Are you a Heavy Shooter?

[StuartR]

I think I am usually a low volume shooter. I went on a 25 day trip this summer, mostly with photography in mind, and I shot about 30 rolls. Another example...I went out street shooting today in Sapporo and walked around town for about 2 hours, and I did not take a picture though I had the camera in my hand for the entire two hours. I thought of a picture to take though, so I will probably go back in a few days and take it.

I think that I definitely need to shoot more, but when I shoot a lot, unless I am really in the groove I don't find that I like many of my images. I think I feel better when I am careful about the images I am taking. That said, certain places or scenes inspire me to shoot a lot. I shot quite a lot while i was in Iceland, and when I am with my good friends (which is quite rare for me these days, as they all live thousands of miles from me (currently I am in Japan, and my best friends are in New York, Iowa, Afghanistan and Seattle at the moment)). One of my biggest problems is that I am extremely shy about taking people's pictures. Kind of a problem for someone who wants to be a photographer.

For example, today I went to the fish market to check things out. I am trying to do a photo project on Russian-Japanese relations, so I asked one of the fish mongers where the crabs he was selling were from (they were huge and alive). He said that they were from Russia. I explained to him how I used to live there and so forth. He was quite nice, and I wanted to ask him to pick up one of the monsters and show it to me while I photographed him with it, but I just didn't. I just thanked him and walked away, all the time with my camera in hand. It is this sort of thing that I am trying to overcome.

Anyway, enough of my troubles.

 

[Toby]

Whatever methods you adopt, it's still damn hard to do something original and good. And to recognise it when you've done both.

Gary

That's the bottom line but at least its heartening to know "great" photographers don't shoot amazing pictures 10 to a roll -they're also driven to work extremely hard

 

[Fred]

I used to shoot a lot of medium format before my RF, that used to slow me down, not just the weight of it but loading roll film in a Bronica ETRS in the rain is not my idea of fun, so using two backs helped but that only gives 30 frames. I'd probably get through four rolls in a portrait or still life shoot but say only one or two rolls out and about.

That similar mentality has stayed with me in RF shooting where I'll only shoot something if I see a photo in the scene, sometimes taking many many similar shots of the same scene slightly different angles etc so maybe a couple of 36s get used in a day.

Shooting digital is a pain, I find myself settling for medocre stuff and fill a couple of gigs in a day easily only to delete a shed full of garbage when I get home sometimes keeping nothing at all. The digital doesn't get out much these days. I don't get inspired by it. It makes a good substitute for a polaroid back for light tests though.

 

[hoot]

Fred, maybe you can ask a friend to be your assistant when you shoot MF outdoors.

Toby - good results always demand hard work, whether or not you're a pro. I don't think the great photographers had a better hit rate than we do... they just had better hits.

And most of today's celebrated photographers just have better marketing.

 

[Toby]

Fred, maybe you can ask a friend to be your assistant when you shoot MF outdoors.

Toby - good results always demand hard work, whether or not you're a pro. I don't think the great photographers had a better hit rate than we do... they just had better hits.

And most of today's celebrated photographers just have better marketing.

I heard it described as "athlete's luck" -a combination of talent and practice -a good analogy I think.

 

[TPPhotog]

Actually I'm quite slim 😀

I'm another where it depends on my mood and the subject.

If I'm out on a model shoot then anywhere between 10 and 15 rolls per shoot is normal for me. If it's photojournalism stuff like marches or protests, street shoot session or something I'm really interested in to then I guess I average about 5 rolls in a session. Average per week on odds and sods is about 5 rolls a week.

Although most of my shots are usable for general use, I aim for 1 nailed shot per roll that I would like in my portfolio.

Keeping up with processing as I do it myself is another issue 😉

 

[varjag]

So, a lot of heavy shooters here 🙂

I am actually more of an opposite, very similar in work mode to Stuart. One roll lasts nearly a week for me, unless I shoot a protest, parade or other public event; and even then it's only 2-3 rolls per outing.

