| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/20/2003 02:33:18 PM · #1 |
From the national geographic traveller FAQ
How much film is shot on an assignment?
The number of rolls (usually 36 exposures each) ranges from 300 or 400 to more than 1000 for complex stories. While this seems high, you must remember that professional photographers âsketchâ with the camera, much like writers probe with questions to get at the essential information. They explore subjects visually by shooting many sides of a subject in many ways. It is usually the combination of enough time in the field and enough film exposed that provides the depth that has become the hallmark of our coverages.
That's up to 36,000 shots for a typical final used 10 or 12 images |
|
|
|
06/20/2003 02:38:04 PM · #2 |
| Crap. I guess I'd better go get some more storage media for my cam... |
|
|
|
06/20/2003 02:40:15 PM · #3 |
Holy ****. I stopped in my tracks when I hit those figures. I don't think I've taken that many shots in my entire life (though I must be fast approaching it!).
|
|
|
|
06/20/2003 02:43:10 PM · #4 |
| Holy Moly! Can you imagine having to narrow down the 36,000 shots to the 10 or 12 best? That is probably more time challenging that taking the photos. I wonder if there is something like carpal tunnel syndrome for photographers...hmmmm. |
|
|
|
06/20/2003 02:44:06 PM · #5 |
| That's a lot of film to develop. Ansel Adams once said in an interview that he was happy when he ended up with 10-12 good pictures a year (of course, lots of the stuff he discarded we would be insanely proud of). |
|
|
|
06/20/2003 02:44:13 PM · #6 |
I find that as I get better at composing shots and taking photos in general, I shoot MORE than I did before. I want to have the option of the different angles etc. I also don't mind discarding 90% of the shots I take in order to get the one good one.
Thanks Gordon!
Shari
|
|
|
|
06/20/2003 02:58:41 PM · #7 |
Maybe that's my problem. I don't take nearly enough shots. Typically for a challenge I'll take 25 - 30. Maybe I should concentrate more on my shooting than shooting off my mouth in these threads. lol That would make some people happy or not. Thanks for the post Gordon, it's eye opening :)
|
|
|
|
06/20/2003 03:08:47 PM · #8 |
part of it with film, though is the uncertainty. no matter how good you are, you cant know for sure if you got the shot and you cant review it on the spot, like you can with digital.
that aside, yes, the more shots you take of a certain thing, the more you increase your probability that there will be one shot that is properly exposed, not ruined by cam shake, from an interesting angle, etc.
|
|
|
|
06/20/2003 03:53:51 PM · #9 |
Even with digital you can't review it on site that well, what appears on LCD screen is not necessarily what you see on PRINT (this is especially true in dark condition where the LCD will still glow brightly but your exposure is underexposed) And there are these one shot things that if you miss it, you really can't take it again.
I think National Geographic still requires photographers to shoot with slide film, as it is still the only medium with the higest resolution.
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
part of it with film, though is the uncertainty. no matter how good you are, you cant know for sure if you got the shot and you cant review it on the spot, like you can with digital.
that aside, yes, the more shots you take of a certain thing, the more you increase your probability that there will be one shot that is properly exposed, not ruined by cam shake, from an interesting angle, etc. |
Message edited by author 2003-06-20 15:54:17. |
|
|
|
06/20/2003 04:00:28 PM · #10 |
Hmmm, I thought I was getting better by building up my shooting to about 100 shots a day!
|
|
|
|
06/20/2003 04:02:32 PM · #11 |
paganini,
I agree, I find the LCD often "lies"; what you think is a great shot many times turns out to be out of focus, under/over exposed, or not framed quite as well as you thought.
|
|
|
|
06/20/2003 04:08:35 PM · #12 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
From the national geographic traveller FAQ
[i]
How much film is shot on an assignment?
The number of rolls (usually 36 exposures each) ranges from 300 or 400 to more than 1000 for complex stories. |
Well, I am not too sure, but it is worth taking into consideration that a NG assignment is a BIG deal. Then again, when doing professional work, taking lots of shots is often the only way to assure a perfect picture. I have to admit to never have taken a perfect picture, but on the various assignments I have done... Since August of last year (less than a year), I have taken nearly 25000 shots.
HJ
|
|
|
|
06/20/2003 04:59:17 PM · #13 |
At the other end of the spectrum. . .
Anyone familiar with a photographer who was commissioned to shoot New York, Boston or Chicago (can't remember the city or the photographers' name) who turned in a single roll of film at the end of his assignment? I can't find the story but my understanding was he was quite famous for his day and contended that he had met every criteria he had been given and that every shot was exactly what was needed, properly exposed, composed and ready for the magazine that commissioned him. The editors were not inclined to believe him but paid him and had someone else do a larger number of photos to rummage through. Man, I hate remembering only parts of the story.
I've got a photographic memory. . . the only problem is nothing ever develops. . .
|
|
|
|
06/20/2003 05:19:44 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by SharQ:
Well, I am not too sure, but it is worth taking into consideration that a NG assignment is a BIG deal. Then again, when doing professional work, taking lots of shots is often the only way to assure a perfect picture. I have to admit to never have taken a perfect picture, but on the various assignments I have done... Since August of last year (less than a year), I have taken nearly 25000 shots.
