Delete or save?

Note on selecting photos.

Delete or save? 9 circles of hell

Delete or save? 9 circles of hell

One of the most difficult tasks after each shoot - is selection of quality material, selection of the best shots.

When shooting and choosing the best material, I noticed that I mainly use two methods:

  1. selection of the best personnel, their separation from the rest and further preservation
  2. Deleting all low-quality images, after which only high-quality images remain

The two methods take a radically different approach. In the first method, I look for the highest quality images, in the second, the low quality ones.

Save

When I shoot for myself, for the soul, for reviews, I use the first method. In short, I call this method 'Save' from the command of the same name in graphic editors or viewers. It happens something like this:

  1. First of all, you need to copy all the source files into one temporary directory. Typically, the camera saves photos on a memory card in one folder, but if there are more than a certain number of photos (usually more than 1000), an additional folder is created. For the day of shooting, I get 3-4 folders, each of which has thousands of photos. Most often I use a card reader for copying, I categorically do not like copying directly from the camera and there are several reasons for this. For quick access to all files on the memory card, I use the program Total Commander and its command 'View-> Show all files without subdirectories' (CTRL + B). The file table also allows you to easily sort them by type (JPEG / RAW / TIFF / MOV / MP4, etc.), size, etc. You can even quickly sort all photos by parameters from EXIF, for example, by selecting all photographs taken at a specific aperture value.
  2. if after shooting I received only RAW files, then the first thing I need to do is convert / export them to JPEG format. Depending on the situations and tasks for this, I use a huge number of converters for different tastes and colors. I usually rarely make additional adjustments to the source files. Most often, I save a JPEG copy in the same folder as the RAW file, thus getting a set of RAW + JPEG. There are many reasons why I don’t shoot RAW + JPEG right away.
  3. I create a separate folder for the best frames for this session
  4. after that I proceed with the selection / 'save'. For selection, most often I use the program FastStone Image Viewer, which allows me to save a successful frame in the folder I need with the click of a button. Any program for viewing is suitable for selection, FastStone Image Viewer took root in itself historically, as it can unobtrusively display all the parameters I need, which can serve as an additional incentive to save this or that photo
  5. after selecting the best shots, I once again look at all the best shots and additionally delete among them shots that look visually worse than my competitor shots
  6. if I have the source RAW files, then copy them to the folder with the best frames to get a set of RAW + JPEGs of the best of the best. Further, this folder with the best RAW + JPEG images is duplicated on several media (reserved). RAW files allow you to take even better pictures in the future
  7. delete the temporary directory with all RAW and JPEG files

Usually I try to leave no more than 1000 (twenty!) Out of 20 shots, and preferably a dozen. As my practice has shown, for me personally it makes no sense to save more pictures. I’m not a bit sorry to remove a couple of thousand frames that were obtained during the day with great or not very great difficulty. Only the best remain, it is like mining gold. As a result, in a day I can delete more pictures than some amateur photographers have received in their entire lives.

For example, in my gallery 'Nikon D70 + Nikon 50 / 1.8 AF NJ'on service 500PX 27 photos are shown, which are the sum of about 14.000 shots over several weeks of 'fun' with this camera and lens.

Remove

When I shoot for a client, it is not always possible to give away the top 20 photos. Clients, most often, want a lot and high quality. The work is usually done for the technician 'for work, not for the soul', where different results are required. The choice of material for the client is made approximately as follows:

  1. the first item is saved from the previous method
  2. Duplication / backup of all photos from the temporary folder to two media is done. I used to bother with the automation of this process, but over time I concluded for myself that there is nothing better than manual control of this procedure
  3. the process of processing and finalizing the original RAW files begins. When working with a client, I always shoot in RAW, as historically it is one of the best methods for my everyday photography. The basic process for processing source files is described in my post '5 things I start processing'
  4. after exporting the modified photos to JPEG format, I proceed to delete frames that do not meet the required quality, as well as duplicate photos. For removal I use the same FastStone Image Viewer. Removal is always in two stages. The first step allows me to delete a photo with a technical defect, such as failed focus, failed Exposition, unsuccessful cropping, duplicate photos. The second stage allows me to remove photos with aesthetic defects, such as inappropriate facial expressions, unacceptable combinations of things in the frame, bad moments. I do two 'circles in hell' looking through and deleting all unnecessary for the first and second runs
  5. the remaining material is converted to a 2MP preview level and sent to the client. The client chooses the right amount from the base-finished photographs for detailed thoughtful processing, for example, for retouching, or artistic processing. Important: the client 'sees' the photos in a completely different way than the photographer, so it is much easier to get a list of the best photos from the client himself, rather than trying to perfect some photos to your taste.
  6. after receiving feedback from the client, I refine the photos selected by the client and send them for final inspection
  7. after the final revision, and there may be many revisions, the client receives two folders with photos of the original resolution: the basic version of all successful pictures + the selected number of modified photographs in JPEG format
  8. Modified photographs are duplicated on multiple media. Saving RAW files depends on shooting type

There may be nuances. Usually, out of 1000 captured frames, the client receives about 300-400 photos in basic processing, these are the frames that are acceptable to show to the customer. I have no desire to adjust these figures to any specific coefficient. These numbers depend very much on the type of shooting itself, I am an adherent of the idea that it is better to 'shoot than not to shoot', and then remove unnecessary ones, therefore when working as a photographer I always do a lot of additional takes, which I often have to delete.

Sometimes these two methods are combined, sometimes something else is used. It may seem that everything is too complicated, or that it is better to store all the material shot, etc. etc., but after the first million shots you stop trifling and take your pictures in a completely different way, allowing you to delete everything unnecessary.

Leave your thoughts on selecting photos in the comments. In the comments, I am sure, other selection methods will be suggested, such as catalogs and rating of photos in special programs. I will try to answer and describe my experience, why I came back and for a long time I use the methods described above.

Extension here.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval... Look for me on Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter.

Add a comment: US6IBD

 

 

Comments: 119, on the topic: Delete or save?

  • Vladimir Buritsky

    Color with d70 is good, no doubt, warm overflows. I haven’t rented for myself for a long time, I envy you that you can take time for true beauty, and not for the plastic faces of blondes :)

  • BB

    Photos for clients go exactly the same way as Arkady's - RAW, reservation, two stages of selecting 'bad wadps', basic processing, selection and detailed processing of the selected one. Somehow it is very logical :)
    For myself - in different ways: the best shots are also selected, but whether to delete or not depends on the type of shot. Maybe because up to a million shots are still half way)

    • BB

      Directories and ratings are good until the database is covered ... Or you decide to change the viewer.
      And so there are folders named like '2019-04-30 Birthday of Ivan Ivanich', there are subdirectories in it, and that's it. Date in such a not very easy-to-read form - so that any file manager (explorer) would adequately sort the folders.

      • Onotole

        In general, ratings are stored in the file itself, somewhere in the neighborhood with other information from EXIF, and are normally displayed by the absolute majority of viewers / editors from among the sane.

      • Alexander

        I support! I myself store the pictures in the same way, and also name the folders.

    • Alexander

      Thanks for the interesting experience! One addition, from an amateur: sometimes there are photos that are technically unsuccessful, but have some unexpected interesting aspect. I group these photos in a separate folder for subsequent analysis and development of this plot / topic.

      • Alexander

        Yes, I totally agree. And if “this” shot interested you, then you will definitely come back to it, because in my head it is “processed”, it turns around and (I'm sure) a solution will be found to get a quality finish. After all, Something made you press the trigger and shoot THIS moment.

