Post by: dreed on January 21, 2019, 10:12:24 am
Just before I hit the delete button I thought "Should I keep this so I remember not to do that again?"
Which made me wonder if others do this?
If you've made a compositional error, do you ever keep that image as a reminder of what doesn't work, lest you return to the same place and make the same mistake? As for why keep it, well human memory isn't always the best :)
The rationale here is that if over 20 years I only keep what works then one day I might decide to try something new/different again and unknowingly repeat a mistake from the past.
Post by: KLaban on January 21, 2019, 10:20:31 am
Post by: Kiwi Paul on January 21, 2019, 10:21:24 am
It's often surprising when looking back over photos I dismissed initially how with a bit of cropping and creative post processing I really can make a reasonable photo.
I think disk space is plentiful and cheap so I'm happy to keep them all, it's often more hassle deleting them.
Post by: Eric Myrvaagnes on January 21, 2019, 10:34:08 am
Many of the discards were simply bad prints: it was so time-consuming to get a good print in pre-digital days. But most of them were just badly seen, sloppy, lazy images that had me asking: "what was I thinking?"
It was very humbling. On the other hand, I think my seeing (and technical prowess) have improved dramatically since I joined the digital revolution.
My suggestion: Keep everything for a while. Then, maybe once every ten years go through it all and see if you have gotten better in any respect. At that ponit, throw all the old discards away.
Post by: John R on January 21, 2019, 10:46:43 am
I tend to keep everything except photos that haven't been taken properly at all (OOF or completely exposed wrong etc). [snip]I did at first, as per Kiwi Paul. Looking back I would say it's because I never imagined how many images I would collect or how much impact Digital photography would have on my work. Now I delete almost anything not immediately deemed good or very good, and accept the consequences. I am in process of culling all my work. Probably will end up with one hard drive and one backup. My feeling is, the chances are slim that I will bother to wade through thousands of images in the future. I suppose if you are a professional you may have reasons to keep most of your images, such as wedding and client based work, but for most enthusiasts, I can't imagine going through thousands of images. Surely, if the finder of Vivian Maier's work, did not immediately see the value and quality of her work, they would have let it go into the garbage, and not waded through thousands of images.
JR
Post by: Rob C on January 21, 2019, 11:49:06 am
It also happens that a small section of a shot turns out to be very useful when incorporated into a second image; Photoshop has changed the options beyond belief, and things that took a lot of tries to get right in the wet are now fairly straightforward today. You never know what may come in useful.
Post by: Ivophoto on January 21, 2019, 11:53:23 am
Post by: Martin Kristiansen on January 21, 2019, 11:59:02 am
Post by: Bart_van_der_Wolf on January 21, 2019, 12:05:14 pm
Cheers,
Bart
Post by: RSL on January 21, 2019, 12:07:03 pm
Post by: petermfiore on January 21, 2019, 12:18:49 pm
Peter
Post by: Aram Hăvărneanu on January 21, 2019, 12:31:55 pm
Post by: faberryman on January 21, 2019, 02:42:52 pm
Post by: langier on January 21, 2019, 03:33:40 pm
Why? First, I remember the story of Dirk Halstead and the story of Monica's blue dress. He archived his work, the rest of his colleagues chimped and dumped their files... Second, when I edit, many times it's initially in the field of under deadline. Having the similars stashed in the deep archives saves me when I choose an image and then find out it's a little off in focus, composition, gesture, etc. It happens a few times of the year, but not too common.
I seldom, if ever purge in the field since the back of the camera is seldom a good way to judge an image and if you're chimping your pix, your missing life unfolding in front of you.
This way, I figure I'm covered. I've got fodder for visual notes, I've got "B" roll pieces to add to my story and I have back-up for my working files.
I also have my history of my vision, what made the cut, what didn't and if I return and shoot again, I can then see what I should concentrate on or improve.