HJ |
Btw - Nat Geo Traveller is having a travel photo contest - entries before mid August. Not sure if that's the sort of thing you want for your web site - it is a postal/ print thing only. |
|
|
|
06/20/2003 05:25:08 PM · #15 |
For another "opposite end of the spectrum" reference, check out Jim Brandenburg's book "Chased by the Light".
"Award-winning nature photographer Jim Brandenburg gave himself a challenge -- for 90 days between the autumnal equinox and the winter solstice of 1994, he would take only one photograph each day."
One press of the shutter button a day. That's it. (Now that's a challenge!)
You can view the result of his project online. He's gone on to do several follow-up "one exposure a day" projects.
Message edited by author 2003-06-20 17:32:36. |
|
|
|
06/20/2003 05:31:46 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by EddyG:
For another "opposite end of the spectrum" reference, check out Jim Brandenburg's book "Chased by the Light".
"Award-winning nature photographer Jim Brandenburg gave himself a challenge -- for 90 days between the autumnal equinox and the winter solstice, he would take only one photograph each day."
One press of the shutter button a day. That's it. (Now that's a challenge!)
You can view the result of his project online. He's gone on to do several follow-up "one shutter press a day" projects. |
Both approaches are really educational. Anything that makes you shoot more or pay more attention to each shot helps I think, as long as you learn from the results, good & bad. |
|
|
|
06/20/2003 05:40:31 PM · #17 |
|
|
|
06/21/2003 12:01:07 PM · #18 |
|
|
|
06/21/2003 12:15:13 PM · #19 |
I think it is interesting to note -- given the other discussions going on -- that Nat Geo will not allow ANY digital manipulation of digital shots entered for their competition.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2003 12:20:00 PM · #20 |
Originally posted by orussell:
paganini,
I agree, I find the LCD often "lies"; what you think is a great shot many times turns out to be out of focus, under/over exposed, or not framed quite as well as you thought. |
I learned my lesson on my camera. I held it up to the monitor and matched the picture on the monitor to the picture on the screen. I ended up darkening the lcd 2 notches. I've done pretty well with that adjustment made.
I took some pics with my wife's cam, which is a Fuji s602z. They looked great on the cam. Forgetting that there is no screen adjustment (that I know of) most of the pictures came out dreadfully dark. Thank you Olympus!
Bob
|
|
|
|
06/21/2003 12:25:39 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by inspzil:
I took some pics with my wife's cam, which is a Fuji s602z. They looked great on the cam. Forgetting that there is no screen adjustment (that I know of) most of the pictures came out dreadfully dark. Thank you Olympus! |
Shift+DISP on the 602.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2003 12:25:39 PM · #22 |
When I first started using a digital, I was advised by an excellent pro to use the LCD ONLY for basic composition checks. Nothing else. It has been good advice for me. I think this is excellent advice whatever one's camera.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2003 12:50:06 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by Jak:
When I first started using a digital, I was advised by an excellent pro to use the LCD ONLY for basic composition checks. Nothing else. It has been good advice for me. I think this is excellent advice whatever one's camera. |
I'll buy that Jak. I think the biggest thing I need my LCD for is to check the exposure values. I often go thru and toss out the bad ones using the screen, but prefer to do most of my shooting with the regular old viewfinder, with the exception of studio shots.
On the topic of shooting lots, I took about 350 pictures yesterday after a work field trip provided me the opportunity to go see the tune-up laps for the big boat races today and tomorrow. Using the hi-speed sequential shooting, I managed to take all these shots in about 45 minutes. Of course with the boats moving as fast as they do (0-100mph in about 3 seconds), I had many, many shots way out of focus. I had to take that many to be able to salvage one or two out of every sequence. Sometimes none. But I really like the burst mode stuff. Its a great tool for sporting events. Good thing I have a decent size CF card!
-Bob
|
|
|
|
06/21/2003 01:00:01 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by Jak:
I think it is interesting to note -- given the other discussions going on -- that Nat Geo will not allow ANY digital manipulation of digital shots entered for their competition. |
Yeah, its unfortunate that they dont bother to define manipulation at all though - is brightness/ contrast adjustments manipulation ? Sharpening ?
I'm sure they don't want spot editing, or elements added/ removed or colours changed/ hues inverted etc. That's the easy part - but how far down to the restrictions go.
It's not unusual to have tigher restrictions on photojournalism , however, particularly in terms of spot editing and so on, so I don't really feel it reflects on the dpchallenge rules at all.
Message edited by author 2003-06-21 13:03:58.
|
|
|
|
06/21/2003 01:03:00 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by inspzil:
I think the biggest thing I need my LCD for is to check the exposure values. I often go thru and toss out the bad ones using the screen, but prefer to do most of my shooting with the regular old viewfinder, with the exception of studio shots.
|
I think the point is that the LCD is a terrible thing to use to evaluate exposure, unless its showing you a histogram. Incident light changes completly how things look on an LCD, so does viewing angle, display temp, length of time its been on etc.
They can be used to see if you got the composition you wanted, as particularly for non-SLR cameras, the viewfinder is often as much as 25% off the scene that the lens is capturing.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/28/2025 04:52:04 AM EDT.
