| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
How much did YOU shoot?
Nic Coury, Photographer
 |
Monterey | CA | | Posted: 2:51 AM on 01.03.10 |
->> I just did a blog entry about camera shutter count.
http://photographnic.blogspot.com/2010/01/numbers-game.html
I got my D700 for Christmas last year and it was my main body and I picked up a near-new D300 in August with only 2,500 photos on the shutter plus about 1,000 on my D2H, slated for remote use.
My total photo count for 2009 = ~92,000 (80K on my D700 alone).
Not bad for a photog at a Weekly.
Who's beat me here?
~ nic |
|
Jody Gomez, Photographer
|
Murrieta | CA | USA | Posted: 3:02 AM on 01.03.10 |
->> Me - I shoot that many in one game just to make sure I get a decent shot.
:~) |
|
Andrew Weber, Photographer
|
Toledo | OH | | Posted: 3:36 AM on 01.03.10 |
->> D3= 126,693
D700=65,513
Total for 2009=192,206 |
|
Mike Brice, Photographer
|
Ogden | UT | USA | Posted: 3:51 AM on 01.03.10 |
->> Andrew,
I saw you out on the field during the Gatorade dump at the OSU game - how did that shot turn out - or was it just a sea of orange?
Also, how did you get a pass to be on the field during the game? |
|
Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer
|
Lexington | VA | USA | Posted: 4:56 AM on 01.03.10 |
->> Let's see...
D300 #1 - 16,825
D300 #2 - 41,698
D300s - 11,281 (acquired mid-October)
D90 - 13,407
Drumroll please...
83,211
Plus who knows how many D2H, D70i, Panasonic DMC-LS1, Casio EX-FH20, and N75 frames. (Too lazy to try to figure those out, since my shots on them aren't organized primarily by date.) |
|
Steve Ueckert, Photographer
|
Houston | TX | | Posted: 10:33 AM on 01.03.10 |
| ->> 18 rolls of Tri-X and 12 rolls of Fomapan T200, but that was just for December. |
|
Jeff Stanton, Photographer
|
Indiana | IN | USA | Posted: 10:44 AM on 01.03.10 |
| ->> I've had this particular D300 body since Oct. 2008 and it has 52,000 clicks on it. What do you guys do, stand on the shutter release all day, everyday? I'm a staffer at a daily. The most I will shoot at a high school basketball game, if it's a good game, is around 300-350 frames, sometimes less. For high school football, it's far less because I have to use strobe, around 150 frames. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 10:50 AM on 01.03.10 |
->> On my primary D3 367,152
Add to that some 20 to 30K on the backup D3, D2Xs and D200.
And I know that while high I am not the winner of this contest. |
|
Matt Kartozian, Photographer
|
Scottsdale | AZ | USA | Posted: 11:51 AM on 01.03.10 |
| ->> 155,000 give or take a few. |
|
David Manning, Photographer
|
Athens | GA | | Posted: 12:21 PM on 01.03.10 |
| ->> Yeah but how many were you happy with? |
|
Andrew Weber, Photographer
|
Toledo | OH | | Posted: 12:51 PM on 01.03.10 |
->> Mike-
I was shooting the game for a client. I will also be shooing the National Championship as well. |
|
Mike Brice, Photographer
|
Ogden | UT | USA | Posted: 1:16 PM on 01.03.10 |
->> Must be a powerful client that allowed you to go onto the field with time remaining in the game to try and get a shot of the gatorade dump.
I am sure the networks and other photographers didn't mind. |
|
Michael Ip, Photographer
|
New York | NY | USA | Posted: 1:49 PM on 01.03.10 |
->> I think I put about 45,000 on my 1d mk3. I put about 15,000 on my 5D (before I sold it) and about 35,000 (and maybe about an hours worth of video) on my 5d mkII before it broke last week.