        • Arkady Shapoval

          Yes, sometimes the best shots have some flaws, but they still look much better than the rest. And sometimes only you yourself “understand” such a frame, you can enjoy all its “complexity / simplicity / beauty”. Sometimes you can't show it, because hardly anyone will understand.

    • Onotole

      Everything is the same for me, but I never immediately delete even frankly unsuccessful photos - I just move them to the 'marriage' subfolder. This sometimes allows you to stretch out later (in difficult cases - to collect one relatively sane frame from two or three takes - especially important for group portraits) sometimes a very necessary picture. Sometimes in a completely stupid frame, after a while, you can see something that you will not see right away, with a blurry eye, flipping through hundreds after hundreds of pictures.
      Although, maybe it's just that I never learned to take pictures)

  • 1Ds_mk3

    I try not to approach photos at all on the first day of their shooting.
    Because there is fatigue and it is better to look in the morning the next day, and not in the evening on the day of shooting.
    Why is that?
    It was a couple of times that looking in the evening at a sleepy / tired head and eyes, you delete by accident or specially pictures that you can later bring to life, refine.
    Those. it’s better not to do double work, get enough sleep and start watching in the morning with coffee or tea. Initially, it’s easy to go over, and the second time you’ll already have to delete a frank marriage, for example with a shake or a jamb of focus. The source code on the flash drive of the camera should remain a couple of days, just in case.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      The same thing, you need to take a break from shooting and only then take up its analysis.

      Sometimes I don’t want to go to any exhausting shooting at all, since psychologically I have to experience the same conditions as during the shooting. And time passes and smooths out all the roughnesses, and after that you already look at the shot material with a non-biased look.

      • Carl Zeiss

        And on the contrary, after shooting, the enthusiasm and interest in processing the entire series of photos is at the highest level. Even despite the fatigue. Then, over time, you have to force yourself to sort through these thousands of frames in search of those that remain for processing.
        I also shoot in RAW and do a lot of takes. But in jpeg I prefer to save already selected files by automating this process in Photoshop.

  • Radmir

    when I shoot for myself, you immediately notice the very same frame (even at that moment looking through the viewfinder) “masterpiece” that will then go to print. When there is a commercial shooting, usually a reportage (wedding), the eyes = the brain does not have time to notice those successful shots, since you are focused on finding the best angle of the view (you are in the working process), as it were, in the wrong one.

  • Radmir

    at the same time you look at the footage in one pass, until the eye “for soap”. To select the best photos. And those that can later be saved during post processing.

  • Air force

    The main thing will stop in time, ina

    • Air force

      Che can be deleted. I can be viewed right away in irfanview with a set of plugins

  • anonym

    I can also share my own experience. It all depends on what kind of photograph you are doing. Many years ago, when I worked with magazines, there was no digital photography, or it just came, in most cases they were shot on tape, I had to store everything, but I also had to not shoot a lot, especially when using the medium format. Then, when I stopped working with magazines, and generally stopped shooting for the sake of commerce, and also switched to digital, since then some sometimes bad and sometimes useful habits have remained. In the final analysis, when I shoot something, I just transfer the files to the computer and select the best ones, but I will not delete the rest for at least a year, because after a few months, when I return to the old folders, I find that I was mistaken in choosing what I missed the good, but it was something so-so or very bad that I threw it into the select folder, well, I’m adjusting the choice. After that, I openly delete bad photos forever. I shoot only in RAW, since almost any viewer can view them to sort and select the right photos. I myself use ACDSee for this, it works very fast, etc. Since I usually take about 100-150 photos in one session, or even less (that's a bad habit from the time of medium format film cameras!), Then special RAW converters are not required by and large, I select about 10-12 and convert them individually using Photoshop . I suspect that each photographer in this platform will have his own unique set of actions, completely dependent on the type and purpose of his work.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Thanks for the experience. I met photographers who work with Photoshop ACR by the piece, for example, with a couple of thousand wedding photos.

  • Den

    So I did not understand the moment of making jpegs.
    You run all 100500 photos through something like
    lightroom with its basic preset? It’s strange.
    Why not use Photo Mechanic?
    On the fly, he pulls out chamber jpegs from the ravok,
    has a bunch of sorts and selections, very fast and all that.

    • Vitaly N

      Watching ready-made jeepgs is faster. In the meantime, he is showing, you can drink tea ...

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Yes, for myself, I usually convert all files to my native software, which nevertheless gives the output a little different result than a wired jpeg or on-camera jpeg. There is a difference starting from the file size and to the granularity. The software on the computer usually gives more details.

      For work, batch handlers such as lightrum are used. As I described, in this case the photos undergo additional revision, many shortcomings are corrected in batch, series of frames are saved, for example, with small overexposures, etc. the basic correction takes a little time. Then everything is uploaded to JPEG for thoughtful selection. You can also select in converters, but still they work much slower and the selection process in them becomes painful, since they need to render a new preview for each 'improved' photo, and even a 1/3 second delay is already unnerving.

      If the photos are really interesting, then you can cut all the photos from the net into the converter for a long time, sorting them there, deleting and converting them, but this does not happen often.

      Sometimes the refinement process itself turns into shamanistic dances with a tambourine, where 3-4 applications are used, but this is a separate topic, which should be covered in the 18+ category for pervert photographers.

  • zengarden

    Good article! “It's hard to delete only the first million photos ...” 😆

    You write about duplication on several media - and what do you use for this? hard or optical drives, cloud?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Hard drives, but there is also a separate cloud for key work. Recently, I restored one dead hard drive, the heads stuck, it cost about $ 200, I restored all the data, although 90% of them I had, but it’s better to have everything.

  • Andrey Radionov

    Do you reserve in the clouds?
    not painted at all, but useful information

  • A.N. Onim

    An interesting approach. It coincides in some places, but I am also a commercial. I’m almost not shooting))
    As for the FS Image Viewer - I have a strange bug when viewing a large number of RAW and / or jpeg files in a folder with a resolution greater than 16MP (and with a large file size, respectively). For example, there were no problems with files with 6MP D40 and 14MP D3100 and other similar cameras, but when viewing 24MP files from D750 FS, the Viewer freezes and glitches after a while. At the same time, there is a lot of space on the disk, more than enough RAM - perhaps this is a feature of working specifically on my computer, what is the problem with it. I am looking at other viewers with similar functionality.

    • 1Ds_mk3

      There is an old version of the program, possibly 32-bit (x86), and not 64-bit.
      It is also possible that Windows, in addition to the program, you have not quite up-to-date fresh and not 64-bit.
      This is not a rebuke to you, but a software feature.

  • Michael

    It looks more like the second method for me, however, and I never take so many frames - I still have a habit from film. I look in my native converter, delete technical defects and duplicates. Further development in acr and make jpeg a standard script. Over time, I look at the result, correct, delete which do not look.

  • Igor

    Both commercial and non-commercial filings are first stored for some time on my computer and on a memory card until I give the shooting to the client (not a wedding manager, I can afford it), and then everything will be backed up to Google Photos. There, with compression, you can download in unlimited quantities, and so, if desired, even after a few years I can open some source code and process it. Of course, provided that he initially removed it normally, because there is no longer RAW. And it works fine for me, constantly rummaging through my archives (which Google also sorts automatically), and periodically I find photos that I haven’t properly rated before. So the masthead.

