|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2009 7:20:43 GMT
Today's newspaper says that an average of 900 photos a year are taken by people using digital cameras, compared to 120-150 in the days of classic film.
Are you within the average? I know that I am well over it, but at least I am getting better and better at deleting photos of no interest, even when they are not blurred.
When I go out with my camera with a specific goal in mind, I take anywhere from 30 to 150 photos, depending on whether it is to photograph a "sight" (fewer photos) or an "event" (more photos if there is a lot of people watching to do). If I carry my camera around with absolutely no specific goal, I will generally find about 5 photos to take anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by tillystar on Oct 1, 2009 9:02:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2009 9:12:05 GMT
That's another problem. My main computer has been out of order for a couple of months now, and that's where the majority of my photos are. I keep putting off taking it in to get it fixed (it is stuck in perpetual re-boot mode, including the blue screen of death before each re-boot). Actually, I just want the contents transferred to an external hard drive, and then I'm ready to chuck it.
|
|
|
|
Post by tillystar on Oct 1, 2009 10:22:05 GMT
Yep, same here on that. My old laptop needs all the photos sucking out of it and then binning.
|
|
|
|
Post by happytraveller on Oct 1, 2009 10:28:00 GMT
I am in the average of 900 pictures a year. Maybe a bit more. Yeah with a digital camera I don't think about wether or not I should press the button. What a difference it makes !
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2009 10:43:23 GMT
I am nowhere near that many. Used to take alot,both Mr. C. and I,but haven't for quite some time now. Having a digital camera has made some difference though. Some of it is sloth,another is indifference,and then,lack of confidence and discouragement at results.
|
|
|
|
Post by imec on Oct 1, 2009 12:36:57 GMT
At least 3000 in the last year. btw, external drives are very cheap now (not much more than $100 in North America for a terabyte). Do I have one, no  . |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2009 12:49:46 GMT
I have two. It's a shame that I didn't use mine before the computer got sick!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2009 13:55:23 GMT
I don't take an awful lot of photos. I find that it can sometimes take away from the moment. We get quite a few Japanese people around these parts in the summer months and it always surprises me that they seem to take photos non-stop, it must be like living your vacation behind a lens, instead of really experiencing it.
|
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Oct 1, 2009 15:38:56 GMT
I don't think I could guess, especially as the number keeps increasing. I am getting better about remembering to take the camera along even if I'm going no place in particular, as there is always something worth snapping. I got the fountain pictures on my way to the library, for instance. The main thing with a digital is there is no limit, which allows you grab a shot in a hurry, then follow it up with as many "insurance" shots as you please. It's easier to snap a bunch of pictures of the same thing than it is to take a picture, consult the screen to decide if you need another, etc. Of course, that can backfire, too. I took some pictures of this fantastically painted wall near my house. It was in bright sunlight and I was standing where the traffic enters the gasoline station, so was hurrying. When I got home, I realized the camera was set wrong and I had a series of completely white pictures. Very shortly after that the wall was repainted.  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2009 17:26:44 GMT
I don't take an awful lot of photos. I find that it can sometimes take away from the moment. We get quite a few Japanese people around these parts in the summer months and it always surprises me that they seem to take photos non-stop, it must be like living your vacation behind a lens, instead of really experiencing it. Well said. There were so many shots I could have got while on holiday but didn't for this very reason. I realized it when President Obama was coming through Central Park. Trying to get a picture (which I didn't get anyway) seemed to take something away. Some people become obsessive and I find it a little annoying. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2009 17:35:30 GMT
The most incredible "missing everything" sights that I have seen are at Disneyland, both in Paris and in the U.S., where the father films the entire day, every ride, every parade, and does not see anything except through his screen. Of course, is there really much to miss at Disneyland, once you are past the age of 12?
|
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Oct 1, 2009 18:04:13 GMT
I agree that constantly wanting to record everything seems to be the opposite of a vacation's purpose. However, this forum and my reactions to what people generously share here have made me realize that one person's everyday stuff may be of keen interest to others. As Spindrift put it, "we want more glimpses...!"
|
|
|
|
Post by fumobici on Oct 1, 2009 19:25:40 GMT
Hmmmm... I find having my camera handy I'm less apt to just float through wherever I am in my distracted spacey way and looking at things visually more acutely and differently, looking at everything as a potential composition. Am I more "there" in that state or just walking about distractedly daydreaming as I am apt to do? I'm not sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2009 20:00:31 GMT
I agree that when you have a camera in your possession, it changes your perception of what you are seeing. "What can be captured?"