I've tried to force myself into a roll per day on several occasions: in short, it didn't work. I just *can't* shoot in an indiscriminate mode, it's nearly painful. Shyness is an issue for me too, but looking back I can see that it never stopped me from taking a shot I truly wanted; it works as a sort of editing aid 🙂

I know the point of heavy shooting, from Winogrand interviews and otherwise. But apparently it's just not my thing.

 

[TPPhotog]

Not so much shooting in indiscriminate mode as being experimental. Even after all these years shooting I still like to try new things or angles that haven't worked in the past with other subjects.

Film may be a little difficult to source at times , but it's till relatively cheap 😉

 

[l.mar]

Ths is a very interesting thread. What if any effect would different types of cameras/technology have on the photographer. For example, the great "Weegee" shot with a Speed Graphic and bulb flash at night ---- one shot per sheet of film. Photographers who were influenced by him, such as Diane Arbus (one of Winograd's contemporaries) shot with 35mm and 120 roll film. And yet one can see from Arbus's contact sheets her rejection of many shots before her final selection of the most "arresting" image. Could there be an inverse relationship between number of images/film shot and number of "good" final photographs? Nah... 😉 (I think I'll go to my darkroom now to coat some metal plates to make tintypes... 😛 )

 

[Kin Lau]

Kin did you mean 100 or 1000 in a day. That would be over 40 rolls of film if it was 1000.

Jan

1000 (one thousand). Thankfully it's all digital, and I carry an image bank with me. 100 comes very quickly especially when I'm trying for flight shots, such as with the falcons.... you basically start shooting the minute they take off, and don't stop until they're too far or perched again. The "you may never get this opportunity again" principle works here. Things happen incredibly fast with birds, in a 4 shot burst in just over 1 sec, they can be in 3 completely different poses, and the 4th frame will be blank 🙂.

 

[wierdcollector]

I generally shoot about 1 roll per camera and bring three or more cameras when I shoot. I don't do street photography but doesn't cost me much for processing as I have all my shots transferred to disk for about 4$/roll. I average about 3 rolls per week lately, have 300 rolls in the freezer and about 300 more coming from eBay.

 

[ErnestoJL]

It depends on my budget, my mood or the kind of pictures I want to get. For example, I´ve been one week in the south of Argentina (a short vacation with my wife). I brought three cameras with me, one SLR with some lenses, one auto VF, an RF and a tripod for tele lenses.
The SLR was used only to get pictures of whales, and I shoot 2 and a half rools in an hour or so - just documentary shots. I shoot only one rolll with the VF in a week, it was meant for the usual family shots.
The RF (a Y Lynx 14) was instead used for the "other pictures", it is those of anything that drives me. I shoot two rolls of B&W film and from it came the best pictures of the vacation (just 5 or six pictures I really like plus some other 10 nice shots). A good score for my standards.

As long as film + processing (incl. scanning +CD) means about USD 18 ea. roll, I have to be conservative and get the most out of it. If money is not an issue, I´ll be shooting about a roll a day.

Ernesto

 

[Toby]

Ths is a very interesting thread. What if any effect would different types of cameras/technology have on the photographer. For example, the great "Weegee" shot with a Speed Graphic and bulb flash at night ---- one shot per sheet of film. Photographers who were influenced by him, such as Diane Arbus (one of Winograd's contemporaries) shot with 35mm and 120 roll film. And yet one can see from Arbus's contact sheets her rejection of many shots before her final selection of the most "arresting" image. Could there be an inverse relationship between number of images/film shot and number of "good" final photographs? Nah... 😉 (I think I'll go to my darkroom now to coat some metal plates to make tintypes... 😛 )

I think in some ways digital could detrimental to a young shooters develepment because it encourages you to be less descriminating. When I was at college we all tried to shoot as little film as possible to get the images we wanted -there is now no real cost barrier to shooting as much as you like. I shoot a pentax 67 which at current lab/film prices costs about £1.50 per frame -that makes you think before pressing the shutter. There are many good things about digital (like the instant feed back of an LCD) but sometimes I wonder whether cost free (or low cost) shooting is necessarily a good thing in the long run

 

[T_om]

... I shoot a pentax 67 which at current lab/film prices costs about £1.50 per frame -that makes you think before pressing the shutter...

