The art of the edit and other ramblings.

I’ve sometimes been accused of posting “too many” images to my sites when it comes to an event. For one of my infamous Space galleries I’ll usually post 70 - 100 photos, maybe more if it’s an extended event. However, that means I’m not publishing about half of them. Since I shoot RAW and carry limited memory, I’m only roughly generating 200 images or so a night. Less if I hit the video hard. 

I feel half the art of shooting an event is in the edit. Now I understand if it is a wedding or some such occasion where every great-uncle and old high school friend needs to be covered, and a 600 image gallery is generated. That’s fine, just charge accordingly. But for concerts and club events and so forth, part of the art is definitely culling the less desirable frames from the choice cuts. 

I usually try to give some love to the people in the venue itself, as well as the performers/DJs and dancers with somewhat equal facility, interspersed with overall crowd/venue images and random obscurities. Fortunately, since I run my own operation, the editorial control is fully mine. So in reality I could push 200 images if I felt like it. However, I know no one wants to wade through 200 images, so I won’t. 

Unfortunately, I see this a lot, especially on Facebook. Now, I know with the whole social media revolution, some clients want hundreds of images so every Tom, Dick, and José in the venue can tag themselves. And that’s fine, even though the marketing return is dubious. But I still think within that model there exists a space for some form of editing. The client should think of it as a ‘contest’, i.e. “You might just be the lucky lad or lady featured in our Facebook Fan Page this week! Have your photo taken by our ace shooter this evening to enter!”. And then yeah, maybe spin it into a prize and put it up for a vote. Winner gets a comp bottle or something. Then our ace shooter puts the best 70 up, and people get to do their thing. 

Plus, since Facebook’s gallery architecture is horrid, no one wants to wade through 300 images anyways. Plus, if you run or work for an independent website, why post your entire take on Facebook? People won’t go to your site? 

I run the fan page for Talk Nightlife, and for every event I cover, I post 10 or so images out of whatever the take was that evening. The rest reside on in my galleries. And the galleries represent the final edit. Some obviously didn’t make it. ‘Well gee Dan, why didn’t they all go up? I saw you shooting like 1000 frames’.

Well, this is why kids…note, this is just me, other guys do it other ways….

- Dark/blurry/hacked frames. Sometimes the light doesn’t agree and I didn’t delete on site. 

- You blinked and ran away before I could retake. Your fault. 

- You were visibly wrecked and I was only humoring you. I’ll send you the image, maybe. Thank me later. I like vodka tonics. 

- That wasn’t your boy/girlfriend you were with. I just spared you countless hours of drama. I also like vodka cranberry. Good for the kidneys.

- I selected another image of you. Don’t worry, it’s there. 

- It was 10 AM and upon later inspection, I deemed the photo not worthy of presentation. My fault. 

- There was something in the frame that could maybe cause problems for me. Think Photobomb. 

- And sometimes I’m just being a bitch. 

Now, I’m actually in the minority here. A lot of photo sites pay per photo. So, it’s in the better interests of the shooter to upload as much as possible and see what amount sticks. ‘Gee Dan, they can make lots of money that way…’

Hold the photo, cracky, not quite. Most of those sites pay a paltry 0.25-0.50 USD per photo with horrible work-for-hire terms. And they don’t cover expenses or provide any extras. So, if you shoot 200 photos, upload 200, and 150 get picked, you’re pulling less than $80 a night. Now, that’s not too horrible until you get into the expenses. Unless you live close to your assignments, you have to pay for transport, whether it’s gas and parking for your car, or cab/bus fare. Plus the cost of your equipment since stuff does wear out. That $80 can easily turn into $40 or less. 

And the photos belong to the shysters running the site, not the photographer. I understand some give and take with regards to rights, but not absolutes in favor of the media outlet.

And even with this egregious model, there’s still a whole cart of photos to wade through. Those sites I alluded to above? You still have to sort through 200 images, even for a no-name open format night. 

Edit down, retain your rights, get a per-gig rate, and cover your expenses.