Speaking of history, sometimes a little snap that seemed so inconsequential at the time becomes a cherished piece of history when the world out there changes. How many times have I simply said "I shoot that later when I have time or the conditions look better..." only to come back later and there is no later....
As always, find a system that works for you and keep at it!
Post by: farbschlurf on January 21, 2019, 03:51:11 pm
Post by: Telecaster on January 21, 2019, 04:24:48 pm
-Dave-
Post by: stamper on January 22, 2019, 04:30:42 am
Post by: kers on January 22, 2019, 08:27:02 am
I used to keep everything, but recently i just had to throw away shots. I made too much rubbish.
My work is partly making photographs at late night concerts,in bad light, sometimes in stroboscopic light; You can imagine how many failures you have...I shoot a 100GB on a night .
Now i keep about 20-30% of that.
I am in the process / mood of cleaning and throwing away things, after a long time of keeping everything. ( also just emptied my attic )
It takes a lot of time to throw away the right things- On the other hand- it makes me look more careful at the photographs i just made what could be done better next time, what could improve things.
If it is about photos of friends and family i hardly throw away anything, but the very worst. If it is my architectural work i only throw away the clear technical failures.
It also has to do with my way of photographing; a lot of trail and error to find the right thing.
Of course you always risk that you throw away the wrong things looking back, but often i just do not know anymore what that was... fortunately :).. and as i said i noticed that throwing away things makes you think deeper of what you really find valuable.
Post by: Aram Hăvărneanu on January 22, 2019, 09:15:59 am
I dislike Lightroom as much as ever. I used to use Adobe Bridge and Photo Mechanic for DAM functionality, and Adobe Camera Raw for processing, but for some reason Bridge became unusably slow and buggy, and that forced me to use Lightroom.
Post by: Rand47 on January 22, 2019, 09:22:34 am
I’m a scorched earth kind of guy.
If something I shoot “doesn’t work exactly” in my first “go” at editing, but I sense it might be something, I’ll keep it for a while and revisit. On second or third look, if nothing comes . . . It’s gonzo!
I’m a firm believer that you can’t make chicken salad out of chicken s*^t.
;D
Rand
Post by: Rob C on January 22, 2019, 11:35:46 am
If something I shoot is crap, it’s gone. If there’s something to have been learned about “why” what I shot was crap, and if I’m too dense to remember it, then I deserve whatever more crap I shoot in the same circumstances.
I’m a scorched earth kind of guy.
If something I shoot “doesn’t work exactly” in my first “go” at editing, but I sense it might be something, I’ll keep it for a while and revisit. On second or third look, if nothing comes . . . It’s gonzo!
I’m a firm believer that you can’t make chicken salad out of chicken s*^t.
;D
Rand
But don't bet the ranch on chicken curry. Or soup. Go with your eye, not your nose, which is why you're safe(ish) with the salad.
;-)
Post by: Rand47 on January 22, 2019, 01:11:10 pm
But don't bet the ranch on chicken curry. Or soup. Go with your eye, not your nose, which is why you're safe(ish) with the salad.
;-)
;D ;D ;D
Rand
Post by: Jeremy Roussak on January 23, 2019, 05:20:27 pm
Jeremy
Post by: ShirleyB on January 23, 2019, 07:17:49 pm
Post by: faberryman on January 23, 2019, 08:00:32 pm
Post by: stamper on January 24, 2019, 07:35:33 am
Post by: Martin Kristiansen on January 24, 2019, 08:13:28 am
Looking at photos months/years after you have have taken them means that you see them differently. There isn't any emotional attachment that was was there when you captured the image. Objectivity is important when assessing the merits of an image.
I have a particular style of photography I am always drawn to and shoot over and over. When I am working on a project I will shoot perhaps 10 images of a scene, three are OK and at least 4 fall into that style that I shoot over and over. I call it deadly dull or “why the hell did I shoot that”. Looking at them I will look at things like focal length and so on to see where I am missing. I have learnt a lot.