So I guess that's about 95,000. |
|
Ronnie Montgomery, Photographer
|
Houston | TX | USA | Posted: 1:49 PM on 01.03.10 |
| ->> I say the person with the fewest shutter actuations is the one deserving of the bragging rights. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 2:11 PM on 01.03.10 |
| ->> If it's bragging rights that were talking about the only numbers that matter are the ones in the bank account. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 2:11 PM on 01.03.10 |
->> "I say the person with the fewest shutter actuations is the one deserving of the bragging rights."
Actually, I'd give props to the person who made the most money with the fewest actuations. That person would be my idol. |
|
Matthew Sauk, Photographer
|
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 2:21 PM on 01.03.10 |
->> Lets see here, Looks like just over 14,500.
Not bad and not that much. In 2008 I had over 24,000. |
|
Andrew Nelles, Photographer
 |
Chicago | IL | usa | Posted: 2:28 PM on 01.03.10 |
| ->> I have just a few frames under 100,000 for 2009. |
|
Jeff Jones, Photo Editor
|
Gallup | NM | USA | Posted: 5:39 PM on 01.03.10 |
->> So let's see - 100,000 frames - since a lot of people shoot sports we'll say the average was 1/250th second shutter. That means that for 100,000 frames in a year you actually only recorded 6.67 seconds. Now, if you are working for a daily newspaper like I USED to and making (optimistically) $30,000 per year, you end up making $4,497.75 PER SECOND (pre-tax).
Huh. Maybe I should have not complained about the pay and stuck with it...? |
|
Kevin Krows, Photographer
 |
Forsyth | IL | USA | Posted: 6:03 PM on 01.03.10 |
| ->> Note to self ... don't buy used cameras from Eric or Jody. :) |
|
Chuck Steenburgh, Photographer
|
Lexington | VA | USA | Posted: 10:29 PM on 01.03.10 |
| ->> Jeff...actually, you would have recorded 6.67 MINUTES. So maybe the pay's not so great. |
|
Mark J. Terrill, Photographer
|
Simi Valley | CA | USA | Posted: 1:40 AM on 01.04.10 |
->> Mike,
Excellent point. I was one of the photographers that got screwed out of a really nice Gatorade shot by Andrew and two other photographers running out there with 45 seconds left to go in the game. Normally, it's just one of those things that happens and you suck it up. In this case Rose Bowl officials had a meeting and specifically told everyone that no one goes on to the field until time runs out and if they did they would have their credential pulled for the BCS. We'll see if they keep their word on that. My only consolation is that Andrew was chimping as the Gatorade came out and didn't get in front of the coach in time. Near as I can tell Andrew got nothing, but screwed a lot of people in the process. Maybe that's even worse.
People forget that when photographers pull crap like this, those of us that got screwed remember it for a long time and payback is a bitch. More importantly is that this sort of behavior causes rules and restrictions to tighten for all of us and makes our jobs that much more difficult.
BTW, just to stay sort of on topic. I have three D3 cameras and each have about 130,000 over a two year period. At least six of those frames had Andrew in them. (-: |
|
Thomas E. Witte, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Cincinnati | OH | USA | Posted: 3:11 AM on 01.04.10 |
| ->> No idea. I don't actually write down my actuations every year on January 1st. For whatever it's worth, I shot 1.191TB's last year. |
|
Thomas E. Witte, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Cincinnati | OH | USA | Posted: 3:21 AM on 01.04.10 |
| ->> And in fairness, Andrew didn't block any shot worth squat anyway (assuming he was the one in the grey t-shirt which it looks like is him). The guy in the black blocked the best shot from anyone down range. Go to youtube and watch the clips. |
|
Mark J. Terrill, Photographer
|
Simi Valley | CA | USA | Posted: 3:40 AM on 01.04.10 |
->> And in fairness, Andrew didn't block any shot worth squat anyway (assuming he was the one in the grey t-shirt which it looks like is him). The guy in the black blocked the best shot from anyone down range. Go to youtube and watch the clips.
