Images taken v. images sold

[CSR Studio]

This is mainly about weddings. I am a member of another photography forum and a few members had posted their wedding shots. There were detail shot after detail shot. It was crazy.

So, it got me to thinking how many images do you shoot versus how many you sell? Also, do you offer packages so you know going in that they are going to get x number of images? And you shoot how many?

This would be on an average wedding, no high end or low end stuff.

 

[FrankLamont]

Are you asking this as a professional question, or just... asking?

Because it depends on style, client requirements, the lot.

 

[CSR Studio]

Are you asking this as a professional question, or just... asking?

Because it depends on style, client requirements, the lot.

I don't understand, what do you mean asking as a professional? I am just curious about how many we shoot compared to what we sell. Maybe it is because I started shooting weddings on film but I make every image count and be a sellable one. That is all I can trying to figure out.

 

[KmH]

This is mainly about weddings. I am a member of another photography forum and a few members had posted their wedding shots. There were detail shot after detail shot. It was crazy.

So, it got me to thinking how many images do you shoot versus how many you sell? Also, do you offer packages so you know going in that they are going to get x number of images? And you shoot how many?

This would be on an average wedding, no high end or low end stuff.

You're going to shoot way more than you sell. Are you talking about 4 hours of coverage, 6, 8 or the entire day?

After the event you're going to cull a bunch of images for blinks, blurs, experiments that didn't pan out, whatever.

As far as the ratio of keepers to sold images, if you have it set up right, you get paid for your time and talent (including PP) before the wedding and anything you sell after is just gravy, so who cares.

 

[CSR Studio]

This is mainly about weddings. I am a member of another photography forum and a few members had posted their wedding shots. There were detail shot after detail shot. It was crazy.

So, it got me to thinking how many images do you shoot versus how many you sell? Also, do you offer packages so you know going in that they are going to get x number of images? And you shoot how many?

This would be on an average wedding, no high end or low end stuff.

You're going to shoot way more than you sell. Are you talking about 4 hours of coverage, 6, 8 or the entire day?

After the event you're going to cull a bunch of images for blinks, blurs, experiments that didn't pan out, whatever.

As far as the ratio of keepers to sold images, if you have it set up right, you get paid for your time and talent (including PP) before the wedding and anything you sell after is just gravy, so who cares.

I understand, I have been doing this for awhile. I am trying to find out if it is a hold over kind of thing from film. I am thinking that people that started with digital are more free shooters than people that started with film.

Just give me an average of images captured versus images sold.

 

[CSR Studio]

Maybe I am not explaining well enough what I am trying to figure out. When I used to shoot weddings on film you had to figure out how many shots you would take so that you had enough film with you. Obviously you took extra but that is not the point.

I am seeing a trend of new photographers, what I mean by this is people that got into the industry after digital was introduced so they never had much to do with film, take thousands of images at weddings and I am thinking wow, that has to be a lot of extra work. A thousand image wedding on film would be a president of a major corporation with parties and teas. But every wedding? Are your brides and grooms purchasing them? Are you putting 1000 images in a book? I am trying to understand. Help me.

 

[CSR Studio]

This is mainly about weddings. I am a member of another photography forum and a few members had posted their wedding shots. There were detail shot after detail shot. It was crazy.

So, it got me to thinking how many images do you shoot versus how many you sell? Also, do you offer packages so you know going in that they are going to get x number of images? And you shoot how many?

This would be on an average wedding, no high end or low end stuff.

You're going to shoot way more than you sell. Are you talking about 4 hours of coverage, 6, 8 or the entire day?

After the event you're going to cull a bunch of images for blinks, blurs, experiments that didn't pan out, whatever.

As far as the ratio of keepers to sold images, if you have it set up right, you get paid for your time and talent (including PP) before the wedding and anything you sell after is just gravy, so who cares.

My point is this, if we shoot the same type of wedding and get paid the same and you shoot 1000 images and I shoot 300. We give the bride and groom an album with 50 prints, who is working more?

 

[c.cloudwalker]

This is mainly about weddings. I am a member of another photography forum and a few members had posted their wedding shots. There were detail shot after detail shot. It was crazy.

So, it got me to thinking how many images do you shoot versus how many you sell? Also, do you offer packages so you know going in that they are going to get x number of images? And you shoot how many?

This would be on an average wedding, no high end or low end stuff.

You're going to shoot way more than you sell. Are you talking about 4 hours of coverage, 6, 8 or the entire day?

