when a reshoot actually saves more time
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 !".
Photo credits: Tan510jomast.
How to shoot events