# What is your keeper rate?



## dhr90 (Apr 6, 2017)

As a shooter primarily of motorsports and airshows, and a determination to push shuttter speeds as lower as I possibly can, I'm used to having an average of 10-25% keeper rate. Variations on subject, weather, backgrounds all play a part. I find myself happy if I do get a 25% keeper rate. Sometimes shoot landscapes and the odd portrait, where I might have 75-90% of shots I am happy with.

Just curious as to how other amateur and pro photographers feel about their keeper rate and if they feel it is high or low?


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 6, 2017)

I have a 100 percent keeper rate.... seriously......

I dump EVERYTHING to a hard drive......

Of those 100 percent keepers, only about one in ten is worth looking at, and perhaps one in a hundred worth showing....

I would say that focus and exposure is good on about 80% of shots (on average) but with things like birds in flight and the hyperactive kitten from hell, it drops down to under 10 percent.


----------



## Mikehit (Apr 6, 2017)

'keeper rate' is hard to define IMO. 
I have moved towards wildlife photography in the last 5 years, and it is mainly birds because that is the easiest wildlife to find and I wonder what I define as a 'keeper' - with birds it is as much about wing position and head angle as it is about lighting and background and that puts my keeper rate much lower. Simply 'pin sharp focus' is not really enough. And even now many photographs I kept 2 years ago I would happily throw in the bin now so obviously my standards have changed. 
On a day out, if I shot 1,000 frames I would be pleased if I got 100 I would happily show to friends/family. Really happy if I had 5 that I would consider good enough to print.


PS - shooting at 10fps, if I get 10 very similar is that 10 keepers or one?


----------



## Ryananthony (Apr 6, 2017)

I have taken 1000 photos of a tree swallow feeding its youngs waiting for the ''perfect'' shot. I left with one image i was happy with, and the truth is, that one image is not timed as perfectly as it could have been. 

Ive also gone out to take a certain landscape shot. I took only 6 images, merged them all into one keeper.


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 7, 2017)

If your standards are low enough, every shot can be a keeper.....


----------



## serendipidy (Apr 7, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> If your standards are low enough, every shot can be a keeper.....



;D ;D ;D ;D you are so funny


----------



## rfdesigner (Apr 7, 2017)

When it comes to astro, completely blank shots can be keepers (dark frames), and most shots are keepers, at least to some extent.

About 18 months ago we had a big storm come through. I fired off 150 shots to get one keeper, which ended up on the BBC.

For me since going FF and having my Eg-S screen (so I can see fairly accurately in the viewfinder what the shot looks like) my keeper rate has certainly improved, and my frames/year has fallen. So images of my kids now are usually 5~10 shots per "moment" and I get a choice as to what to print, where as it was more like 20 shots and sometimes there was nothing.


----------



## scyrene (Apr 7, 2017)

My keeper rate varies depending on the subject. If it's something unusual, a species I've never photographed before, or a unique occasion, I'll keep a lot more. If I get better views of that species, etc. at a future date, I can then return and cull some more. In general I take several images per shot, to account for AF inconsistencies, camera shake, etc. The more challenging the subject, the more I take and the more I expect to cull - for something like swifts in flights, it might be a 95% deletion rate. Otherwise I'll delete all but the best of each batch of images (so maybe I'll take 3-5 of each shot, and end up with the best of that bunch), which would imply 65-80% deletion rate. For other types of work it's different. I keep all sub frames from focus stacks, astro stacking, etc, so for that it might be a 95-99% keeper rate.


----------



## zim (Apr 7, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> If your standards are low enough, every shot can be a keeper.....



Coffee down nose, not nice. thanks for the laugh!


----------



## awair (Apr 7, 2017)

It so much depends on the subject and the lighting...