After the event you're going to cull a bunch of images for blinks, blurs, experiments that didn't pan out, whatever.

As far as the ratio of keepers to sold images, if you have it set up right, you get paid for your time and talent (including PP) before the wedding and anything you sell after is just gravy, so who cares.

My point is this, if we shoot the same type of wedding and get paid the same and you shoot 1000 images and I shoot 300. We give the bride and groom an album with 50 prints, who is working more?

If they are not PPing any more images than you do, they are not working that much more.

At the same time having more images might avoid what I saw in my son's wedding book. Same images used on different pages. Guess the photog didn't have enough to not do some repeats.

 

[CSR Studio]

You're going to shoot way more than you sell. Are you talking about 4 hours of coverage, 6, 8 or the entire day?

After the event you're going to cull a bunch of images for blinks, blurs, experiments that didn't pan out, whatever.

As far as the ratio of keepers to sold images, if you have it set up right, you get paid for your time and talent (including PP) before the wedding and anything you sell after is just gravy, so who cares.

My point is this, if we shoot the same type of wedding and get paid the same and you shoot 1000 images and I shoot 300. We give the bride and groom an album with 50 prints, who is working more?

If they are not PPing any more images than you do, they are not working that much more.

At the same time having more images might avoid what I saw in my son's wedding book. Same images used on different pages. Guess the photog didn't have enough to not do some repeats.

I think it's more about quality than quantity. My 300 images would be very quality shots, my bride and grooms have a hard time deciding which to put in their book, which is always a good thing.

And I really don't believe that if you shot 1000 images that you are PPing the same amount as I am if I shot 300. Come on now. It seems that you are taking this as an insult or putdown, it is not intended that way. I am trying to understand the mindset. Is it getting carried away so you shoot every possible thing, is it CYA, what?

In reference to your son, that was a bad photographer, you never reuse an image unless you are expressly asked by the couple. Bad business.

 

[KmH]

Shooting digital is absolutely different than shooting on film for the exact reason you mentioned. Digital shooters don't have the same materials costs associated with the quantity of images they make. It's a fraction of film costs. So shoot, shoot and shoot some more.

I can go through 1000 images as a first cull in about 45 minutes. I can batch process the remaining 700 or so images for proofing while I sit and watch a ball game and have a beer, or interact on some photography forum.

Is shooting digital better than shooting film? Not really, just different.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

I think it's more about quality than quantity. My 300 images would be very quality shots, my bride and grooms have a hard time deciding which to put in their book, which is always a good thing.

And I really don't believe that if you shot 1000 images that you are PPing the same amount as I am if I shot 300. Come on now. It seems that you are taking this as an insult or putdown, it is not intended that way. I am trying to understand the mindset. Is it getting carried away so you shoot every possible thing, is it CYA, what?

In reference to your son, that was a bad photographer, you never reuse an image unless you are expressly asked by the couple. Bad business.

I can hardly feel insulted since I have not shot a wedding in a very long time and when I did, it was with film. Which also means that I understand you're being surprised.

At the same time, you have got to accept the fact that shooting 1000 photos in digital doesn't cost any more than shooting 300. And how many you shoot has nothing to do with how many you show to the customer. If they don't PP the shots they don't show the customer (which, true, is an assumption on my part) I don't see how they would PP any more than you. They just have a larger pool to choose from. Probably should say a larger pool to reject from.

If you do a traditional type of album, the number of photos used is fairly limited. If you do a book, you'll use more. But again, I don't see that it makes that much of a difference in the amount of work.

Btw, I agree about my son's photog but I am not about to tell him that

 

[Jeff Canes]

in 30 years, sold 9 taken 100,000+

 

[CSR Studio]

I disagree that ALL digital shooters always shoot so many images. I think that SOME digital shooters lack discipline and therefore are clicking off 1000+ images when they need to be more concerned with making each and every image the best it possibly can be. Quantity does not make up for quality. And if you are truly making each and every image the best it can be there is no way to click off 1000+ images. Culling out over half of your images exactly makes my point.

 

[c.cloudwalker]

I disagree that ALL digital shooters always shoot so many images. I think that SOME digital shooters lack discipline and therefore are clicking off 1000+ images when they need to be more concerned with making each and every image the best it possibly can be. Quantity does not make up for quality. And if you are truly making each and every image the best it can be there is no way to click off 1000+ images. Culling out over half of your images exactly makes my point.

Agreed.

Read some of the "I just got a camera, I'm shooting a wedding this weekend, what do I do?" type thread we get here. That will explain that part of the problem.