******* insane.
kidding
Complex answer: The more you take, the larger the chance you can get the "right" shot. I used to take a couple hundred shots at a time because I would play with the burst function in my XTi. Just do it, burst until the buffer is full or you get it out of your system. That being said, when you import, just kill the duplicates, compare the almost like shots, and kill those too. I take it for granted you would have already killed the bad exposures. Last bit of advice, if you do shoot raw at any time, remember, if the image is sharp, just too light or dark, all is not lost. You can brighten dark exposures quiet a bit, you will just not have the same quality as you would have had. That's not to say that it will look like crap though. The same goes with bright ones, darken them, but not too much, and boost contrast.

P.S. If you look at the pics on your camera and think they all look like crap, wait until you get to your display at home (it is even better if it's calibrated).
I can assure you they will look better. This is especially true of the Xti.

Enjoy your cam!
Don't scare anyone with it though!

lol i'd say half bat **** insane

Good advice. thanks. your last point is well taken. i almost erased a few pics and said, "nah..wait until you put them on your mac". i thought it was a 'good pic', but it looks awesome full screen as my desktop.

cheers,
Keebler

 

[compuwar]

Why not? Storage is cheap.

Certainly doesn't make anyone less of a photographer.

There's a difference between "less of" and "lesser," so semantically you're correct. Someone like Monte Zucker who'd line up the 'blad and fire off about six shots during the ceremony on film and *know* he got the shots is a different caliber of shooter than someone who needs 60 shots to "make sure." That's not to say that anyone who fires off six shots is a better photographer, but there's a point where volume and quality depart ways.

 

[miloblithe]

There's a difference between "less of" and "lesser," so semantically you're correct. Someone like Monte Zucker who'd line up the 'blad and fire off about six shots during the ceremony on film and *know* he got the shots is a different caliber of shooter than someone who needs 60 shots to "make sure." That's not to say that anyone who fires off six shots is a better photographer, but there's a point where volume and quality depart ways.

How do you know when everyone in a group of ten people is going to blink?

 

[compuwar]

How do you know when everyone in a group of ten people is going to blink?

Generally, I ask them to rapidly blink first and then fire off a shot afterwards when everyone's eyes are fully open and I've asked them to smile- otherwise even at several fps, you're going to have folks starting and stopping their blinking.

 

[miloblithe]

Generally, I ask them to rapidly blink first and then fire off a shot afterwards when everyone's eyes are fully open and I've asked them to smile- otherwise even at several fps, you're going to have folks starting and stopping their blinking.

What if the shots are candid, not posed?

 

[compuwar]

What if the shots are candid, not posed?

I've never taken a candid shot of 10 people all looking towards the camera where the people were the focus of the image. For a small group, I'll generally either look and time or wait for something to move in my direction that catches the attention, or someone in front of them to start speaking, as folks tend to open their eyes for attention shifts. I really don't think at 10 or so people you're going to get someone not blinking without something like that going on anyway- but since I haven't tried it, I can't say for sure if machine-gunning them all would or wouldn't work. I'm not sure I'd like the lighting on a group that large in a candid situation either though.

 

[miloblithe]

Well, neither have I. Obviously, I'm just trying to think up examples where taking a small series of shots is a good idea. I figure that there's got to be a few (other than, of course, when you actually want a series of shots to show, for example, how a tennis player goes through the motion of swinging a racket). I think with candid event photos it's likely helpful.

 

[compuwar]

Well, neither have I. Obviously, I'm just trying to think up examples where taking a small series of shots is a good idea. I figure that there's got to be a few (other than, of course, when you actually want a series of shots to show, for example, how a tennis player goes through the motion of swinging a racket). I think with candid event photos it's likely helpful.

Oh, I'm sure there are times when it's more useful than not, but I'm saying as a general rule of thumb a well-aimed/timed shot wins almost every time.