Mainly, I cover swimming events (70%), with other sports being a major part of the remainder (20%). Over a two-day event I will take 5-8,000 shots. For outdoor sports, I expect that about 70% of these will be technically acceptable shots, (both the subject in focus and correctly exposed), but after review only about 10% are acceptable for display/sharing (composition, expression/action etc). This may be due to inevitable duplication, or that someone just looks 'odd', because of their exertion.

When reviewing the typical (indoor) swimming events, that 70% reduces to about 30% (and lots of very sharp, perfectly focussed splash!). I'm very happy if I get 2-300 quality shots of different swimmers. Typically, some of the swimmers are easy to capture, with a very predictable motion, others I just can't quite capture.

Another consideration is the edit/review time: after a day's good shooting I can generally find my 2-300 'real' keepers in just a few hours.

In contrast, I had a very poor and unevenly lit swimming gala - the light varied between lanes, as well as up and down the pool: it took me over a dozen editing/review session (over several weeks) to produce an acceptable collection.

There's no doubt that Don sums it up perfectly...



Don Haines said:


> If your standards are low enough, every shot can be a keeper.....



Most of us here on this site are hoping to learn and improve - your 'worst' could be better than my 'best', but I'll never get better without critical review (self or peers).

Anyway, back to the statistics:
This shot was "1 of 900" for that race,
- "1 of 5,000" for the gala
- "1 of 150" for that particular length of the race
- "1 of 20,000" over similar galas
or "1 of the first burst of 8", because the swimmer I wanted was in the first heat after the break...

...I got lucky!


----------



## Click (Apr 7, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> If your standards are low enough, every shot can be a keeper.....



;D ;D ;D

Thanks for the laugh


----------



## Duckman (Apr 7, 2017)

What is considered a keeper can be quite subjective and varies wildly depending what is being captured....generally speaking for me, ~25% keepers.

That said, I'd say only 5% of all my photos are worth printing and throwing in a frame.
-J


----------



## scyrene (Apr 7, 2017)

Duckman said:


> What is considered a keeper can be quite subjective and varies wildly depending what is being captured....generally speaking for me, ~25% keepers.
> 
> That said, I'd say only 5% of all my photos are worth printing and throwing in a frame.
> -J



5% isn't bad! I wouldn't print and frame more than one in five or ten thousand shots.


----------



## Duckman (Apr 7, 2017)

scyrene said:


> Duckman said:
> 
> 
> > What is considered a keeper can be quite subjective and varies wildly depending what is being captured....generally speaking for me, ~25% keepers.
> ...


Now that I think about it, I may have been too generous with myself haha : it's more realistically ~1% that I'd print. 
I also don't really shoot too much sports high action stuff where laying on the shutter is advantageous (and lowers %) to getting the shot.
At the end of the day... The keeper % doesn't mean sh*t. What really matters is getting the shot.  
-J


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Apr 7, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> If your standards are low enough, every shot can be a keeper.....



HA! 
Thanks for making my day.  

I shoot about every subject known to man because I'm a bit scattered.
If I shoot with prior planning on a controlled subject, it's better than 50%.
No planning, but a controllable subject, maybe 30%.
High speed motor sports drops to the level of metal anguish- maybe 1% if I'm lucky.
For me, airshows are the worst for keepers. I have stopped going to airshows that have poor lighting or acts that I have shot numerous times over the years.

Keepers really depend on the format to be viewed or printed.
Maybe the true definition of "keepers" is how many photos were so stunning that you had it printed larger than 24x30 inches and hung it in the living room.

If I was asked to have a public exhibit, the number of photos might be about 20.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 7, 2017)

To me, there are multiple categories of keepers.

1. First, I toss out all the images with poor focus, messed up lighting, or goofs like shots of the ground when I'm moving the camera. The remain photos all are potentially usable. Thats about 98%.

2. Next, I review images for content such as closed eyes, facial expressions, and the like. This varies a lot, but usually eliminates 10-20% of the images.

3. Finally, I review for similar images, best facial expressions, or if movement is involved, for the right moment. This eliminates another 20-90% depending on the type of subject.

