How many pictures should be expected from a 1 hour shoot?

<p>I am just starting out and do not do prints. I give them the disc. I am charging 65$ for 30 minutes or $100 for an hour of shooting. this is for posed shots of family, engagement wedding ect.. I take abt 200- 400 pics in an hour but obviously only 100 are good (no eyes closed no blur ect) but maybe only 30-40 are really good? so how many frame wothy pics should clients expect. (Obviously number of frame worth shots depends on the ppl, some ppl I have found are very photgenic others are not.?</p>

<p>Obviously only 100 of 200-400 are good?<br>

I'm confused by use of the word "obviously". That mean's you're only running at about 25-50% success.</p>

<p>We can't really tell you what your clients will expect. You need to educate your clients about what they should expect, based on time spent, number of subjects, number of locations, etc. There is no simple rule.</p>

<p>I used to provide 30 to 45 shots total (2 or 3 rolls of 120 film) for an hour-long portrait session. All of them were properly exposed and in focus. About 85% didn't have blinks or weird expressions. The shots chosen for enlargements were based on which expressions/poses the client found most appealing (often not the ones I would have chosen).</p>

<p>Too many "obviously" 's for me to be good business. (i.e. assumptions)<br>

<br>

As this is posted in the business section, my first advice is to not assume that non photogenic "ppl" require more shots to make the sale.<br>

<br>

Secondly, if you charge $100 for an hour, and are pulling 400 images, to then cull to100 (at what 20secs each cull? = 100minutes) and then show a final 30, (another 60 minutes sorting?) . . . that business model, here, would send you broke (bankrupt) in two weeks.<br>

<br>

So, to answer the question the light of a business framework / forum: between 15 to 30ish, from 20 to 40 frames taken, absolute maximum. <br>

<br>

The same answer I would give, if the question were not a business question, but posted in the W&P section. <br>

<br>

WW</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

 

<p>Try learning how to use your camera, how to use flash for outdoors shots. How to use studio lights. Once you are able to adjust your camera settings to create a properly exposed and sharp image with your very advanced digital camera (autofocus, exposure control, etc.) then the rest is up to you to properly frame the shot. How else will it be frame worthy? Try looking through the viewfinder and literally capturing the image you see. If you don't see a great image then why capture it? I am not saying you have to shoot in manual mode or buy expensive lenses. Just use the Program mode for starters, but pay attention to your subjects through the camera... where the light is hitting their faces, their expressions, where their hands are, etc. If you can't train yourself to "see" the photo then how can anybody expect you to capture it? Anybody can press the shutter and it even has a machine gun mode... but what is the purpose of that other than exercise for your finger. If I take a photo and it doesn't look right, I delete it right away and take another. I dont' bring back bad or blurry images.</p>

<p>In a two hour engagement shoot I might come away with anywhere from 200 to 500 photos. Feel free to browse the engagement galleries to see the quantity and quality of my work.... just as a sample. http://ibd-designs.smugmug.com.</p>

<p>ID</p>

<p>200-400 shots in an hour? That's 3-7 shots or so per minute. If I were there with my family or a couple of people, for some sort of posed/formal shoot, there is no way I would expect this kind of shooting rate to be remotely successful. That's looking at it from the standpoint of being the subject/model - and not a professional model. You need to get the subjects "together," paying attention, thinking, doing and looking "together," for each shot. That kind of rate leaves very little time to consider any of the factors that might impact the shot - what the light is doing, what clothing is doing, hair, or if you have even remotely undividued atention from the group.</p>

<p>I'd expect that if you slow down enough to actually have everyone "working" together, your success rates would go up some.</p>

<p>I believe 200-400 shots per hour is called "spray and pray." If I'm working at it, I might make 40-50 exposures in an hour and usually more like 30-40. With the expectation of keeping more than 50% of all the exposures and delivering more than half of those that I kept.</p>

<p>I suggest you should slow down and take a more deliberate approach to your photography. It's hard to shoot 3 to 6 pictures a minute and give them any deliberate attention as far as light and shadow and posing.</p>