    • BB

      The 'source' is just RAW, well, or the original, not compressed JPEG, and storing something twice (or three times) compressed for further processing is a bit silly, IMHO. Twice / Thrice - because the first compression when converting RAW-> JPEG, the second when processing (if any), and the third, the hardest - by Google. What will be left of the originals?
      I have the most valuable, in addition to two HDD duplicated on two DVDs. They have one significant minus: after 7-10 years, DVDs are partially degraded.
      Duplication in the cloud is good, but only as a 'reserve just in case' (also with the expectation that these photos may fall into the 'wrong hands'). And in this country (referral to Lurk) tomorrow they can say that your cloud is our 'enemy', and deny (= greatly complicate) access to it.

      • Sergey

        DVD for me will just be more reliable than CDM. You just have to buy not the cheapest DVDs, burn them at a low speed and not load the car with any additional work. I have been doing this for more than ten years now and all discs are readable on the fly. When using CD-disks, the reading speed is still significantly reduced, despite the fact that the disks were of normal firms.
        And in the event of a DVD failure, 4,7 GB of information is lost, and in the event of a CDD failure - several hundred gigabytes. DVD discs are stored in special albums, and they are not afraid of falling, and CDMs in any performance are afraid of hits and falls.

        • BB

          In short, HDD storage is safer and cheaper, especially if you have a separate (connected only for redundancy) HDD. Small blows are not terrible for them when the screw does not work (the heads are parked).
          I can't read about 2007 / 2012-1 / 4 of the information from the disks of 1-3. That is, the disk is visually intact, the file is seen but not readable, or read with an error (two different drives, different firms - some files are read only by one of them). Only TDK and Verbatim disks (one copy for two disks from different companies) are the most expensive disks in the 'consumer' sector, and the least problematic (among all tested disks of that time). They wrote at low speed (x4 mostly). More than 50 discs were recorded (× 2 copies). Stored in boxes (less likely to scratch than in an album 'pocket').
          That is, the safety of DVD information is in the region of 65-75%.
          At the same time, the HDD purchased in 2006 (while it’s always working) still works fine for me, and the files recorded in about 2007 read perfectly and without errors.
          We have 4 PCs and two laptops at home, in total - more than 10 HDDs in them, + three external ones. One HDD completely died, so that it was not possible to read the information from it, another one was buggy, but readable.
          Total safety of information - over 90%. Purely my practice.

          • Arkady Shapoval

            Thanks for sharing.

          • Sergey

            Well, my practice just says the opposite. There is already someone more convenient. For recording, I use Verbatim and Titanium.

      • Igor

        It’s not even a reserve just in case, it’s just to be. I wrote this.

        Well, firstly, not three conversions, but one. I back up RAW files, and Google converts them to JPG itself. (processing and converting to JPG is one step, if that). Secondly, if the frame is immediately exposed correctly, there will be no problems with processing. It converts to JPG in the color profile that was set in the camera. I have a neutral one with twisted contrast, saturation and sharpness. You can extract something from such a picture even in JPG if necessary. For commercial filming, I naturally don't use them, because in a day or two after shooting, I give the finished result. But to resurrect an undeservedly forgotten photograph is a great option. To store on DVD is real nonsense. 99 percent of the photos saved on them will never be useful at all, and the remaining 100 percent will take a very long time to search, and this can only be done on a PC with a DVD drive, and only if you have these discs with you. In the same google photos (not necessarily it, any service), I can find photos from any device connected to the Internet, regardless of location. And quickly, as they are sorted by date, location, and objects in the frame. Even if it is compressed XNUMX times, I will find the photo I need in a minute or two. And with disks, I must go home and spend hours looking for a single photo. Time is the most valuable resource, and it is somehow unwise to spend it so mediocrely.

        • BB

          DVD searches are handled by an ancient portable programmable disk cataloger. My archive disks are signed by numbers, it is searched for in two minutes. The drive can be external.
          The location of the archive is a moot point. Access from anywhere is convenient if you have not turned off the Internet, the desired resource, or your end device.

  • Photographer

    A real professional photographer is the one who saw and took a frame and after that you don't even need to edit and crop it ... And you don't need to smack the entire resource of the camera shutter in one shooting day, such photographers, mostly weddings, are now a dime a dozen the former USSR and most of them only know the purpose of one button on the camera ... Of course, at a wedding you can't do with one shot, but thoughtlessly clicking left and right with the shutter of thousands of shots that you know in advance will be deleted - what's the point ...? Wear the shutter faster ...? I don't see the point in this ... Before, when there was film, out of 36 frames, a maximum of five were for deletion, and all the rest were productive ... I remember that we had a photographer in the registry office (in the 80s), he had some kind of GDR- An ovsky camera, not even a SLR and color film from the GDR, and he needed one film for two pairs (just in the registry office) ... We still have negatives somewhere ... He did not make a single defective frame ... All frames were not even cropped it was necessary ... And now there are practically no photographers - there are only Nutcrackers ... A friend of mine once went on vacation - in a month he snapped 2000 frames, returned - there were four, the rest in the basket ... Why then shoot ...? I would take Smena-8 and click without the film if I want to thoughtlessly press the button ...

    • zengarden

      "It used to be better"? 😉 although, I also have a habit from film times, sometimes I take only 1-2 pictures for each plot, and I do not shoot at all in series (there is no need). And nothing, somehow I manage. But, for example, such a number will not work for reporters and weddings, they have to beat each scene in series of 10 frames to be sure that at least one will turn out right. Times and technologies are changing, there is no point in getting stuck in the past. In any case, a good photographer (who “sees” with the camera) is much more likely to get a good shot, no matter how many shutter releases ...

      • Arkady Shapoval

        I strongly recommend everyone never and under any circumstances think about the “shutter mileage”, about its “wear”. If there is a desire, feeling, need, uncertainty, or vice versa, confidence that an extra shot will not interfere, it should be taken. Now the shutter is akin to film rolls in the film era, and that and that needs to be changed over time. And many amateur photographers will never be able to kill the shutter.
        But the thought of "saving" the shutter eats like a worm, the soul and consciousness of the photographer. They make you get distracted about the process, feel sorry for “doubles” or “frames”. The fate of the camera is to work to its fullest, therefore you do not need to bypass it and allow the camera to fulfill its mission. The shutter is changed by the master in a couple of days and it costs much less than “forever unfinished and not developed frames”.
        Often photography is just a hobby, the main task of which is simply to enjoy the process itself - then, indeed, you can slowly and slowly do what you love. Sometimes photography is still aimed at obtaining a result, and any tricks come in, including duplication, continuous shooting, etc., this is just one of the methods to achieve the result.

        • Pokemon

          Arkady, this is if the camera is fresh and official services agree to repair spare parts in the public domain.
          My official services refused to replace the S3Pro shutter, and one of the famous Fuji repairmen in Moscow is now sitting in the country and drinking naturally, because he has holidays. And indeed he is drunk, alas.

          • anonym

            S3pro is known for its problems with mechanics, there plastic which is not very reliable. And taking into account age, you won’t especially repair. And the matrix loves to pour in)

        • anonym

          Replacing the shutter mechanism costs about $ 200, on ff it can easily cost $ 350. When replacing the shutter on mirrors, AF adjustment is required, which requires equipment and skills.

