How many photos is enough?

[Paul Ewins]

I know that there won't be any definitive answer to this question, but for any particular photo project how do you know when to say enough? I've gone back to study photography as a mature age student and we are required to produce one thematically linked folio per semester which should have 10 - 15 photos. My folio last semester had the minimum 10 shots of which three or four really resonated with me and make me want to try and do more on the same theme. I have found that I work best when there is some sort of target or time constraint to tell me that I am finished, which leads me to the original question.

Say you were working on historic covered bridges, how many photos would you use if you were creating a folio (or folios) for sale? And how many more would you think that you would require for a solo exhibition? At what point do you think you would have enough for a book?

I realise the some people just keep shooting the same thing for years and fair enough. Maybe that will happen to me, but at the moment I'd like to be able to say that I gave myself (and the subject) a decent chance rather than just what i could do in six months.

[John Kasaian]

For what purpose? An architectural record would require a number of technical shots of structural details with clarity and not neccesarily artistic images. For a purely artistic portfolio there may be other considerations, such as the weather, water level (I'm thinking of your covered bridges scenario) stuff like that.

[r.e.]

Say you were working on historic covered bridges, how many photos would you use if you were creating a folio (or folios) for sale? And how many more would you think that you would require for a solo exhibition? At what point do you think you would have enough for a book?

I think that you should consider the possibility that there is no market, apart from government archives, tourism associations and post cards for tourists, for photographs of historic covered bridges.

[Paul Ewins]

The covered bridges was just an example. I'm really speaking in very general terms here. I am thinking purely about art, so there aren't any considerations other than aesthetic value. Whether or not somebody would buy my images isn't that important to me (which is probably just as well) but the expectations of galleries is probably a good place to start.

[SMBooth]

If purely for a display or portfolio of a given subject then I would think 15-20 image is enough, if your cataloging then at least one of every bridge, which makes your chosen subject of covered bridges in Melbourne number about zero :). I was at a display before Christmas of images depicting old industrial buildings and the number of image was around 20 in a reasonable sized gallery.

[Paul Ewins]

A one point my father decided to sketch every bridge over the Yarra which took him a few years. He also sketched all of the bridges that no longer existed, using the engineering plans (where available) and other historical sources. I'm trying to hit the point between "a job worth doing is worth doing well" and "flogging a dead horse".

[SMBooth]

I had that idea once a while back, but it stayed just that. I'm sure I'm not the first either. There are some wonderful bridges straddling that brown stain we call a river and it would make a worthy personal project.

[Vaughn]

I always thought 12 was a nice number for a portfolio. If the images are varied enough (might not be on something like the bridge project), then up to twenty might work.

The important aspect of a portfolio (no matter how many images are in it) is that all images be equally strong. Toss out the weaker ones -- don't include them just to get to a certain number of images for a portfolio. It is the old "one rotten apple spoils the barrel" sort of thing.

Vaughn

[Bruce Watson]

...for any particular photo project how do you know when to say enough?

You'll know. Trust your instincts.


I've gone back to study photography as a mature age student and we are required to produce one thematically linked folio per semester which should have 10 - 15 photos. My folio last semester had the minimum 10 shots of which three or four really resonated with me and make me want to try and do more on the same theme.

This is exactly what I mean. Your instincts are telling you that you aren't done with this project yet.

There is no universal time line, there's no set number of images, for any photographer and/or project. You'll know when you're done. And when you aren't. Art photography mostly isn't about a schedule or a number of prints. It's about expressing your vision to the best of your abilities. You have to use as many prints as necessary, and take as much time as you need, to accomplish that.

[bob carnie]

You will get bored with the project, leave it , a year or two latter it will come back to you and if its a worthy project then I would say you may never have enough.
I try to have a couple of projects going at any one time for this boredom factor.

[DrTang]

12

hell..13 - baker's dozen


baker's dozen of pix

[Scott Walker]

Start photographing and printing your subject or theme. Once you are satisfied with what you have done, count your prints.....that is the right number.

[Mark Sawyer]

I know that there won't be any definitive answer to this question...

It's going to depend, subject-to-subject and photographer-to-photographer. Not enough for me may be too much for you, and the photographs will be different anyways. Personally, I tend to continue things until it just feels time to stop, and even then, I never know when I'll go back and pick it up again.