Thomas,
Fairness?! Really?! It's not for you or anyone else to decide what that shot was worth and do you really think that's what he was thinking when he ran out there? Any shot is better than no shot. Do you think he was trying to be fair by blocking a hundred other photographers who were following the rules? The only reason he wasn't right next to the other photographer in black is because he was asleep at the wheel when the Gatorade came out.
I don't need to watch it on Youtube. I was there and I have it in High Def. He completely blocked everyone who was shooting from directly across the field.
It's really simple. Follow the rules and stay the hell off the field so everyone has a chance to get a shot. Now that's fair. |
|
Mark J. Terrill, Photographer
|
Simi Valley | CA | USA | Posted: 4:37 AM on 01.04.10 |
->> Thomas,
Do you think Andrew was trying to be "fair" to Robert Beck from Sports Illustrated? Perhaps you'd like to tell Robert that his shot "wasn't worth squat." http://www.sportsshooter.com/members.html?id=535 |
|
Thomas E. Witte, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Cincinnati | OH | USA | Posted: 6:01 AM on 01.04.10 |
->> Mark-
You missed my point by so many effin miles it's ridiculous. There are two things being discussed here. Photogs on the field (your argument, which I agree with) and where the shot was (my argument).
By "shot" I mean "the best angle", which 97 times out of 100 is in front shooting in to the lee of his head with the face all cinched up, which was from the left. Not a lot of publications I know run bath photos shot from greater than 90 degrees. I catch that you don't want to go to youtube, but you linked Beck's page and didn't look closely at the photo... The players already blocked the angle on the coach, because, as I already said once, the SHOT was from the far left. If you were on the right, you were out of position for it clean view or not. (Mind you this off the cuff analysis is based on one photo picked deliberately to illustrate three photographers running out in front of the angle. In said photo, the players doing the dumping are already blocking Tressel. If there are photos earlier (shot from the right) in the sequence where you can totally see the coach but there is a photog obstructing the meat of the photo, then I'll recant my statements.)
You also were not shooting from directly across the field. If you were, you to would be guilty of being in the player bench where you don't belong. You should have been outside the 30's. If you were outside the 30's, then you know that the head coach is going to be facing the play, know he's going in the drink and ergo, be in ready willing and able.
Am I saying either of these three were in the right? No, of course not. Never did. I especially didn't condone it. My point to that was simply:
If you're going to blame anyone for blocking the shot (the best angle) you need to sodomize the guy in the black.
Now I have to post this in the other thread as well. No cross posting on SS please. |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:31 PM on 01.04.10 |
->> "People forget that when photographers pull crap like this, those of us that got screwed remember it for a long time and payback is a bitch."
Mark: I know how you are feelin', dude. I was shooting a basketball celebration at the University of Illinois a few years and a fella with an SI cred stood moved in front of me and block my shot of trophy presentation. I asked him to move just a bit politely. He looked at me and he stood his ground.
The effin crux was I and the rest of media covering the event followed the SID's rule stayed behind the provided ropes to shoot. You'd think the a-hole would have the courtesy to drop to one knee or better follow the rules like the rest of us, but no.
I didn't get "my shot" because I followed the rules set by the establishment. I would have moved, but we were elbow to elbow along the ropes five deep with student fans mixed in around us. I usually don't hold grudges but this incident still knots my boxers when I think about it .... and it has been a long while since it has happened. If the situation allowed me to quickly move I would have long forgotten the incident by now. I will not be so polite the next time with the guy if we are covering the same event in the future he happens to do the same thing.
We have maxims and guidelines like "Tight is right", the "Sunny 16" and others I propose a new one for the world to learn: "If you ass is facing a camera, be polite - move to right." |
|
Clark Brooks, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 1:34 PM on 01.04.10 |
->> P.S. - Sorry to continue the OT discussion. I return you to your normal programming......
FWIW and back on topic, I consumed 1.5TB of primary and back up disk space of RAW, sound and video files. |
|
Walt Middleton, Photographer, Photo Editor
 |
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 2:22 PM on 01.04.10 |
->> Yeah... I hate to admit to this as well, but I used up around 1.5 TB of back up disk space for Raw and video as well...