        • Dmitriy

          I fully agree with FotograF. I believe that a real photographer should be able to take the right shot right away. I still shoot on slide film. The last 20 years - only for professional. And before that such a film was the most expensive, and now even more so. Since Soviet times, I have learned to appreciate every frame that is worth its weight in gold on a slide. This also includes the technique with a piece of exposed film, which I attach to the beginning of the roll, so that during automatic refueling I do not lose precious three frames (the maximum was 42 frames from a 36-frame roll). The principle worked out this way, not a single spoiled frame (this includes all the details and nuances, including framing and composition), not a single repetition (each frame is unique). Therefore, when digital devices appeared, this habit came in handy for me. Yes, I shoot a little more, but I don't overdo it. Looking at other acquaintances who thoughtlessly shoot thousands of photographs that he will never revisit in his life, it becomes sad. And if someone shares their pictures, then viewing is really tiring. The photos are completely uninteresting, a lot of repetitions, they don't even remove a frank marriage, including accidental photos “on the floor”. Everyone who looked at my photos - they really like.
          About replacing the shutter. Even the replacement of spare parts on “soap dishes” requires adjustment on special service devices. What can we say about "DSLRs". Only a representative office of the company can afford to equip with expensive service devices and tools for each camera model. Even authorized third-party service centers will not bear such costs. As an example, here are the settings that need to be made on the D90 after replacing the shutter. Setting up the connection of the two parts of the camera on a special stand using a micrometer at three points (the matrix is ​​mounted on three screws - adjustment in two planes - top-bottom, right-left). Then, using the service program on a computer connected to the camera and a special device Shutter Tester, as well as a special service lens with a slot for inserting five calibration lenses, a sequential adjustment is made according to the program.
          By the way, I talked with a rather famous photographer Sergey Gorshkov (https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Горшков,_Сергей_Владимирович), he shared how he takes photos. He puts the device on a tripod and stupidly with the remote button, snaps all day. And then he selects the masterpieces.
          1 2 Clipboard02

          • Nikich

            Some are afraid to ditch the shutter, others scare something else. How scary to live! Well, nothing, this kind of dinosaur leaves and everyone can find the best option for himself

          • Arkady Shapoval

            Thanks for sharing.
            But still, you join those who scare the neophytes with locks, adjustments and other technical trifles. This is redundant information, which, I repeat once again, only distracts from the main goal - to get a picture.
            Film, slides have their own approach and tasks. Digit, czk, bzk, soap dishes and telephones have their own approach. Transferring the shortcomings of the film, and I'm talking about a limited number of frames, into the world of numbers is wrong. It turns out that following the canons of the film, you need to take 36-72 shots with a modern figure. With this logic, you are trying to impose and limit the number to lack of film. There is simply a huge, gigantic number of modern photographic tasks, where such an approach is no longer acceptable, where many, many dozens of frames are really required.
            Of course, don't mindlessly shoot and kill your camera. I am for this, and no one else here calls. Digital has greatly expanded the possibilities of photographers, the ability to take an unlimited number of frames is a good opportunity and a good tool that works great in a number of genres and, like everything else, should be used wisely.
            Also, there is a very strong misunderstanding of the plot. It so happened that the film, slides remained the lot of units, and usually these are very much fond of photography people who spend a lot of time on building a frame and working with it. Therefore, indeed, such photographers can easily fit into a movie or two films and get an excellent result at the output. But the point here is not the number of frames, but the work done to create this or that photograph. And if you really want to boast of a small number of marriages, a high number of decent shots, then first of all you need to arouse aspirations for creating this very good shot for amateur photographers, and a photographer, and he will already understand the number of frames, because he has all the modern potential and is not limited certain patterns that are tied to the film era

            • anonym

              Arkady, your prejudice constantly slips against mirrorless cameras. Meanwhile, getting them not a marriage is much easier for neophyte lovers than a DSLR and the shutter can be used there electronic.
              Can you show by arguments the meaning of buying the first SLR camera for a beginner amateur photographer? Especially for someone who does not know how to do exposure bracketing, does not know what adjustment is, etc.

              • anonym

                Complete heresy about the problems of zc, focusing, alignment, etc. it's just another shkololo from the world of dad's mirrorless cameras ran in and scares mirrors with their problems. BZK in Russia has one problem - horse price tags

              • anonym

                ## Complete heresy about the problems of the zk, focus, alignment, etc. it's just another shkololo from the world of dad's mirrorless rushed in and scares the mirrors with their problems ##
                ==========\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ 's
                Another illiterate pseudo guru from photography. The adjustment problem is so urgent that carcass manufacturers have introduced several points for zooms, and lens manufacturers in docking stations give different corrections at different distances.
                A moderator nikonklab.ru each of its lenses and each carcass is adjusted in the European Nikon service and shows a huge difference in detail due to a more accurate hit af))))
                Although if you shoot on a crop for cheap shit with flu +/- 20m, then you definitely do not need to adjust! ))))

                Or another example, Oleg with an olegasphoto, a well-known Kiev photographer, sold ff zk and switched to bzk, kraynk is pleased with the accuracy of af, focusing on the eyes, etc.

              • anonym

                Olegasfoto he and Olegas apparently bombed the usual, or did he get better pictures? Beck front is the point of pressure on the mirror, no more.

              • Alexey_S

                I propose to remove all this offtopic mirrorless srach, because it has nothing to do with the topic raised in the topic. An anonymous mouth foam will continue to prove that UPC is the only normal option, and sane people will say that the world cannot be so simple and one-sided. Everything has its pros and cons. Both SLR and mirrorless can perfectly solve photographic problems.

              • Arkady Shapoval

                Where? If you like bzk - let them use it.
                A beginner usually buys what he wanders into his head, and then he begins to ask me what he is doing wrong.
                Both DSLRs and mirrorless cameras are soulless pieces of metal, until I review them, they are absolutely indifferent to me. Holivar bzk / zk makes me sick. Everyone is smart, but some have beautiful photos, while these units usually have not always TOP equipment :)
                If a person chooses zk, I recommend him zk, if bzk - I recommend him. But if you still find some of my beliefs in favor of zk - show me, I will revise or update them.

            • Vladimir

              It seems to me that the idea that you need to shoot as little as possible and that all shots are correct comes from the assumption that everything depends on the photographer and everything is in his power. Well, or he has a brilliant intuition and a gift of foresight. And so - you can never say what will happen next. I remembered the situation - some kind of historical holiday, a Varangian ship sails to the shore, a girl in old clothes is waiting for him. It's beautiful, and now it is getting closer, closer, you can wait for the ideal proportion and interaction between them, but it's better to do a few takes in advance. Suddenly the girl leaves, the ship turns to the side, or someone unnecessary runs into the frame. And then, calmly at home, select the best one. Or some kind of dance, where you can only catch a successful combination of figures in mass.
              I watch how a colleague from those who formed in the “film era” works on a report. “But stand up like this, and then turn around like this” ... It is, of course, very professional, but often completely lifeless. Sometimes, of course, it happens that you can't do it otherwise, but it's better when you get a live, non-staged shot, and this is achieved only in hundreds of takes.

            • Dmitriy

              It was not about what I frighten with adjustments and, as some write, they need to be constantly done. And that the repair on the knee, "from a friend of the master" will lead to the fact that the camera will not work according to the standards of the manufacturer. You are exaggerating about 72 frames on the Central Control Commission. I did not call for this and did not claim that I take off so much that supposedly habits remained from the film. We are talking about the fact that people who are taking thoughtlessly to digital cameras, having the ability to delete images and clear memory, people do not try and do not increase their skill level. A freebie cools and corrupts the user.

