Photos per day?

[psimon]

On average, how many photos do you shoot a day when at Disney? Sometimes I think I shoot way too much!

---Paul in Southern NJ (except this week :banana: )

[npealer]

Lets see on my last trip to DL we went for 3 days and I took 500+ pics. It gets worse every trip LOL!

[susan1]

i read a serious article a while ago by a professional photographer sayin you should not take more than 5 photos per day!

[handicap18]

Last trip I took an average of 330 pictures per day. I did a lot of bracketing and also took a pic of the same subject from different angles so that adds a lot. I also had a GREAT time doing it!!! :teeth:

[handicap18]

i read a serious article a while ago by a professional photographer sayin you should not take more than 5 photos per day!

:rotfl2:

So that means you can only meet 1 or 2 characters per day and have your picture taken with them, all the others you are only allowed autographs, and then get 1 or 2 pictures of the Castle/SSE/Tree of Life/Hat from only 1 angle and then have room for 1 or 2 other different pictures. Oh and don't bother going on the safari or walking though either of the Jungle treks at AK.

[rtphokie]

I'm averaging about 500 per day. I end up keeping about 25-50 per day.

[donaldduck1967]

On my last 10 sday trip I took 993

[Groucho]

Our last trip, I took about 360 pictures over the whole 8-day trip. But I wasn't feeling the love for my camera like I should.

Armed with an SLR and a DSLR for the next trip, I figure I'll take that many per day! Hmm, ten-day trip... all raw format... it'll take a few DVDs to back everything up. :)

52 days and counting... I thought I was finally ready on the photo front but now I have to buy another holster bag and I keep being tempted by the 50mm 1.4... arghhh!

[tinksdad]

The beauty of digital is that it doesn't cost you to take a bunch of experimental pictures. Maybe that's what the "pro" had a problem with. I really like the bracketing feature that most cameras have. Play around with working the subject, you be surprised what you might come up with. :thumbsup2

If I take my camera, then I'm using it!! Somewhere in the 200-500 range a day!

[barrie]

On my last trip I took between 300-500 per day. I noticed you didn't say, "How many GOOD pictures do you take in a day?" That number would be considerably lower!

[WillCAD]

When shooting film I was taking about 10-12 pics a day, and taking more time and effort to line them up and frame them properly to avoid wasting film.

Since I went digital I have been more careless, but I have been shooting as many as 100 pics per day at WDW.

I have been to other places recently and shot 150-200 pics in a single day, so my average at WDW might be on the increase on my next trip, too.

[CAVEA001]

Wow. :eek: I'm such a weenie to vote for 25-50. It always seems like I'm taking a lot, but when I get home I'm like, "that's it?!?" :confused:

[Michele]

We were there for 8 days, 2 cameras-DSLR for DH, P&S for me, came home with 805 pictures....that makes.....50 a day, per person, per camera. And it was not enough, I can thinks of 100's we forgot to get. Looks like we'll have to go back!! :rotfl:

[KYCruiseCrazy]

i was hoping to see a number higher then 300 LOL. i took 342 a day over 11 days last year. loved every minute. and it was my first ever trip with a digital camera. got to love the canon rebel XL.

[whogirl'smom]

On our 7 day trip, I had about 500 digital pics, one disposable camera and DD's princess camera with 12 35mm pictures. I ended up keeping about 450 printed out and in the album. Next time I plan to take lots more! I just want to know how to take time to frame great shots and enjoy my camera and also get to the rides and attractions!

[mecllap]

The numbers in this poll are way too small -- unless you're just on a weekend trip! We can easily rack up 50-100 in a day. Last trip we got close to 200 just on our Photopass CD. Plus video (9 1/2 hour tapes) -- trying mini-CD for that this time -- so will probably do much more than we really need -- trying out new cam.

[JR6ooo4]

being not too fond of rides I take a "few"
5 days five gigs (raw files with 8 mp canon xt)
and I deleted the obviously bad pics



Mikeee

[Terk-1]

My last trip, it was about 100+ a day. This trip I have 4 2GB memory sticks (holding 820 per stick), 2 256MB sticks (holding about 100 pictures per stick) & 2 128 (holding 50 per stick). Total amount of photos: 3,580 (more if I get the chance to burn the photos on to cd-roms mid-trip). Average of about 398 pictures per day. Of course will have a camcorder & 4 120 minute tapes too.

I find one of the best souvies I have from a trip to WDW is the wonderful photos and videos I take.

[Scottl]

I took 996 last time. I think the poll should be updated to include 250, 500, 1000, 200+. Almost everyone seems to take more than 100.

[WillCAD]

I took 996 last time. I think the poll should be updated to include 250, 500, 1000, 200+. Almost everyone seems to take more than 100.

The poll is per day Scott, not per trip.

[Master Mason]

It is kind of interesting how the advent of digital allows everyone to take so many more pictures.

With film, if I shot a lot, it would be a couple of rolls a day. Now I don't even blink an eye at taking 100+ of a single football game or other event.

[Scottl]

The poll is per day Scott, not per trip.

Oh ok, sorry about that. I didn't realize that.

[Groucho]

It is kind of interesting how the advent of digital allows everyone to take so many more pictures.