...and if what you are shooting still looks the same after all this time thinking about it, you might end up with a good shot. However, if the scene changes while you are meditating and you lose the shot, you are SOL.

Tom

 

[Toby]

...and if what you are shooting still looks the same after all this time thinking about it, you might end up with a good shot. However, if the scene changes while you are meditating and you lose the shot, you are SOL.

Tom

I think that was probably true when I first bought the camera but in the end It made me a more competent shooter 😀

 

[FrankS]

I'm from the same mold as Stuart and Eugene. In normal day to day life, a roll may last me 2 or 3 weeks. On vacation, it's 2 or 32 rolls a day, at an event I might shoot up to 8 rolls. Definitely not a heavy shooter. Shyness in approaching people is an issue for me too so I usually shoot without their awareness. Whenever I have screwed up the courage to actually ask, I have to say that I've never been turned down.

 

[DougK]

There are many good things about digital (like the instant feed back of an LCD) but sometimes I wonder whether cost free (or low cost) shooting is necessarily a good thing in the long run

A digital camera freed my mind from the worries about paying for rolls and rolls of crap coming back while I struggled to learn about f-stops, shutter speeds, depth-of-field... you get the idea. It let me try new things with the knowledge that if my experiment didn't work, at least there was no additional monetary cost associated with the experimenting. It certainly allowed me to speed up my learning process, although LCD preview still doesn't match inspecting negatives or slides on a light table. When my confidence increased and I knew I wasn't poring money down the drain, I started shooting film again. Ironically, the problem is now that I'm more confident and shoot more, my film costs are going up dramatically so I'm right back in the same boat... but with a lot fewer crap shots, I hope 🙂.

 

[bmicklea]

Shooting digital is a pain, I find myself settling for medocre stuff and fill a couple of gigs in a day easily only to delete a shed full of garbage when I get home sometimes keeping nothing at all. The digital doesn't get out much these days. I don't get inspired by it. It makes a good substitute for a polaroid back for light tests though.

A friend once commented that all digital has done is turn everybody into an amateur stop-motion videographer. Looking at my raw digital downloads I can't help but nod. It was actually the decrease in shot quality I saw from constantly shooting digital that prompted a friend and I to start a local photo club/outing in whose only rules were:

1 camera, 1 lens, 1 roll of 24 exposure film. No digital.

It's been great and has made a huge difference in the quality of shots. And unfortunately the GAS attacks too!

Brad

 

[Toby]

A friend once commented that all digital has done is turn everybody into an amateur stop-motion videographer. Looking at my raw digital downloads I can't help but nod. It was actually the decrease in shot quality I saw from constantly shooting digital that prompted a friend and I to start a local photo club/outing in whose only rules were:

1 camera, 1 lens, 1 roll of 24 exposure film. No digital.

It's been great and has made a huge difference in the quality of shots. And unfortunately the GAS attacks too!

Brad

I use this approach pretty regularly -it's like a musician practicing his scales 🙂

 

[StuartR]

Shyness in approaching people is an issue for me too so I usually shoot without their awareness. Whenever I have screwed up the courage to actually ask, I have to say that I've never been turned down.

I have to say that I agree with this completely. My shyness is less in that I think that they will refuse the shot than in the fact that I don't want to put anyone out. I think (at least in my case) it is a very WASPy sensibility. I was pretty much raised not to ask anyone for anything, and that makes it a bit hard to get photographs. Even if I strike up a conversation with someone and I know that they would not mind me taking a photograph, I still have trouble actually asking them if I can take their picture(or actually doing it). It is definitely a psychological barrier and not a real one, but it is something I need to overcome.

As for cost per frame...that never really enters my mind. Though I will not burn through film, that does not really come from the cost per frame as much as the idea that I need to make proper use of every frame. Again, I think for me there is this weird waspy sensibility that everything must be used to its full potential. Waste not want not and so on.