|
|
|
|
Post by imec on Oct 1, 2009 21:10:27 GMT
Cameras may help you see things you migt not otherwise have seen - and in different ways too. But the flip side is that here is more to an "experience" than just the view - and you can often miss that by spending too much time behind the lens. And when you are with others, the "shared experience" can be completely lost if you pay more attention to your compositions than your companions. I would have taken far more pictures in France were it not for this realization - but I would have missed much of a once in a lifetime vacation with my family. I "missed" most of my first Stones concert in 1978 because I was trying to capture it all on film  . |
|
|
|
Post by fumobici on Oct 1, 2009 22:17:28 GMT
I "missed" more than a few rock concerts in the '70s in spite of being present and I don't even have any photos to show for it!  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2009 22:25:02 GMT
I "missed" more than a few rock concerts in the '70s in spite of being present and I don't even have any photos to show for it! Moi aussi! |
|
|
|
Post by imec on Oct 2, 2009 0:27:08 GMT
I "missed" more than a few rock concerts in the '70s in spite of being present and I don't even have any photos to show for it! Different issue - and one I'm all too familiar with. |
|
|
|
Post by palesa on Oct 2, 2009 14:25:17 GMT
I am very glad that we got a digital camera and I have tons of pictures on computer to look at and treasure.
I guess in an average year 900 would be the norm, but if we were on a trip then probably a lot more than that.
But yes everyone should back up regularly. We used to back up once a month, at the moment I am not taking as many photos so I just recently did a backup for the first time in months.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kimby on Jun 12, 2011 19:45:14 GMT
Just noticed this very old thread. The most incredible "missing everything" sights that I have seen are at Disneyland, both in Paris and in the U.S., where the father films the entire day, every ride, every parade, and does not see anything except through his screen. And in addition to that, when the family looks at the pictures, it will be as if Dad wasn't along on the trip because he won't BE in any of them! |
|
|
|
Post by cheerypeabrain on Jun 15, 2011 19:18:39 GMT
I love my digital camera...and I reckon I'm well over the 900 maybe 9000? ;D I do miss the excitement of the old days tho...when you took your film to be developed and had photographs to slap into an album. In the loft I have many albums crammed with memories. Since we had the pooters I've scanned all the old pics in and saved them to cd. Indeed these days I tend to burn lots my photos onto cd/dvd on a regular basis...then delete them from my pooter. I also feel that sometimes I spend too much time taking photographs...I have to make myself put my camera away and just enjoy looking at the world instead... |
|
|
|
Post by Kimby on Jun 15, 2011 19:25:51 GMT
Though the camera display the number of shots on the current SD chip, my camera keeps a running tally on the number of pictures exposed as it assigns a unique number to each shot as they are taken. Without accounting for deleted photos, we have taken almost 7000 photos since getting our camera in about 2005....
|
|
|
|
Post by darcy on Jul 5, 2011 4:52:13 GMT
Hi, I'm the new kid on the block. When I'm on a trip, I seem to average about 100 photos a day and when I'm home I probably average 100 photos a month, mainly of my cute little French bulldog, Jean-Luc.  |
|
|
|
Post by Don Cuevas on Jul 6, 2011 12:04:17 GMT
As I reformat my camera's flash drive after finishing major sessions, I have no idea of how many photos I've taken since I got this camera 4 years ago. Lots more than if I were using film. With digital, cost of supplies is not an issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by bixaorellana on Jul 6, 2011 15:44:40 GMT
Big welcome to Darcy and we look forward to seeing your photos one day. I only recently learned about French bulldogs, and really, the word cute could have been invented to describe them.
I don't know how many pictures I take with the digital camera, but huge amounts. If I'm trying to get a close-up, I always take more than I need. I also take duplicates of scenes when there is too much sun for me to see what's in the viewfinder -- better to delete the bad ones than to come home & find no record of something. Also, I take some pictures to experiment with what settings & techniques work best in certain situations.
|
|
|
|
Post by cheerypeabrain on Jul 8, 2011 16:01:58 GMT
Between us OH and I took 900 digital pics last week in Wales.... he also has a video camera....YAWN... |
|
|
|
Post by Kimby on Apr 24, 2015 12:11:25 GMT
My camera recently "rolled over" and started over with a lower number. Does this really mean I've taken over 10K photos in a few years?
|
|
|
|
Post by amboseli on Apr 25, 2015 21:22:10 GMT
That may very well be possible, Kimby. On our last trip I took 949 pictures with my camera (my husband about the same amount with his camera). For shorter trips somewhere between 400-600 pics. With two major trips and three or four shorter trips a year this makes around 3500-4000 pics a year per camera.
I remember that in 1996, on our 20th anniversary trip to Kenya, I came home with 18 rolls of film, 36 exposures per roll. Everybody thought I was crazy!
|
|
|
|
Post by Kimby on Apr 26, 2015 2:43:12 GMT
Film? What's that? ;-)
|
|
.
.