So, for photographing fast moving objects like birds or aircraft, its entirely possible, likely even that only a few percent are selected. I mostly shoot stage productions, and keep about 80%, but only 20% get used.


----------



## DominoDude (Apr 7, 2017)

My worst keepers, are far worse than some of the shots that I toss.
With some birds you take what you get, because it is the first and only occurrence, and perhaps the only shot I will ever make of it.
I have a shot of a Lesser scaup, that really sucks, it was in a lake shot through branches in crap light, but I couldn't get closer and the branches were too far away to be moved, and the bird did not cooperate.
Also have a Black-faced bunting, shot from a distance of 140-150meters with a 400mm lens - it sucks so much.... The bird is perhaps 50pixels across. If I tried to get any nearer, I would probably have scared the bird away, and then I would have been beaten to a pulp with tripods by 60 angry birders.
To me those are "documenting shots" - they prove I was there at the same time as the bird. Photographically and technically I'm not proud of them.

Out of roughly 30 000 shots, I could perhaps pull half a dozen to a dozen I'm truly content with.


----------



## [email protected] (Apr 7, 2017)

This question elicited some really useful responses. We all expected the answers to be diverse, depending on style, equipment and subject matter, but the details given by the various posters provided a breadth of color that I think really answers this question well.

This is easily the best forum. 

-tig
PS: I do much intervalometer work for some bird studies. I'll take 250,000 shots in a month. They're all "keepers" because I need to preserve my data. If you ask about my shots of kids: 30 percent is good, 10 percent is bad. They're pretty violent in their movements, and they dwell in low light. My wildlife shots: 20 percent. Deliberate landscape shots: 30-40 percent. Things I'll print: 0.05 percent, according to what I printed last year and non-data shots I took (15/30000).


----------



## chauncey (Apr 7, 2017)

IMHO, you should have described your genre as well as what you desire from your images before asking that question.

As an example my BIF images have a much lower keeper rate before they end up in my living room. But, age has forced
me indoors and my keeper rate is 100%, simple because all my shooting is done live-view, tethered using Canon Utility Software. 
All my adjustments are done prior to squeezing the shutter.


----------



## IglooEater (Apr 7, 2017)

Let's see, out of my last 10,000 shots (roughly) I've printed maybe 30-40 larger than 4x6, shared several hundred online, "picked" a couple thousand in LR, and rejected maybe 3,000 of them So my keeper rate is somewhere between 0.03% and 70%


----------



## AlanF (Apr 8, 2017)

Well, it's clear that you bird photographers are truly an obsessive bunch. Even more unfortunately, I am one of you, comparing miniscule details of successive shots to find the best one and searching for that perfect pose in perfect light with perfect background and impeccable sharpness. Don, of course, is the exception to prove the rule.


----------



## peterzuehlke (Apr 8, 2017)

I mostly shoot performance (music and dance) under stage lighting. Typically shoot 300 to 500 frames and deliver about 40, about 1 in 10. And some of that is not technically great. . .


----------



## tpatana (Apr 8, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> I have a 100 percent keeper rate.... seriously......
> 
> I dump EVERYTHING to a hard drive......
> 
> ...



That's almost identical to my answer, although I dump EVERYTHING to TWO hard drives.


----------



## tpatana (Apr 8, 2017)

[email protected] said:


> I'll take 250,000 shots in a month.



How many bodies (/shutters) you go through a year?


----------



## tpatana (Apr 8, 2017)

At my typical sport-shoot -day, I take between 3000-5000 pics. In focus (etc) usually ~95%, give or take. I post usually ~100-150, so I guess the keeper rate is about 3%.

At runway show, I'm usually around 600-1000, or up to 2000 if big show. In focus ~95%, of those maybe 50% have bad body position or eyes closed. Then choose the best of the remaining, and post ~60-100, or 200 for big ones. So in this case the keeper rate is ~10%.


