How many frames do you take per shoot? One? Two? Fifty? Back in the days, film and developing was expensive so there was a price to each click. In today’s world clicks are cheap and a single frame no longer costs any money. This is why it is refreshing to see this tip coming from Hasselblad master Roman Jehanno.
It is a very simple advice: “shooting fewer frames will make you a better photographer“.
Roman says that the amount of pictures taken is counterproductive.
The post over InMyBag gives some very strong rational as to why taking more photos of a single scene has negative impact on the final outcome (at least for some types of photography):
The two ideas I identified with most has to do with how we invest out time:
… So spend more time talking (and by that I mean listening) with the person you want to make the portrait of.
This will achieve a number of things, all of which will help you get much more from your subject:
- You’ll make them relax and forget about the photographic act.
- You’ll learn more about the subject, gain their trust and respect.
- Your subject will feel invested and want to help you make a special picture.
- If you invest time to get to know them, you’ll end the photo shoot enhanced with the feeling of a shared moment.
- And your last picture will be far more interesting than the thousand that you could have taken.
and how we perceive it:
Think about it this way: when you make a portrait session or even take holiday snaps, everything is about the moment, not about the picture. If you shoot 1,000 pictures, then the moment will be sliced 1000 times, and each picture will represent a 1/1000 of that experience.
So there you have it. Better to take one incredible frame than many good ones. I would love to hear the ratio between the time you invest in shooting vs. the time you invest in not-shooting.
[Why shooting less frames will make you a better photographer | Roman Jehanno]