              • Arkady Shapoval

                Well, my article is not talking about thoughtless shooting, and I have already drawn your attention to this more than once. A lot does not mean thoughtlessly.

          • Onotole

            Well, which of the listed devices do you consider “expensive”? Is it really an indicator?

            • Dmitriy

              What indicator are you talking about?
              You can see right away that you did not work in production and are not aware that any special tool that needs to be ordered in Europe costs thousands of euros.

              • Onotole

                I'm talking about a watch type indicator. Which in your picture is already shown in 5 places. This is the little thing that you, because of your total incompetence in this matter, called a micrometer (google this word).
                My work experience in production is 11 years, including personally responsible for the purchase of special tools, once - for a couple of million. Branded spetsura is expensive, often unreasonably expensive, in my opinion. But the phrase “any special tool that needs to be ordered in Europe costs thousands of euros” is complete nonsense and a fucking shame. Approximately 100-150% overpayment, 200-500% compared to the Chinese slag with Ali - but these are far from the fabulous sums that you imagined there.
                Who said, by the way, that any of this “needs to be ordered in Europe”, where did you get it from?
                A set of tools for carrying out a "super-duper complicated, almost like a heart transplant" operation, which you have shown in the pictures (which, by the way, can be performed by any person, a layman, it is enough that he simply does not drink the day before) - about 30 40 tr. This is if everything is zero and with valid verifications (in this case, they didn’t give up) - an indicator, a stand, a plate, a caliber, a shutter tester. A manual test fifty kopeck (!) Without an iris diaphragm mechanism (!) Put it on top, I don't know how much it might cost there. If you approach it wisely, you can probably meet half of it. Is this an unbearable waste for a service center, especially an official one? Then you have to run from such services without looking back.

              • Dmitriy

                Onotole, the pointer micrometer, which you call an indicator, is not in my picture, but on the service instruction page. In this case, it is shown schematically for clarity. Below you can see a similar measuring device, but with an LCD display. On the second page at the bottom it is presented with a serial number. There is also a reference stand. I worked in the Nikon representative office, in the official service center. We did everything according to the procedure. This is not a complete list of equipment. At the end of the service manual, a complete list is attached, quite impressive. And that's just for one camera. Yes, some are compatible for others, but each camera has its own individual SKUs. I'm not even talking about the repair of lenses and flashes. For Europe - the head office in Holland. All the logistics from Japan go there, and then other subordinate dealerships order from the Dutch, not the Japanese. Therefore, from Europe. If you think that you don't need to test anything, that all this is superfluous, then you can only envy you that you are much smarter than a camera manufacturer who exhausts himself with unnecessary manipulations. By the way, quite often there were such situations that you change a spare part in the camera, but the camera does not pass the test according to the test program. Although, of course, she shoots and in sharash services they do not set anything at all, only spare parts are changed, and used ones. And the customer does not see anything by eye. I agree that the price is unreasonably high for special equipment. But this is due to non-mass production. When any product becomes massive, then the price falls. And no one in their right mind would ever think to buy from the Chinese on Ali for official representation. I also worked at the Renault plant and there they also showed me a simple piece of iron for installing one spare part on a conveyor. Its cost is 5000 euros. Two were ordered. One on the conveyor, and the second to the warehouse, just in case. Reinsurance, because a minute of downtime of the conveyor - if I'm not mistaken, 50000 rubles. And no one will ever come up with an analogue of this piece of iron.

              • Onotole

                Would you still try to Google the “micrometer” and “dial gauge”, which looks more like the one in the picture? And believe me, I know how this SI is correctly called, and it does not matter in this case - it is mechanical or electronic.
                I never said that I did not consider it necessary to test. Rather, the opposite. I just wanted to emphasize that the complexity of the operation itself was too exaggerated by you.
                I saw this list of special tools, I suggest - let's not measure the length of the list of special tools, because I can also show a list of what every seedy office should have. dealer of almost any car brand. And this list will be longer than yours every 15-50; a separate room (warehouse) only for small things. And at the same time, no one complains that the purchase of the special equipment has ruined someone.
                And I also know that despite the fact that it is all there (because it's stupid), and people on the ground do everything according to the procedure - about 90% is never used at all and has not been unpacked for years. Therefore, unofficial services that have no obligation to the parent organization, but have - to the clients - do not buy everything they can, but only what they need. And they are looking first of all among analogs that are much cheaper and in 99% of cases - no worse. And sometimes the officials on the sly buy something on Ali - because it is cheaper and really no worse. If necessary, I can give examples.
                That is, I argue that the horse price tags for the company special tool are primarily due to the lack of an alternative, i.e. arrogant extortion, but not the lack of mass.

              • Dmitriy

                Onotole, the indicator differs from the measuring instrument in accuracy class. I do not understand your desire to make me google something. I worked with mechanical micrometers long before the advent of the Internet. Since then, the world has changed; combined mechanical-electronic devices have appeared. Like you, I also advise you to go to the site of the Japanese company Mitutoyo, you will discover a lot of new things.
                I did not exaggerate anything at all, but merely resulted in squeezes from the service instructions on the necessary actions after replacing the shutter. I simply warned Arkady, as he wrote that there was no need to be afraid to change the shutter, that it was all simple. I described the "pitfalls" of such a service. And another opponent also mentioned the camera, which the official service does not support. Everyone decides for himself where and how to repair and maintain, and even hammer nails with a camera! Nobody forbids this.
                About the special tool I propose to finish the topic. I heard your opinion. A completely incomprehensible dispute that leads away from the article under discussion.

              • Onotole

                Again, it is wrong - even a wooden ruler can be a measuring instrument, if it is included in the GRSI and has a valid verification.
                Here is the definition of the word micrometer from the encyclopedia: Micrometer is a universal tool (device) designed to measure linear dimensions by the absolute or relative contact method in the field of small sizes with low error (from 2 microns to 50 microns, depending on the measured ranges and accuracy class) , the converting mechanism of which is a micropair screw - nut.

                Again! - _screw-nut_.

                Even if you adapt the HDI to the micrometer bracket, it will already be called the indicator bracket. Well, what is used in assembling a camera is an elementary indicator.

                I agree, it's time to finish.

              • Onotole

                In fact, everything turns out to be logical: if someone confuses the concepts of “sleeve” and “cylinder” and does not see the difference between “shaft” and “axle”, then replacing a punctured wheel may seem like something incredibly difficult and tricky. I personally do not find anything shameful in this, it is simply “not his”.

              • Dmitriy

                You are absolutely right! For someone who is rude to everyone and imposes his opinion, the word “politeness” is also “not his”. And no one claimed that some procedures are incredibly complex and sophisticated. It’s just an amateur approach, but a professional one.

              • Dmitriy

                And about measuring instruments. You are referring to an encyclopedia. Who told you that it is the ultimate truth and meets modern requirements? With the collapse of the Soviet Union, we have no development of the economy and industry. All standards are outdated, no one creates new ones, but rewrite old, Soviet ones. Take any approved state method of verification of a modern device. It is written by a person from the distant past, he simply rewrites the old methods, inserting new names. When state witnesses read these opuses and try to verify them, it turns out that this is impossible. It is also a pity that in ROSTEST, VNIIFTRI, VNIIMS and other metrological institutions are not familiar with your statements about SI, otherwise they would have thrown out modern laboratories in their laboratories that use a combination of mechanics and electronics, rather than the screw-nut principle.