"Knock on wood" No shutter blow outs in 2009 |
|
Louis Lopez, Photographer
|
Fontana | CA | USA | Posted: 5:02 PM on 01.04.10 |
->> I wanted to post this here as well as the discussion is going on in two threads.
I know and I think if everyone looks closely you all know who the guy in the black is... Has a flash on his camera, those distinctive white knee pads... Very Professional guy, well respected in our business. I surely think he was supposed to be there.
I saw all three of these guys as the seconds ticked off as I positioned myelf behind the OSU bench area seeing if I could get a shot from behind as our other photographer was covering from the other sideline. I saw them moving in and the thought enetered my mind that maybey I should get in there, and then I thought nope gonna be hell and end up blocking everyone else.
I remembered the meeting and I figured that the guy in black had to have special permission as he is arguably one of the top and highly respected sports photographers in the world and by his body language,(not hiding or sneaking) is supposed to be there. The other two I was sure had no business being there as they were definitely sneaking around. The guy on the right was at the Pointsettia Bowl and did the same thing. There was no announcement or agreement to not do it so not much to be said there.
The rules should apply to everyone, and those that don't follow them should be outed and some action taken from the media credential people. There are some allowances to be made if a photographer has permission and it is part of his duties to be there. I don't know the name of the two guys in white and grey but I know they are both Presswire shooters. They both need to take a few moments and see how badly they screwed everyone. If they have any issues with what I said, or pointing them out they can come discuss it with me anytime.
I am pretty well known, not hard to find at all. |
|
Jeff Jones, Photo Editor
|
Gallup | NM | USA | Posted: 5:18 PM on 01.04.10 |
->> Chuck -
you're correct. I converted to minutes when I divided by 60. Doh. Now you know why I teach journalism and digital darkroom instead of math and science. |
|
Thomas Boyd, Photographer
|
Portland | OR | USA | Posted: 5:40 PM on 01.04.10 |
->> This thread is really interesting to me. I was at the Rose Bowl and was totally clueless any of this happened because I was on the Oregon bench shooting dejected players...or least trying to.
I really appreciated the management of photographers at this game. The sidelines were surprisingly clean of donors. It was especially easy to work without the local TV guys there. The ABC dudes were a little obnoxious with four cable pullers per camera, but I'll take that any day over bus loads of fans on the sidelines.
It was refreshing to have someone like Richard Mackson as a photo marshal. He's someone who actually knows what he talking about. |
|
Jay Sinclair, Photographer
|
Vancouver | BC | Canada | Posted: 7:27 PM on 01.04.10 |
->> Spray and pray. Spray and Pray.
imagine what those numbers would have cost in film.
Digital definitely equals less selective shooting.
I think I pulled less than 7,000 frames in 2009. Then again it doesn't pay all my bills, so maybe I should shoot more frames? |
|
Jody Gomez, Photographer
|
Murrieta | CA | USA | Posted: 7:54 PM on 01.04.10 |
->> In the interest of clarity, I wasn't serious about shooting that many frames in a game.
I have about 25,000 on my new body and I got it a little over a year ago.
:~) |
|
Michael Fischer, Photographer
|
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 8:29 PM on 01.04.10 |
->> Andy;
If it was you, the right thing to do would be to apologize - promise not to do it again... and then live by your promise. |
|
Michael Fischer, Photographer
|
Spencer | Ia | USA | Posted: 8:30 PM on 01.04.10 |
->> Nic,
Since when does quantity equal quality?
Just wondering. |
|
Brian Dowling, Photographer
|
Philadelphia | PA | USA | Posted: 9:24 PM on 01.04.10 |
| ->> I have 18,146 keepers according to LR. I'm one of those people that spends the time deleting the bad shots. |
|
Nic Coury, Photographer
|
Monterey | CA | | Posted: 9:49 PM on 01.04.10 |
->> @Michael,
I never said it did. Just curious where my shutter counts are relative to my colleagues.
I've found in my few years on the professional level, my shutter count goes down as I learn to compose and frame better, getting better shots in fewer frames.