----------



## rfdesigner (Apr 8, 2017)

tpatana said:


> At my typical sport-shoot -day, I take between 3000-5000 pics. In focus (etc) usually ~95%, give or take. I post usually ~100-150, so I guess the keeper rate is about 3%.
> 
> At runway show, I'm usually around 600-1000, or up to 2000 if big show. In focus ~95%, of those maybe 50% have bad body position or eyes closed. Then choose the best of the remaining, and post ~60-100, or 200 for big ones. So in this case the keeper rate is ~10%.



what's a runway show?


----------



## Valvebounce (Apr 8, 2017)

Hi rfdesigner. 
I take a runway show to be a fashion shoot with a platform or 'runway' for the victims : models to strut out in to the audience. 

Cheers, Graham. 



rfdesigner said:


> tpatana said:
> 
> 
> > At my typical sport-shoot -day, I take between 3000-5000 pics. In focus (etc) usually ~95%, give or take. I post usually ~100-150, so I guess the keeper rate is about 3%.
> ...


----------



## rfdesigner (Apr 8, 2017)

Valvebounce said:



> Hi rfdesigner.
> I take a runway show to be a fashion shoot with a platform or 'runway' for the victims : models to strut out in to the audience.
> 
> Cheers, Graham.
> ...



ah!.. At first I thought is was aircraft.. but they don't have eyes.  

The fashion industry has a lot to answer for.. the one place you never see anyone running is called..... :


----------



## Steve Dmark2 (Apr 8, 2017)

Hey Everyone,

i don't keep track.
To me photography is the best way of being outdoors and showing the beauty of nature and the world.
In my eyes "keeper rate" is just another way of saying: "I am the best." or "I have the best gear" or "I make the best pictures"

Be greatfull for amazing pictures and situations and share them with others 
Cheers 8)


----------



## awair (Apr 8, 2017)

Hi Steve,


Steve Dmark2 said:


> In my eyes "keeper rate" is just another way of saying: "I am the best." or "I have the best gear" or "I make the best pictures"


Not sure, respectfully, that I really agree with you here - if anything it is the opposite!
I have some great kit (paid for by my 'other' job) - I'm more interested to know whether I have wasted my money, I'm in over my head, or whether I'm on the right track, and I'm sure others are asking for the same reason.

At the moment, there is a definite lack of familiarity when I shoot anything other than swimming. There's plenty of room for improvement, which goes beyond the 'scatter-gun' approach of burst mode on the 7D/7D2 or 1DX. The intricacies of the various AF modes are still way beyond me.

However, I will agree 100% with your subsequent advice.



Steve Dmark2 said:


> Be greatfull for amazing pictures and situations and share them with others
> Cheers 8)



Possibly we're talking about completely different aspects of the Art? I can appreciate that in many cases, 'keeper rate' is not even a consideration.

However, sports, birds & air shows, all seem like a challenge to capture anything at all, let alone images of the quality produced by @KeithBreazeal.

I'm inspired by many of the results I see here on this forum. Sure, having better gear can offer greater opportunities. But ideas & better technique will normally tip the balance. 

I believe this thread is for many of us who wonder:
Was it worth getting the extra 2 fps, the extra focus points, or the 'L' lens? Can you really see a difference, can anyone?

The answer for the purist, is yes, you can see a difference; for the businessman, can you see _enough_ of a difference?

As you said earlier - Enjoy 8)


----------



## Don Haines (Apr 8, 2017)

tpatana said:


> [email protected] said:
> 
> 
> > I'll take 250,000 shots in a month.
> ...


I have had to do intervalomerer work too. One image every ten seconds for a month is 250,000 shots. We used a GoPro to survive the weather, so no focusing or shutter issues.....


