Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/04/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] OT - National Geographic film usage
From: "Kit McChesney | acmefoto" <kitmc@acmefoto.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 10:48:48 -0600

Well, your point about being remote and shooting as much of everything as
possible is well-taken. I expect those motor-drives help to bump up the
quantity as well! :)

Kit

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of bdcolen
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 10:07 AM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] OT - National Geographic film usage


In the days of the real LIFE magazine it used to be said that one should
expect to get about two 'keepers' per 36 exposure roll - two frames that
meant something special to the photographer.

I've always heard that the NatGeo photographers consume tons of
film...But don't forget that they are often involved in assignments that
extend for months, and involve travel to difficult and distant places,
places where you can't easily return - or can't return at all - to get
the one shot you missed. I would assume that if you are doing a piece
on, say, endangered gorillas in the mist, you are going to shoot all the
film you can get your hands on.

B.D.


- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Kit
McChesney | acmefoto
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 11:41 AM
To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Subject: RE: [Leica] OT - National Geographic film usage


Maybe this will make you feel better, but there is probably a greater
percentage of pictures that are "successful" than the few that are
published in any magazine or newspaper. Those photographers, as well as
many others, have larger portfolios of work than the material you see in
print. And it may be that some of those pictures are even "better" than
the ones that are published. Editors may not always select the most edgy
pictures, aesthetically speaking, or even subject-matter speaking
(especially in National Geographic, whose politics are pretty
conservative compared to some other pubs), and so what many
photographers produce may never be seen by a mass-market audience like
the subscription base of National Geographic.

So take heart. Your "success" rate could and should be better than
0.05%. If not, something is terribly wrong.

I would also venture to say that if it takes 20,000 shots per story,
someone is wasting lots of film, and maybe the photographers aren't that
good after all. I'm sure if I took 20,000 shots (and I don't consider
myself a half-bad
photographer) I could get five or six pictures, or even a dozen (most
National Geographic stories don't have much more than that) that would
pass muster for just about any publication! Even National Geographic!

Kit (who at age 15 wrote a letter to the editor of National Geographic
asking "what do I have to do to become a National Geographic
photographer?" and who later found out that there were many other
equally or even more interesting things to do in the world!)

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
[mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Gerry
Walden
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2003 6:30 AM
To: LUG
Subject: [Leica] OT - National Geographic film usage


I notice in this months National Geographic that they reckon to use 550
rolls of film per story. Assuming they use 36 exposure rolls, that means
they shoot close 19,800 frames per story. Based on using about 10 frames
per story for publication, this is a success rate of roughly 0.05%. I
think even I could make that, as could most of us on this board. So are
the NatGeo guys that good or do we just see the very best? Just a
passing thought!

Gerry

Gerry Walden LRPS
www.gwpics.com


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html