              • Onotole

                Oh my God! Already, books are not a decree for you, and GOSTs all lie.

                Drain

              • Dmitriy

                Drain, rather you. You exaggerate again and confuse GOSTs with verification methods. Are we essentially talking or are we based on the letter of the law? You do not know that the last 30 years, metrological institutes (however, like any government officials) have turned into commercial organizations to raise money? For money, you will add any device to any registry and issue any certificate. Even the law of any lobby. If you adhere to the paragraphs, then the conclusion of a certified expert is decisive for any trial. I saw such experts. This is a grandfather who picks up a modern device and does not know what to do with it. And the appropriate conclusion is written out. And no one listens to a specialist engineer. If we speak in essence, then what is considered a device that allows measuring a tolerance of 0,015 mm, a micrometer or an indicator? If you deal with casuistry, then certainly - an indicator.

              • Onotole

                Once again, somewhere off the topic, where do the experts, non-experts? I have seen expert grandfathers who take up the modern device and know KNOW what to do with it, and what of it?
                Answering your question (illiterate, by the way, because you confused the concept of “tolerance” with “error” or “accuracy” of measurement) - everything is simple - if there is a bracket and a screw with a nut, it means a micrometer, if the bracket and a thing that looks like a clock - this is an indicator bracket, if this thing that looks like a watch is fixed on a tripod - then it is an indicator, if it is fixed in a thing that looks like a rod - it means an indicator bore gauge, etc. I am no longer showing how much easier it is for you to explain everything on your fingers. Chtoli would have been googling for a long time. And this does not depend on accuracy in any way, but quite the opposite, the device of the measuring device determines its name, purpose, scope and accuracy class. Not the other way around.
                By the way, read the definition of the word expert, who can be it and understand that there is no such thing as a “certified expert” in nature. Although you can call yourself whatever your heart desires, though - a certified premium expert, for example, paper will endure everything.

              • Vitaly N

                Dmitry, did you yourself see the photo of the instructions that you posted? There, after all, in black and white in English it is written that these are indicators ... But they arranged a fucking noble.

              • Dmitriy

                Vitaly N, Srach arranges Onotole, by the way, not only with me. Check out the other comments. English is not always literally translated into Russian and vice versa. For example, calibration is translated as calibration, tuning. Although, in metrology, calibration has a slightly different meaning.

              • Vitaly N

                Photo No. 2, below, used devices: DIAL INDICATOR.
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indicator_(distance_amplifying_instrument)
                Well then, in the original language.

              • Vitaly N

                Micrometer, again in the original
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micrometer

              • Arkady Shapoval

                offtopic, don't go on anymore. This request applies to the rest.

          • anonym

            You are right, but they will not understand you here. For the most part, the people here for some reason like to recommend old whistle-blowers crop kenon and nikon to beginners, and then beginners fill up with questions that they can’t get sharp photos, etc. Apparently, this is how they get rid of competitors.
            Many newcomers after unsuccessful attempts eventually put a DSLR on a shelf or sell and switch to a smartphone.
            Well, in 2019, it makes no sense to buy a Muscovite 414 as the first car, but no)))
            If you need to learn and drive it is much easier to buy a new Renault or Hyundai with a power steering, without a carburetor, with a gun, kondeem, etc. Why learn to ride a chariot without springs and align the wooden axes))))

            • Onotole

              Comparing a DSLR with a Moskvich (and even a non-existent model) is, excuse me, a bunch of puddles. There - the fictitious need to constantly adjust something there.
              If you consider UPC to be the pinnacle of camera technology, then indicate which technology is used in them, which is not / cannot be applied in the CPC.

              • anonym

                You know better what ludi you fart)))
                If you shoot for something better than shit that is good to remove unless electric welding, then alas and lenses and the carcass to align is a cruel necessity.
                Why is bzk much better for a beginner - google, find out what evi is, exposure, why bzk does not in principle have back-front focus, the advantages of a short cut, camera stub, picking and stacking focus, etc.

                Ps
                Of course, the Muscovite model is invented, is the real model important to you? Well, take 412, is it easier? Does it make sense in 2019 for a novice motorist?))))

              • Onotole

                Now, if we were talking about Zenit or FED, the comparison would be appropriate.
                And yes, in the ancient film camera there is little sense nowadays, especially for the new one. But the TsZK is a completely different matter, it is something like a good modern foreign car of the "old school" - where excellent driving performance is provided by competent calculation and precise manufacturing of the chassis, and not by electronic nannies, with the slightest breakdown of which the new model at once turns into an uncontrollable cart , and in good condition it is not able to give real pleasure - only to stably move from point A to point B.

                Have you ever seen IBIS at the CZK? Or thinks that picking, EVI, etc. fundamentally it is impossible to implement in the CPC? I didn’t understand about the exposure - did it mean that a novice could not get a properly exposed frame without incredible efforts? Really?
                The darkest of the 8 autofocus lenses I own has an aperture of 2.8. Some were bought new, some from hands. No front - no back focus, etc. I don't watch any horror stories, the photos have razor sharpness exactly where I was focusing, I didn't have to do the adjustment. And so - on all three carcasses, what did I have, what am I doing wrong ??
                The only plus is the flange distance, yes. In theory, this should be expressed in the fact that it will be possible to make lenses with a focal length smaller than normal ones of a simpler design, and therefore at a lower price. In practice, all lenses for UPC cost a lot of money and are much more expensive than those for the central factory, and the benefit, if any, is sent to the manufacturers.

                In general, one gets the impression that you will excuse yourself that you do not own the subject at all, and all statements (especially funny - “about cruel necessity”) are drawn from advertising articles and brochures.

                Once again - to scare the alignment at the central locking center - it's like putting pressure on the complexity of setting up the KE-Jetronic or even more trenchant mechanical ignition distributor in the polemics regarding electric vehicles.

            • Arkady Shapoval

              By the way, usually “unsharp” photos are obtained with equal success, both on the bzk and on the zk. Since a beginner with any whale wants to get something from the 200 / 2.0 category, but gets a "mess" of incomprehensible pixels on incomprehensible scenes, etc. And the point here is oh, how not in the back / front. Now the howl about the back / front is first of all inflated, so that the sales of the “new” BZK technology go better. At the same time, since 1947, people have been filming and not really complaining. Personally, I am not complaining about the focusing of most CZKs, but I can’t even name the focusing on the UPC much better, especially on the first series of popular cameras, like the first Sony a7.
              As a counter example, a7r is just fear and horror in terms of focusing quality, just complete hell, against the background of which any kenon / nikon is just a sniper rifle.
              Everywhere there are nuances, everywhere there are conditions. It’s difficult to align everything under one ruler.

              • Dmitriy

                I don’t understand about the front / back focus in relation to the UPC to the central defense complex. Why did they get the idea that nothing needs to be configured on the BZK? If the lens with the matrix were integral, then nothing would have to be tuned. And since there are intermediate parts, like a bayonet mount and two frames on which all the mechanical elements of the camera are hung, as well as electronics, a backlash is inevitable. Therefore, you need to configure the geometry. And the mirror has nothing to do with it at all, it has no effect. The matrix on the BZK is also attached to a metal frame, and not to the lens, and if the geometry is broken, then the back / front will be shifted.

              • Vitaly P

                This is somewhat different. On BZK bf / ff should not be, in principle, shopping mall it is almost the same as the live view mode in the CZK.