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Apr 8, 2017)

DominoDude said:


> My worst keepers, are far worse than some of the shots that I toss.
> With some birds you take what you get, because it is the first and only occurrence, and perhaps the only shot I will ever make of it.
> I have a shot of a Lesser scaup, that really sucks, it was in a lake shot through branches in crap light, but I couldn't get closer and the branches were too far away to be moved, and the bird did not cooperate.
> Also have a Black-faced bunting, shot from a distance of 140-150meters with a 400mm lens - it sucks so much.... The bird is perhaps 50pixels across. If I tried to get any nearer, I would probably have scared the bird away, and then I would have been beaten to a pulp with tripods by 60 angry birders.
> ...



"50 pixels across" - I feel the pain. 
I enjoy shooting the old warbirds at airshows. With the distance the planes fly, panning, and prop blur, if I can't get rivet detail and lettering, it's almost a waste of time. If it's my first time shooting a particular aircraft, like your Lesser Scaup, I will work the photo to death. 

I tried shooting the International Space Station with a 7D + 400mm + 1.4X. There is really no way to focus on the darn thing, so I have to manually "bracket the focus" while panning and firing massive bursts.
I got 32 pixels - that's like shooting a football game in San Francisco from Reno, Nevada!(I ran the numbers)
I did a series of crops and resizing using the tiff format. It's really interesting how the pixels behaved.
I haven't tried this method on a long bird shot to see if there is any feather detail, but it should work to a certain extent. Noise is the only major factor to work around.

before / after - click on the photo for full size.



ISS photo editing process © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr


----------



## ethanz (Apr 8, 2017)

Great question. I ask myself this a lot. Over the years it has probably stayed between 2-10% (depending on the subject of course). As I've gotten better gear and skill wise, I don't think the rate has changed, just the images that I keep are better. I've also become pickier with the images I select as keepers. 5-10 years ago what I considered a keeper may not qualify as one today!


----------



## Jopa (Apr 8, 2017)

I recently realized the subj depends on a camera. If I shoot with the 5dsr, I usually take ~300 pics per session, and I can take 1000+ pics easy with the 1dx2. I select ~5-10 pics max. Due to 14fps the 1dx2 allows to catch the best moment or best facial expression easier, less relying on luck (more on the hardware  ).


----------



## dhr90 (Apr 8, 2017)

Interesting to read everyones thoughts, processes, definitions and just how much they shoot! I guess to define keeper, a photo you are happy with yourself and would want/be happy to share with others, whether because you have nailed that perfect swimming shot, simply recorded a rare bird, created that look in a portrait etc. I don't really print any of my shots out right now, mainly do to not having space to display or store them, hope for that to change soon.

The areas I shoot most, motorsport and airshows here in the uk have a 6-7 month season, I certainly find I am a bit rusty in march/april after a few months not panning and trying to get shutter speeds ever lower, so my keeper rate does change through the year too. Would like to explore other areas, like people, street, architecture more, get out of my comfort zone and see how I develop ( ;D) as a photographer.

If I spend a weekend at a race track, I will expect to take around 1000-2000 shots (I try to sit back and enjoy the action and watch a bit as well as take photos), If I get 50-100 from that weekedn I am happy to put on flickr and share here then I'm fairly happy. Usually I'll only keep one shot from a sequence burst.


----------



## AlanF (Apr 8, 2017)

At the end of each holiday (bird watch trip), I print off an A4 book from one of the sites, CeWe is my favourite now, always high quality, representing about 5% of my shots. The stuff left on the computer doesn't get looked at, but the books do. And, at that size, the IQ demands aren't great.


----------



## scyrene (Apr 9, 2017)

Steve Dmark2 said:


> Hey Everyone,
> 
> i don't keep track.
> To me photography is the best way of being outdoors and showing the beauty of nature and the world.
> ...



Not really, it's just the ratio of shots taken to shots kept. It implies nothing beyond - you don't keep every shot you take.


----------



## mtam (May 5, 2017)

Don Haines said:


> If your standards are low enough, every shot can be a keeper.....



