Keeping or tossing prints?

[Grandpa Ron]

I have wrestled with this issue many times.

I decided that often, it was a question of; am I really improving an image or simply creating a slightly different image. Indeed it was not unusual for me to find I like my second or third revision better than my last "perfect" revision after a few days.

As an hobbyist, my personal bias places content over technical perfection. So now, I find it best to stop when the photograph conveys the idea I want. When I am happy with the print, I try not to second guess the results.

In most cases, the people who view my photos would not notice any minor change I made, so their suggestions would simply be adding their biases to my work.

Photography is personal, it reflects one's opinions. There is no wrong answer.

[xkaes]

A lot of this assumes that a negative only creates one image. More often than not, I create more than one image with a negative. One might be almost all of the negative, while another might be just a small section, another might be toned brown, another might be a different section with very high contrast, another might be hand-painted with transparent watercolors, another might be a panorama, another might be merged with a completely different negative (or two), one might have a texture screen added, another....................

One of my favorites was of an old barn. I developed it by using a spray bottle with developer in it. There's no way to reproduce it exactly.

[Martin Aislabie]

I review all of my working prints after a couple of days to let them dry out properly and then select my favourite one from the workflow.

The rest get binned.

I chuck a considerable number of my final prints too upon review after a few weeks of being stored, so I come to them again with fresh eyes.

You need to be your own harshest critic.

I've looked through too many other photographers work which has been a mixture of hits and misses.

Martin

[Grandpa Ron]

xkaes does make a valid point; cropping, toning, and other modifications, can create a lot more head scratching that trying to tweak the perfect photo. I do have multiple variations on the same negative, because I like them all.

There is no law saying you have to pick just one.

[Merg Ross]

You need to be your own harshest critic.

Martin

Good routine. And only show your best work.

Thanks,
Merg

[wooserco]

Regarding being your own harshest critic: Albeit digital, my most sought after print was one that I was one second from brooming to the discard file.

My wife saw it and exclaimed: That's perfect, I want it in a 16x20!

Months later, I went to capture the same scene on film and a storm had removed it. The photo is titled "Mill Ruins". It had been there for over 100 years, but the creek bed flooded and washed it all away. A once in a lifetime photo.

While we can be own harshest critic, solicit the eyes of another. My wife's eye is my final opinion from here on out.

[Jim Jones]

Really bad rejects are destroyed. The fairly good rejects might get tagged with the negative ID in case i want to reprint them in the distant future, or be given to friends who understand they may be rejects, but still like them. Why destroy what others may appreciate? If I was more businessman than photographer, destroying rejects would help maintain sale prices. However, I like people better than money.

[jtomasella]

Save one to write the process on and toss the rest.

[Dave Ogle]

sometimes I keep them. that way I can compare to a good print to a work print for future printing. I can see where to dodge and burn.

[ASA1000]

If I want to keep a less than anticipated print I cut the corner off, in the white border. That way I know, if I come across it later, that it is 'less than perfect'.