              • Dmitriy

                Answer to Vitaly P, it doesn’t matter which mode, liveview or otherwise, if the matrix is ​​at an angle with respect to the focal plane, the image will not focus throughout the frame, and parallax will also arise. If the camera is simply disassembled and assembled, then you must definitely configure the geometry on the stand with a micrometer. There is such a sensitivity that even the tightening torque of the screws matters.

              • Vitaly P

                Well, I don’t argue here.

              • anonym

                Arkady, dissemble.
                Do not substitute concepts.
                Do you knowingly substitute AF MISTAKES (which are always and everywhere for very different reasons!) With back and front focus? Why confuse people?
                Want a story? No problem. It is possible on the example of Kenon (Nikon followed her belatedly and introduced technologies with a long delay)
                First, the bulk before the digital era of pictures went to print with low resolution. Missing tricks were completely uncritical.
                Secondly, let's say a 12MP FF (Kenon 5d) is a bold pixel, which, due to the low resolution, successfully continued to mask the back and front focus.
                But the complaint ALREADY was and in the next model Kenon began to implement crutches - the AF correction system (precise correction) was introduced and the forerunner of mirrorless cameras was introduced - ANOTHER AF system, where the focus was on the matrix itself - Live View.
                Call the nikon or kenon service - they will popularly explain to you that there is, in principle, no and cannot be a back front focus in Live View.
                Moreover, in the same Nikon European service, I adjusted the D800e phase AF taking Live View as a sample.
                At the same time, AF MISTAKES in Live View are quite possible, depending on various factors.

              • Arkady Shapoval

                No, I also wrote you a real situation. One does not cancel the other.

              • Onotole

                Grandma's tales, for those who do not understand.
                It is true that in Live View, in principle, there can be no back front focus.
                But it is also true that the point of highest contrast (what Live View considers to be focus) of the image you create and the focus point are not necessarily in the same place. For details, google “spherical aberrations”. Conclusion - it turns out that in the European service of Nikon, the same Losers can also work.

              • anonym

                Arkady, do you know Dmitry?
                here is his old article
                “The fact is that many photography lovers have heard about the front-back focus. And sometimes they mistake their own focusing errors for camera focus errors. Therefore, in addition to real focusing problems, there is also a large fraction of false focusing problems.
                Front-back focus of the lens presents a real problem on fast lenses, which can be considered lenses from F0.95-F2.8. In addition, the problem is even more pronounced in fast lenses with a focal length of more than 50mm on a full-frame camera. ”
                http://evtifeev.com/13129-proverka-obektiva-na-front-bek-fokus.html

              • Onotole

                And this phenomenon is a surprise-surprise, does not depend on the technology of the cameras, but only on the lenses. Only on the DSLR is it possible to focus this way and that - and on the UPC - only the second option.

              • anonym

                http://evtifeev.com/7655-sistema-avtofokusa-zerkalnyih-i-bezzerkalnyih-fotokamer.html

                Autofocus system for SLR and mirrorless cameras
                2012 year

                It will be nice to highlight both methods, but at the same time we’ll figure out why we can adjust focus using the LiveView ideally even when we get a stable focus error in the viewfinder and autofocus also works with an error (autofocus front / back).

              • anonym

                Onotole, your ignorance no longer surprises, you made my evening today!
                You basically don’t understand how the camera works, but you don’t try to figure it out and you accuse Nikon engineers of ignorance with aplomb)))
                Also, I believe that you still sincerely believe that in mirrorless lenses there is ONLY a contrasting focus method? )))
                Dual Pixel CMOS AF technology is a sensor-based autofocus (AF) system with phase detection (!)
                https://www.canon.ru/for_home/product_finder/cameras/digital_slr/dual_pixel_cmos_af/
                Need a Sony?
                For autofocusing in the Sony Alpha 7 Mark III, a system of 693 phase focusing points located directly on the matrix is ​​responsible. They cover 93% of the frame area - competitors never dreamed of such a thing. The phase sensors are assisted by 425 contrast AF areas. Thus, the system is hybrid. The autofocus system inherits both the eye-tracking function (including in continuous mode), and priority recognition of faces, and other fine settings. The mirrorless A9 has 693 phase-detection AF points, 25 contrast AF points, working in conjunction.
                In DSLRs, such hybrids do not and cannot be.
                What you have and where in mirrorless cameras is the only way and in DSLRs and so and so - only you know. )))) Again from the category that the earth is flat? )))

              • Dmitriy

                Dear Anonymous, you confused me with another Dmitry. I did not write such posts.

              • Onotole

                In hybrid autofocus - phase sensors roughly show where and how much you need to change focus, the final word and exact - behind the contrast method. And switch between them, as far as I know, is impossible. Or give a counterexample?
                And take the trouble to explain why such a hybrid autofocus cannot be used in the central lock (in LV mode)?

      • Photographer

        “Such a number will not work for weddings, they have to beat each scene in series of 10 frames to be sure that at least one will turn out as it should” - these are such photographers, from the word Nutcracker ... And why does “get stuck in the past” ...? The point is that Photographers do not mindlessly clicks even on digital and try to shoot photographically ... And Nutcrackers appeared with the advent of digital cameras and series ... As I hear clap - clap - clap, I imagine the Nutcracker Boryusik ... No one clapped on film and filmed there were still a lot of weddings and photographs ... But the Nutcracker is not a photographer, he is a cotton mower and has nothing to do with photography ... I understand, to shoot in series, for example Sports ... But a wedding ... why ...? There is nothing to click in series ... If a photographer has chosen only one out of a series of XNUMX shots, then this is his choice and in fact no one else will notice the difference between the shots ... So who is he shooting a wedding for ..? Yourself ...?

        • BB

          You shoot at a wedding with a group of 10 people, made 2 frames. The groom blinked on one, the bride on the second. (as an option)

          • anonym

            Take off a pair of glasses, as an option.

          • Arkady Shapoval

            And it’s better to shoot with children who like to do Skoda in the frame :)

            • BB

              With children, in general, it's always more fun and unpredictable))

        • zengarden

          Photograph, here it is about the specifics of the photo session, which I emphasized. If this is a commercial shooting, where you have no margin for error, then you will have to do several takes for each scene to be sure of the result. For one mistake - and a completely successful shot is hopelessly spoiled ... And the point is not that these are “bombil photographers”, they also know how to build a frame and composition, you just need to play it safe in advance.
          And when you shoot "for yourself", then it's at your own risk - it will work out or not, this is also the beauty of the process :) That is why I usually take 1-2 frames; yes, sometimes it goes into marriage, but such is life. In this regard, I think the “film” habits are not so bad; they make you think before you press the button.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      and 36 frames 5 defective -> out of 3600 frames 500 defective.
      Out of 36 frames, maybe 1 will be as worthy as possible, out of 3600 it will be 100 as worthy as possible and out of these 100, perhaps 1 frame will come close to perfect.
      In the comment above, there is only one wrong assumption - that many shots are being filmed “thoughtlessly”. Imagine that you are filming all these thousands of frames thoughtfully, then at once the attitude changes, and the work of a “real” photographer becomes even more difficult than before.
      A lot is removed not from the sweet life, but because of many factors. One of them is duplicates of key points. Sometimes even steel hands, fortune and instant reaction will not allow achieving results. Dubs also protect the photographer from evil fate, and also improve the quality of the final product.
      When there is a limit on the number of frames, the approach changes. The film has its own approach, its own specificity and its own tasks. The number has its own specifics. It is desirable to be able to work with both.
      About 4 frames. I immediately remember the words of the classic: “photographers usually get 1 great photo for their lives, but I was lucky, in my life I took as many as 3 such photos!”