This! Memory is so cheap as well as hard drive. It really doesn't hurt it keep it all and keep clicking. The only downside I find is having to go through all of them while in post. But even then with a fast computer its a non issue.


----------



## Sabaki (May 8, 2017)

Depends on which genre is my focus at the time.

If I shoot insects with my macro lens, I can have a very low keeper rate. With my 100mm L IS, maybe 10% and with my MP-E65, less than 5%. My criteria for my macro photography is clean backgrounds, sharp insect eye and no cutoff of subject.

If I shoot landscapes, my keeper rate can increase to 25%. Most of my throwaways here has less to do with correct sharpness and exposure but more to do with poor comp, lack of oomph or if I settle on one particular composition over similar ones of the same scene.

Shooting people can dramatically increase my keeper rate, as I have control of exposure, sharpness and subject to a far higher degree than other genres. so I can get in excess of 60% or more


----------



## rfdesigner (May 8, 2017)

dhr90 said:


> As a shooter primarily of motorsports and airshows, and a determination to push shuttter speeds as lower as I possibly can, I'm used to having an average of 10-25% keeper rate. Variations on subject, weather, backgrounds all play a part. I find myself happy if I do get a 25% keeper rate. Sometimes shoot landscapes and the odd portrait, where I might have 75-90% of shots I am happy with.
> 
> Just curious as to how other amateur and pro photographers feel about their keeper rate and if they feel it is high or low?



For the record I shot a parkrun for the first time a couple of weeks ago.. lots of runners, mainly using my 6D+100F2.0.

Keeper rate was about 90%. I was amazed.


----------



## Foothead6 (Jun 22, 2017)

my keeper rate varies depending on the subject


----------



## Valvebounce (Jun 22, 2017)

Hi Foothead. 
Welcome to CR. 
As it does for most of us, perhaps you could elaborate slightly like Sabaki a couple of posts up, what do you shoot, with what and keeper rate for different subjects. 

Cheers, Graham. 



Foothead6 said:


> my keeper rate varies depending on the subject


----------



## Ozarker (Jun 24, 2017)

This thread is a breath of fresh air and a real help to my confidence. I like to shoot portraits, but don't get much opportunity to practice. I like the iris in the eye to be in perfect focus and the composition to be correct. That isn't easy for me to get both. My keeper rate is about 5 out of 40-50 shots. If I were a younger man there would be more models available to me and the rate would improve. Right now, 2 - 3 shoots a year doesn't cut it. I'll never wear out my camera 

When I shot birds it was the same standard. I wanted the eyes in perfect focus. Keeper rate of about .25% if they were flying.

Flora? 90% keeper rate.

Anyway, I don't feel so bad after reading the other posts. I feel normal and human like the rest of you.


----------



## FTb-n (Jun 24, 2017)

For sports with consistant lighting, I toss about 10% due to focus issues and another 10-15% to missed shots (such as a player flying into the frame blocking my subject). 

On average, I find roughly 25% are "printable moments" that I think are worthy of offering to parents and players. These are photos that are sharp and flattering of a player. The rest may be technically acceptable, but somthing "less than special".

However, for any given shoot, there may only be 1-2% that I truly like and only a few that wow me -- if I'm lucky.

For challenging events, like an ice shows under spot lights, I take more risks with a lot more shots. The keeper "rate" may drop, but the number of keepers generally increases. It just takes more work to get the pool of images that I'm after. 

Keeper "rate" is a curious way to measure success. When I shoot sports for a team, my goal is to capture as many flattering images of each player as I can and to find perspectives of the event (including the fans) that are unique and memorable. I can increase my keeper "rate" by sticking with the safe shots. But, if I want more "wow" shots, I may have to experiment with more exposures. One example is capturing a controlled motion blur of a basketball player during a break away or in the air for a shot at the basket. These are tough to do consistanly and the more I try, the lower that keeper rate falls -- but, the odds of capturing that great shot go up.


----------