That said, I don't think the two are in sync with one another necessarily. You shoot as much as you need to get the job done. Some shoot more, some less. |
|
Eric Canha, Photographer
|
Brockton | MA | United States | Posted: 9:49 PM on 01.04.10 |
->> Jay ever been on a cruise? Before digital they shot film, MILES of film and processed AND printed ALL the exposures DAILY. Then they put them out to sell and tossed the what didn't. This was (and is) done on a daily basis. My last cruise had 2 photographers who would shoot everyone going on shore excursions or partying on the boat or at dinner time they setup two stations in the ship's lobby by the staircase and shot formals.
Granted I shot a ton but keep in mind that I also worked countless 14 hour days shooting 10 12 or more games in a single day only to go back and do it again. This coming weekend I will shoot 1000 kids (give or take). If I just take 2 shots of each kid I will have shot in one weekend just shy of 25% of what you shoot in a year. I don't mean to take issue with you directly but at the same time to imply that I'm shooting indiscriminately and hoping is to imply that I don't understand what it takes to be successful at what I do.
The praying must be working because I do believe that I beat '08 sales by double digits and that was in a 'soft' economy...... I can only hope that I have the chance to shoot 450,000 this year! |
|
Jim Pierce, Photographer
|
Waltham | MA | USA | Posted: 10:40 PM on 01.04.10 |
->> I agree with Clark's post above regarding:
"Actually, I'd give props to the person who made the most money with the fewest actuations. That person would be my idol."
I focused on efficiency this past year and it worked out perfectly. I shot less than previous years but it paid off a great deal. Less travel, less expenses, less kickbacks less hassel, less everything and yet more of what I wanted which including camping week-ends, snowmobiling, and the most of all GOLF! Oh did I forget the reason why I do this more sales too.
I had many opportunities that I past on for one reason or another and this included some events that I covered for 4-5 years which I passed on for various reasons but the ones I gained worked out and will for a few years.
I have found it is not wrong to say "no I can't do this event under your terms but I can if we change XYZ" Some agreed some didn't and that is fine.
As we have all heard "don't work harder, work smarter". If it takes 500,000 clicks to make it then go for it, if it takes 1 then all the better.
Jim |
|
Jay Sinclair, Photographer
|
Vancouver | BC | Canada | Posted: 4:58 AM on 01.10.10 |
->> Eric.
397,000 frames / 24 frames a roll * $5.00 = $82,000 in film overhead alone not to mention processing.
don't get me wrong, I can shoot stick and ball sports and drop the hammer. It's just not what I do.
You can't sit there and tell me that photographers weren't more selective before digital, you'd be lying. The invention of digital and cards has made photographers less selective. maybe thats a good thing, but I don't think so.
I'm with Clark and Jim. I shot less and made more. I was more selective and happier with my shots. I pick the clients and athletes I want to work with. I don't shoot 12 games a day. I don't deal with parents. I'd go nuts.
It's just a different style of working. No offense intended.
The camera is just a tool to me. If it takes 500,000 frames for you to do what you do, cool. You just can't say you're being selective when you're pulling 10 frames a second all day long at 12 games a day.
Selective is waiting 3 months for the light to be right to shoot an ad shot.
I hope your 500k frames makes you even more successful at what you do.
No ill will intended.
nothing but love here.
J. |
|
Tom Knier, Photographer
|
Lancaster | PA | USA | Posted: 11:16 AM on 01.11.10 |
| ->> I shot ~340 hours of video last year. How's that compare? |
|
Kevin Seale, Photographer
|
Crawfordsville | IN | United States | Posted: 11:22 AM on 01.11.10 |
| ->> Tom - Any estimate on how much hard drive space that much video required? |
|
Tom Knier, Photographer
|
Lancaster | PA | USA | Posted: 3:33 PM on 01.11.10 |
| ->> Kevin, no hard drives. All DVCAM tape. I'm only estimating that much because that's how many hours the camera tells me it recorded last year. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|