      • Photographer

        You, the Professionals, know better ... But still, I think that clicking a lot is also superfluous ... And the option about “Great photography”, I think, is exaggerated ... Sometimes you look at such great photos of great photographers and think - who decided that it was great ...? What some art critic has decided and what is actually seen by the majority often does not coincide ... Sometimes you think that the photographer was smoking before pressing the button ...

        • Arkady Shapoval

          However, they are great. In art, what is often not important is what matters. The same thing in photography. Often it doesn’t matter what is in the frame, but the whole surroundings that accompany the photo are important.

    • anonym

      If it clicks, why not click? Yes, and the client requires thousands of frames incorruptible from the bomb.

    • Onotole

      Just think - one film for two pairs ... Give me the GDR film, I'll make you 36 pairs for one film, and you can even more, because it's a lot to shoot in groups ...
      But there were also half-frame cameras, oooh, 72 weddings can be easily accommodated there. The main thing is not to trim anything later, right?

    • coroner

      But even earlier, people painted only one image on the wall of the cave - about hunting a mammoth there, or sketches from the life of dinosaurs - and the camera resource was not wasted at all. And people for 20000 years are looking at these works in museums. And where will the GDR personnel be in 20000 years?

      Hare Krishnas, for example, are allowed to have sex only for the purpose of procreation, but they don’t break into swingers' forums, broadcasting right and left TRUE?

      Reasoning this - why shoot at all? Go to any photo network, everything has already been filmed, from all angles. And the camera will be more intact. And if you don't buy it, then money is normally saved this way.

  • Elena

    And what about those customers who require all the photos. Both bad and good .. all. Persistently demand no 10 classroom, but all that is. My partner says don't come on, not a good guy to disgrace yourself like that. But people are few 10. and they don’t care what’s wrong with the light or in the frame. But you never know, I'm far from a pro and they know this. But the client wants himself and a tree)), and there, by the bush, well, be sure!

    • Arkady Shapoval

      I also have these, I give away both RAW and JPEG without any problems. You just need to have a conversation with the client that the photographs can contain anything you want, frames of asphalt, when you accidentally pressed the shutter button, 100 frames are completely dark, because I forgot to turn on the auto-iso, etc. etc. Moreover, if I know that there may be some incriminating shots, I still delete them and I think that I deleted them even during the shooting. I do not care a bit about the problem of giving all-all-all material if the client insists. but, usually, for example, if you give only RAW, the client will call and say that he can’t open :) and in 90% he simply does not manage to view all the photos.

      • BB

        I also give it with a warning, but absolutely, completely marriage, such as the sidewalk in the frame, strong blur (pushed during the shutter release), I delete the frames with blacks in a dark room. And 'compromising evidence', etc. - I give it up.

    • zengarden

      I ignore such requests 🙂 as a whole, at best, it turns out half, usually a quarter of what is not just to be ashamed to show, but has at least some value.
      Although, when you shoot cats, here and 146% of the result can be achieved 😄

    • Igor

      My price list immediately states how many photos a client pays. In my case, 30. I often give a little more, but I definitely have no right to ask for more. But as a rule, they have enough of this, and they don’t ask me for any source code.
      Just immediately fix the price, do not make your services rubber. If you are paid a certain amount, then you do a certain amount of material. And immediately indicate this moment, then there will be no problems.

  • US6IBD

    A little clarification: the four-digit numbering of files in the device allows you to record 10 thousand files in one folder. Only then is a new folder created. At least in the Nikon D610, and in the old D80, and even in the Fujik 2980 soap dish - the numbering is four-digit.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Yes, Nikon has four-digit numbering, but d80 and d610 create a new folder on the memory card after every 1000 shots. Those. 1000 per folder. This is done in order to have less brakes when recording / displaying, since the more files in one folder in the camera's file system, the longer it takes to search for the desired file. And 10.000 is the number of resetting the counter, then everything in a circle.

  • Yuriy75

    After installing the plugin, a regular image viewer calmly reads RAW. You can iterate over the footage without covert in Jpeg.

    • Igor

      Firstly, Windows has been able to open RAW natively in the standard viewer for seven years without any plug-ins, and secondly, there are a bunch of third-party programs like the same FastStone Image Viewer, which make it very easy to view any RAW. I did not think that anyone at all was engaged in such a perversion)

      • BB

        Win7 does not open NEF with the D7100 and D5100, the older did not check.
        Opens after installing the plugin from Nikon.

        • Denis

          but with the plugin, anyway, after viewing several files it eats up all the memory

          • BB

            I didn’t notice much, but I almost never use the built-in viewer

  • Radmir

    In life, everything is simply either controlled by love or fear. Everyone, as they say, chooses for himself. A man was born in order to become spiritually elevated, to become better. The current life is the continuation (consequence) of the past. the camera is just a tool for fixing the implementation of ideas or your own goals. So you need to be maximalist and if possible you need to be in time as much more.

    • anonym

      Vanity.

  • Dim

    Thank you for the article! Interesting topic. An amateur myself, I store on hard disks of two computers and on bluray disks, Verbatim disks, I subscribe from Japan. I make the selection just like everyone who unsubscribed, but a lot depends on the mood and the “session” itself, its location. If abroad, I force myself to look through it a couple of times on the same day, because there may not be "later". I try to take a couple of cameras and versatile lenses - it's hard to predict the behavior of my children, it's better to take it from far away, or closer. And so yes, too, first I clean out an obvious marriage and “offensive” photos - with skewed faces, strange proportions, or with strangers doing something in the background.

    • Dim

      I wanted to ask: no one writes on the original Blurey disks of Sony and Panasonic? They are more expensive than Verbatim-Mitsubishi, but it seems not critical. For me, that Panas, that Mitsubishi, that Sony is all the same, Sony is even less attractive, given their recent "achievements", as well as the image of lovers of "special connectors".

  • Ivan Shikhalev

    I correctly guess that "for yourself" you are shooting, already having some kind of plan? Or, at least, the image of what should be obtained as a whole by the beginning of the selection? Otherwise, it is not very clear how to choose from a thousand or two frames.

    I, since I am exclusively an amateur, always shoot for myself, but select through removal, and in three passes:
    1. Marriage and obvious doubles are removed.
    2. Here the basic processing already begins (in Darktable - I do everything in it - both selection and processing) and uninteresting (to me) frames and less obvious duplicates are deleted (when the same thing was taken from different angles, but it didn’t change the essence) , as well as “hidden marriage” - this is when at the first stage it seems that you need to slightly tighten, frame, or correct the colors, and when you try to do this, nothing good comes out.
    3. By this moment, a certain general picture is already being formed in the mind, everything that is unnecessary is deleted to complete it (sometimes the toad presses, and the unnecessary develops somewhere separately).

    And after all this - export to JPG and archive the source.

  • Vlad

    Arkady, there is a wonderful PhotoMechanics program that allows you to quickly view, mark and sort raw files. This can be done in any folder, disk or memory card. Very handy item, highly recommend

Add a comment

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2022

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2019/04/best-of-the-best/?replytocom=267705

Versión en español de este artículo https://radojuva.com/es/2019/04/best-of-the-best/?replytocom=267705