when a reshoot actually saves more time

posted on 21st of february, 2010

is reshoot wasting time?

this is a question many of us , i am sure, asked ourselves sometimes.
we made a little "boo boo" and find our work in question. do we have the objectivity
to say , "no, this won't do", to ourselves.
it's not easy to destroy what you created. we are too attached to what we create.

photography is not unlike parenthood. lol..
it's about accountability. and many times, the time
we avoid the accountability we actually waste even more time trying to save the tragedy of
our terrible work.

post-processing is a double edged sword. it enhances our work, but other times, it can
destroy the essence of our images when we fail to stop at the right time.

even more so, when we think we could "rescue" a shoot, and skip having to do a reshoot.
only to spend countless hours trying to post process a bad mistake, only to make it
an even bigger bad mistake.

i have learned this the hard way. and nowadays, i don't waste much time in trying to
pretend i can save some marginal work by spending hours trying to fudge it.
all it took was one "accident" to make me do a reshoot. such as losing my first shoot
due to a mishap on my computer.

you could say it was indeed a blessing in disguise that i lost my backup file
to a corrupted dvd. and had to reshoot, only to find that the reshoot had in fact
saved me a lot of time, as the reshoot came out so much better.

and of course, less post processing to do.
now, i love my trash can even more than my image editor, lol.

that being said,
of course, there are times we cannot do a reshoot. eg. a location shot, or a travel
excursion. we might be able to go back to the same place, but the lighting
and even the surrounding may have changed.

in that case, i guess we will have to weep and bear it. and then console ourselves
to say, "tough luck! too bad !".

Comments (11)

Posted by Fzy826 on February 27, 2010
Very interesting expression
Posted by Tan510jomast on February 25, 2010
yes Electrochris , agree.
i am technically minded, but i think IM adds something like PS unsharp masking. and if you zoom in 200% or more, you see it's not sharp, but really some kind of darkening to make it "seems sharper".
and if you're one who can hold the camera steadily, you won't see such "ghosting" in a truly in focus image. IM "sharpness" is not clean.
Posted by Creativei on February 24, 2010
As usual a good blog and a useful one. great images.
Posted by Electrochris on February 23, 2010
I have definitely noticed an improvement in sharpness with image stabilization turned off even with handheld shots, and i certainly don't have the hands of a surgeon. I suppose it helps when getting down in the shutter speeds but I feel above 1/80th or so it tends to soften things up for some reason.
Posted by Tan510jomast on February 22, 2010
actually, ImStab on a tripod is an overkill, after all, a tripod is just that ie. to stabilize your camera.
what i was actually referring to, was turning off IS on handheld . actually gave me cleaner and sharper images.
perharps someone will write a technical coverage on this "strange phenomena" of ImStab. it certainly is not an excuse to learning how to hold a camera steadily.
Posted by Wildmac on February 22, 2010
Thanks for the tips! I've heard some lens with built in IS can do strange things when mounted on a tripod. Best to turn it off then. Cheers Carol :)
Posted by Tan510jomast on February 22, 2010
hey cheers all, so nice to see familiar faces as usual, and welcoming to new friends too.
Afagundes, so nice to know you like the hedgehog. it's actually my "top seller" ... i guess cute animals do sell, although many ppl told me it wouldn't sell when i first submitted the shot.
other point you mentioned ie. camera shake.
that's another thing i found out, by accident too... doing my self portraits. since i had to set this up on a tripod to "shoot myself",
i found out that not using the IS (image stabilizer) actually produces cleaner and sharper images.
Posted by Afagundes on February 22, 2010
With digital, the best is try to reshoot right there, at the heat of the moment, but there is allways some images that skip our judgement.
I´ve been trying to do that, I check all my images just after shooting for high contrast problems, distractive elements, and technical problems like camera shake or focus, if its not up to my standard I reshoot it and delete the older one (or ones), it has saved me a lot of time already.

Tan, your Hedgehog Newborn picture, its so cute!
Posted by Almaterra on February 22, 2010
Many thanks for your very good advices.
Posted by Frantab01 on February 22, 2010
good one, thanks for sharing - good luck :)
Posted by Mani33 on February 21, 2010
hahaha thanks for sharing your thoughts! :)

Comments (11)

This article has been read 1086 times.
Photo credits: Tan510jomast.

About me

confidential info

September (1)
July (1)
June (3)
February (2)
January (3)

Stock Photography that BLOGS!

Interact, make friends, share tips and techniques, have fun. Dreamstime wants your ideas and thoughts whether you are a photographer, designer or regular user. Create a blog to tell your story, promote favorite images and photographers, post tutorials or simply exchange opinions with your with fellow dreamstimers.

Don't forget words and pictures go great together so make sure you choose some Dreamstime favorite pics to brighten your article. For inspiration, check out the hottest or the most useful blogs on the left.

Create a blog to tell your story, promote favorite stock images and photographers

Create your blog

My favorite articles


More favorite articles

Related image searches

objectivity reshoot time saving

Time related stock images