If for a gallery show, the number would largely depend on the gallery space being filled. A large gallery space should have more images. Then again, the guiding principle in today's fine art photography world seems to be, "if you can't make more, at least make them bigger..." :rolleyes:

[Kirk Gittings]

1 great photograph may be enough, but 100 may not be enough if the images are lame.

[Robbie Shymanski]

It's like writing. Sometimes you can be Hemmingway and say all that needs to be said in a line or you're Philip K. Dick spending years scribbling volumes of an Exegesis that you never finish and no one really understands.

[Maris Rusis]

And how many more would you think that you would require for a solo exhibition? At what point do you think you would have enough for a book?


In my time as a gallerist I've hung exhibitions that seem to average 30 photographs.

Thirty is about as many as the casual viewer can see and relate to in one go. Wall space is rarely a limitation. More pictures give opportunity to really explore a theme. Reviews and critiques are easier to write.

Anyone who has produced, mounted, and framed thirty first class photographs deserves a show.

Past experience with "standard" 64 page photo-books suggests at least 100 images should be available for the final edit.

[Scott Walker]

Then again, the guiding principle in today's fine art photography world seems to be, "if you can't make more, at least make them bigger..." :rolleyes:

Something like the music industry, if you aren't any good you can cover it up by being loud :D

[chassis]

My rule of thumb in many selection/sorting activities is the rule of 100:10:1

For one "good" piece, whatever the piece may be, you need to start with 100 pieces of raw material, sort through them to get a short list of 10, and arrive at a final selection of 1.

Yes it is resource-intensive (time and whatever else), but following this approach will increase the chances of outstanding results.

[Gary Tarbert]

How long is a piece of string?on a fairly recent nature shoot (not Lf) i was informed that a pair of breeding Osprey were at a certain point , i went down there one morning and the very first day i nailed a shot which has been highly acclaimed by my peers, encouraged by that success i went back three times ,Guess what nothing better than the first attempt ,So the moral of the story is when you nail it !! Regards Gary

[William McEwen]

Paul, with every project I've ever had, I stopped when I was ready to stop. It wasn't a conscious decision. It came from somewhere else inside.

Either I was done with that direction or I wanted to try something else. The number of good negatives/pictures didn't enter into it at all.

The fact that you're asking yourself if you have enough pictures tells me that maybe you're ready to do something else.

BTW, your dad sounds like a cool guy.

[Lynn Jones]

As a writer in photography as well asa photographer, I asked this question to many photographers. The Large format guys say 1 or 2, the portraitists say 4 to 6, the photojournalists are a different breed of cat. Cartier-Bresson said one will be enough if you know what you are doing, however several prominent members of that fraternity will admit to dozens or a couple of hundred. The "junk" I am seeing among digital photographers do hundreds to thousands and editing becomes an attrocity.

Lynn

[Robert Hughes]

Back in the Speed Graphic days, the editor would send his junior photog out on assignment with one double sided film holder. "That way, you've got a backup in case your first shot doesn't turn out!"

Reminds me of the Soviet conscripts sent into Stalingrad in the fall of 1942. They counted off by 2's; one man carried a rifle and a clip of 5 bullets, the second just had bullets. "When the first rifleman is shot, his partner picks up the rifle and continues on!"

[Ed Richards]

Or you keep shooting the same subjects the rest of your life, seeing more each year.

[Vaughn]

Or you keep shooting the same subjects the rest of your life, seeing more each year.

Basically my theory -- I have been photographing along Prairie Creek (under the redwoods) for over 30 years. Started with the Rollei, then 4x5 to 5x7 to 8x10 and occasionally 11x14. First silver gelatin prints, now carbon prints and platinum prints.

It is nice to get out of the redwoods occasionally (tho I have to be careful when sun hits my bellows and causes steam to form inside)...Yosemite, Death Valley, Central WA, etc. I bring back what I have learned about the light in those places to the redwoods.

Vaughn

[chassis]

Or you keep shooting the same subjects the rest of your life, seeing more each year.

I like this alot. It has occurred to me that many powerful images I have viewed come from photographers who know their subjects intimately. This permits knowledge of advantageous lighting and perspective combinations. My strongest images (to my eye) are of subjects I know well, mainly portraits of family members. I am working on an image now which is starting to take shape, after having tried different compositions, lenses and (outdoor natural) lighting conditions.

I have a few strong images of new-to-me subjects, but these are the exception and not the rule.

[Mark Sawyer]

Cartier-Bresson said one will be enough...

In my case, one can sometimes be too many...