<p><Chas></p>

<p>I agree with most of the other posts and would take notes from Ian's tips. Might as well shoot video HD and give the the footage and let them pick out what they want, or heck, let them buy their own recorder and do it them selves. What I am wanting to say is that you are working as a TOOL. To be more than a tool, you need to think more and shoot less. And as William said, the price of what you are doing is a disservice to you, and your clients. Thats not exactly what he said, but Im saying it. <br /> Forget about what you see on TV with the modeling shows when they show the shooter hitting consecutuve bursts...it happens in just about every shoot but at short instances when there is some repeat action you want to follow up with. Otherwise, think of each frame as an intended deliberate action. You posted here as a person with interest as this being a career/business. I would think hard, and if you are starting out... you just got a jump start. :-) Good luck.</p>

<p>I would do away with the 30 min increments. I don't know about anybody else but when shooting an engagement session, I can't imagine doing a half-hour shoot ... seems guerilla style to me.<br>

About some people not being photogenic: if you cannot find something positive/interesting about a prospective client or don't know how to make them "shine", don't do it.<br>

Not everybody looks like Angelina Jolie but isn't this the fun part? Finding the angle they look best at, maybe a smile that they reserve for that "special" person in their lives, a twinkle in the eye, lines in their faces (I have a faible for photographing older people, something about the history in their faces and eyes but I digress) ... if you spend the time to get to know somebody, there will be something interesting about them, maybe they're not traffic-stopping gorgeous but I yet have to find a person that I would call unphotogenic. Just my two cents.<br>

While you cannot control people blinking, you absolutely must be able to control blur.<br>

To bring this back to the original question: my average engagement session takes about 2 hrs., I take roughly 200-300 images; I just looked through some images I took yesterday and it looks like there are probably 20 'outtakes' that might be fun on MySpace/Facebook etc. but not frameworthy; the rest is good to go. My personal preference is to get it right in camera and spend as little time as possible doing post - although I just discovered the joys of Nik Silver Efex. ;-)</p>

<p><strong><em>"I would do away with the 30 min increments. I don't know about anybody else . . . "</em></strong><br>

<br>

My minimum location call is 1 hour. Even if it is a wee assignment - like a small team sports shoot, no individuals, one print ready image required - I still charge for one hour - but if on site for less than one hour I do not charge any travel time.<br>

<br>

In studio, we will take a 15 minute bookings - 15 minutes is suitable for a Corporate H&S or simple Insurance job, for example.<br>

<br>

Engagement and Weddings Portraiture is way different. <br>

I do not shoot, nor charge for those "sessions" by time, but charge for my service. For Engagement Portraiture I would typically spend about 90 minutes to 2 hours with the couple - about 40 to 70 minutes of that is capturing images; and as mentioned previously, at a shoot rate of on average of about 30ish per hour, sometimes more.<br>

<br>

WW</p>

 

<p>In a 'typical' 1-hour shoot, I probably take 80-100 photos, usually a several of each pose and then pick the best one or two that came out best. I usually end up with 40-50 final photos from the shoot. If I'm shooting a large family that wants multiple poses setup, then there will be less; especially if there are young kids that tend to look away when you don't want them to. If you are moving lights or reflectors around or working with other equipment, that will take more time too, but usually give much better results which is what they should be most concerned about. I'd rather give them a dozen great photos than 50 that are so-so. </p>

<p>When working with models who know what they are doing I can shoot about 96 images in an hour on 35mm film! When working with people who are NOT trained and don't know what they want, that rate goes down significantly. If you do shoot 100 pics in an hour you will probably end up pitching over half of them because really you are just shooting to capture everything, which is a mistake. With a trained model its ok to just shoot happy and capture everything. Even at an event were lot's happening you can do that. With average people on a paid shoot... the focus needs to be on details and making sure they are even doing what you need them to... lets face it, there will end up being lots of baby sitting and walking them through things. If you are just blasting away behind the lens and not talking to them and not getting feedback from them, you are just going to end up wasting your time and theirs.</p>

<p>Patrick makes a great point, if it is someone that has worked with you before, or at least follows direction well, you would be able to get more shots in. It is really hard to say how many should be 'expected' within an hour, since there are so many variables. </p>

<p>400 pictures in an hour is a picture every 9 seconds. Where you find the time to pose them and set up some of the shots? </p>