With film, if I shot a lot, it would be a couple of rolls a day. Now I don't even blink an eye at taking 100+ of a single football game or other event.
An interesting question would be - are you getting more "quality" or "presentable" pictures than before?

I don't mind shooting a lot of pics that I am not sure are going to be worthwhile, or bracketing (I almost never did with film, though I knew the concept) in iffy lighting, or whatever. Certainly, the throw-away percentage is much higher with digital, hopefully I am getting more keepers overall though. (I think I am!)

[ella6599]

An interesting question would be - are you getting more "quality" or "presentable" pictures than before?



I think I am- one thing that helps me is the immediate feedback from digital too. Even though you can't see everything on those small screens, if something is obviously not working, I can change it.

(I took about 1200 for ou recent 5 day trip, threw out around 200 that were just bad, and need to go through again to pick out the much smaller number that I'll actually print.

[WillCAD]

An interesting question would be - are you getting more "quality" or "presentable" pictures than before?

I don't mind shooting a lot of pics that I am not sure are going to be worthwhile, or bracketing (I almost never did with film, though I knew the concept) in iffy lighting, or whatever. Certainly, the throw-away percentage is much higher with digital, hopefully I am getting more keepers overall though. (I think I am!)

I'm getting more good pics, but that's only because I'm taking so many more - the good pics are a smaller percentage of my overall total than they were in my film days.

I have unfortunately adopted some bad habits since I went digital, number one of which is that I tend to snap quickly without taking the time and effort to compose a shot like I used to do with film.

But I am aware of these habits and I'm making an effort to shake them.

[DueyDooDah]

90 a day in 2005 and 96 a day in 2006.


As for if the pictures are better quality, good question. My previous work was mostly periscope photos using super-slow speed B&W film. They were good but I can't show them to you. I'd have to kill ya. So, I guess these digital photos are better.

[captaincrash]

I just checked...
my Photo Storage. It looks like I've got 54,763 files/images. There accumulated from about 9 months BEFORE Julianna was born through October of 2007. Roughly a 6.5 year span. Over the 81 month period I might have had 3 months of total inactivity in photo taking. This amounts to an avergage monthly production rate of 702 images over 78 months. That translates into 23 frames a day on average over 6.25 years of photo taking!
My most active period of photo taking was probably the recent 11 nite Disney Southern Carribean sailing we took this past September. Over the 14 days of travel I took 6,737 images which translates into an average of shooting rate of 481 frames per day. That breaks out into roughly 40 frames an hour for 12 hours of each day... over the 14 day period.
Averaging 481 frames a day on this Disney cruise is signifivantly more then the 23 frames a day averaged over the past 78 months. In fact... if we just modify the numbers to exclude the single big Disney Southern cruise photos then.... I've really taken approximately 48,026 images. So - the calculation over 78 months is that I've averaged 615 frames a month... or about 20.5 frames a day over 78 months.

Crazy, eh? So... you wonder why my next DSLR must have a 100,000 actuation life shutter design... unlike the estimated 50,000 actuation design life of my current DSLR. In this forum discussion Bob Atkins thinks the 10D has a 50,000 MTBF design life on the shutter. Then it'll be $180 for a replacement shutter assembly! http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BWHV&tag=

Oh well... that's not too bad as it compares favorably to shooting 50,000 frames on film. Which would have translated into 1,389 rolls of 36 exposures. And at an estimated $18 per roll to buy/develope and double prints translates into an estimated total film cost of $25,002!!! ... so $180 for a shutter or $5000 for a new equipment is pretty cheap to produce $25,002 in images!!! In fact... the shutter replacement alone means the average cost to take a pictures with the 10D is 0.36 CENTs per image (about 1/3rd of 1 cent/image). OR... Thats' about 1.08 cents per 3 images. (shutter replacement alone).

Or... if you factor in that I've spent slightly in excess of $5,000 for all of my digital equipment (obsolete digicams, flash gun, lenses, filters, bags, tripods, hoods, batteries, memory, paper packs, photo grade printers, etc.) against the 54,763 images I've shot - this averages out to 9.13 cents per digital image. That's with having counted the few dozen MPEG movies individually. I've excluding computer, color busines laser and multimedia HDTV costs from this figure otherwise my total capital outlay would just about triple!!!

http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/kids/farm/story1/piggybank.gif

Even so, I think my per frame capital outlay is still too high! I need to try and reach 75-100,000 images with only ONE shutter replacement and less then $300 of further expense. That would contain my capital outlay to about $5,500 for the 75 or 100K images. Which would translate into an average per image cost of 7.33 - 5.5 cents each! That is more tolerable then a dime an image!

[captaincrash]

An interesting question would be - are you getting more "quality" or "presentable" pictures than before?

I don't mind shooting a lot of pics that I am not sure are going to be worthwhile, or bracketing (I almost never did with film, though I knew the concept) in iffy lighting, or whatever. Certainly, the throw-away percentage is much higher with digital, hopefully I am getting more keepers overall though. (I think I am!)

http://www.imagedancer.com/images/RuleOf3rds_5_300.jpg

I teeter between achieving better images then I ever managed with film... then on the other hand I've never shot so many images before. As a previous poster mentioned... I am well aware of the shooting excess I've embraced and am actively put myself on a shooting diet to slim down the production and concentrate more on better concieved compositons and expiosures.