I almost always fail with very wide apertures. I no longer buy those lenses. I always fail with long lenses. I now use long lenses for commercial work almost exclusivly where it is often required for technical reasons. Macros are a total waste of time for me, I shoot them to play with gear and get my eye in only. Other areas I notice is I always pay careful attention to background but frequently neglect the foreground. All this from looking at failures. Very valuable.
Post by: Riaan van Wyk on January 24, 2019, 01:09:33 pm
Post by: Rob C on January 24, 2019, 02:08:34 pm
I have a particular style of photography I am always drawn to and shoot over and over. When I am working on a project I will shoot perhaps 10 images of a scene, three are OK and at least 4 fall into that style that I shoot over and over. I call it deadly dull or “why the hell did I shoot that”. Looking at them I will look at things like focal length and so on to see where I am missing. I have learnt a lot.
I almost always fail with very wide apertures. I no longer buy those lenses. I always fail with long lenses. I now use long lenses for commercial work almost exclusivly where it is often required for technical reasons. Macros are a total waste of time for me, I shoot them to play with gear and get my eye in only. Other areas I notice is I always pay careful attention to background but frequently neglect the foreground. All this from looking at failures. Very valuable.
The style you shoot in "over and over" may not be dull at all, just familiar. If it's where your heart is, maybe you will find greater satisfaction going with it and developing it further instead.
Rob
Post by: Martin Kristiansen on January 25, 2019, 12:34:39 am
The style you shoot in "over and over" may not be dull at all, just familiar. If it's where your heart is, maybe you will find greater satisfaction going with it and developing it further instead.
Rob
Thank you Rob for that observation. I will give that some thought.
Post by: NancyP on February 20, 2019, 01:37:34 pm
I weed out "near-duplicates" a lot. Freehand shooting of birds, freehand close-ups, any macro when a breeze is blowing - there will be a bunch of similar not-technically-ideal shots. Out they go, unless there is something interesting in the not-technically-ideal shot that I might want to follow up (what's that pollinator insect on the wildflower).
If I didn't do rapid rough cuts, I would be swamped. Back up "all" on one drive, just in order to have two copies (computer drive and back up drive) and clear the cards. I flag rejects in Lightroom on a quick first pass. Then I check my flagged shots again, and pitch. At least 50% of shots are gone. The remainder get more thoughtful evaluation, and I am not in a big hurry to ditch.
There's a dandy phone photo app called "Theodolite", gives you compass info (altitude, azimuth, elevation), time, date embedded into photo. The main use is for landscape shot planning. I may see an interesting location at an uninteresting time of day. What would it look like with Milky Way in background? or how would sun hit it at a particular time of day and date? Easier to take the phone snapshot than record manually using physical compass and gps.
Post by: KLaban on February 20, 2019, 10:37:37 pm
Post by: Tony Jay on February 21, 2019, 12:35:15 am
I will usually end up with only 10%, or less, of the images from a particular shoot. However, I only delete obvious failures up front, the rest I evaluate over a long period of time (typically over a year). This gives enough time adopt a more objective approach to judging an images worth...
I took to this approach in an attempt to improve my photography. By only keeping the small percentage of stuff that at least approached what I wanted to achieve, and still seeing plenty of flaws in most of those images, was the motivation to change my approach and to try different things....
Also, a fair percentage of my photography is bird and wildlife. At one point in time the only shot I had of a leopard was a single rather poor, and slightly blurred, image. However, because it was the best leopard image I had at the time, it survived! Thankfully, now, it has been culled because I have been able to replace it with much better images of leopards that go way beyond being mere "animal portraits"...
However, recently, I have taken to preserving a few poor images that well demonstrate common mistakes that are made, or perhaps just the ones that I tend to make(!), for teaching purposes.
Nonetheless, my Lightroom catalog only holds significantly less than 10% of all the images I have ever shot. Particularly the early stuff that I shot was just hideous, both from a technical and aesthetic point of view, but at least I learned from that...