Do You Save Bad Photos?


Useless Photo Storage  

76 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you Save Blurry or Out of Focus Photos?

    • Yes
      16
    • No
      18
    • Depends How Bad
      42


Recommended Posts

So not all the photos you take are going to be good, but do you save those that are blurry or out of focus?

At the moment, I do, but since starting to shoot in RAW then I have realised they are starting to take up space on my tiny hard drive.

Just wondering what other peoples thoughts are on the matter.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/642043-do-you-save-bad-photos/
Share on other sites

If the photo is blurry or out of focus, then it's a no-no (N).

But if it's "bad" as in composition and such, I still save it, but I know the day will come when I'll go through all these photos and delete them :D

Posting pics on Facebook... Why?

What happened to cataloging on PC and sharing it through Flickr to only a few friends than allow every friend on Facebook access your photos?

Manage your friends lists for access rights? :p

Anything I put on Facebook Photowise I dont really have a problem sharing.. to be honest

I do more or less delete most of the blurry/out of focus pictures unless they are really worthy..

Usually I keep everything on the camera that I take (unless I run out of room on my memory card), then I'll transfer everything to my laptop, and get rid of most of the terrible ones then. I still have quite a few bad ones on here though, I'm just too lazy to sort them out lol

If I take an out of focus photo it's on purpose since I have an Autofocus motor on my camera lenses. So yeah, I save them.

Autofocus combined with user error can still produce out of focus photos (bad lighting, fast movement, focusing on unwanted point, wrong focus point selection, etc)

Actually If I want 100% precious focus of my critical shots I use a tripod+Life View on LCD+magnification, then manual focus :D

Autofocus can still produce out of focus photos (bad lighting, fast movement, focusing on unwanted point, wrong focus point selection, etc)

Actually If I want 100% precious focus of my critical shots I use a tripod+Life View on LCD+magnification, then manual focus :D

I know, but I was just using that as an excuse for my OCD complex when it comes to perfect photography.

If it's hideously underexposed (completely black) or overexposed (completely white), or *really* out of focus, I delete it. Usually delete it in camera before even downloading to my PC. If its just poor composition or a bad angle or whatever then I keep it - hard drive space is really cheap and who knows, might want stuff...someday.

I keep most things, and once a month (or so) I'll go through everything and kill any that I don't like.

I actually turned one really blurred photo (accidentally blurred) into something cool while messing with Photoshop - just being blurred doesn't mean it can't be something good.

I don't delete anything. My camera screen is too small to make any decisions like that - so I wait to upload them. Storage is cheap now-days, so I keep everything.

I know I've looked back on stuff I've initially hated, and fell in love with it. Sometimes it just takes a fresh day to realise something :D

I know I've looked back on stuff I've initially hated, and fell in love with it. Sometimes it just takes a fresh day to realise something :D

Exactly (Y). I do the same every once in a while.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • This one baffles me...so they are creating a museum based around the Ship of Theseus? A museum is supposed to preserve things. It doesn't really work if the conversation goes, "I gazed upon Starry Night the other day, the colours were beautiful!" "Yeah...I didn't expect Godzilla to show up, though." Create a building devoted to displaying AI work, fine. The rainforest idea sounds interesting and I would consider visiting if they pay me a few bucks. But don't call it a museum...
    • >defenders of AI-generated artworks often claim that AI is just a tool It is not. It is the inhuman artist replacement. The human writing the prompt is the employer/manager requesting the work product of the artist -- a supervisory/descriptive job that doesn't carry with it any rights to the copyright of that work product at all. And since AI is not human itself, it can't gain copyright for anything it is asked to regurgitate or hallucinate, so it can't transfer that copyright to the employer/manager/human who asked for the output. This was all legally reaffirmed last year. So, no, while there are AI tools, AI slopware generation is NOT a "tool" in the legal definition of that word.
    • As long as i get to play GTA 6 before it ends 😂😂
    • Google is opening the world's first AI museum in Los Angeles by Ivan Jenic Image via: Google Ever since AI image generators went mainstream, the debate over whether AI-generated art is real art hasn't let up. Those who don’t consider AI to be art say that if a machine does the creating and anyone can prompt it, there’s no skill involved, and therefore no art is produced. The counter-argument is equally persistent, as defenders of AI-generated artworks often claim that AI is just a tool, and that every major technological breakthrough, like the camera or the computer, was met with the same skepticism before eventually being accepted as a legitimate creative medium. Google’s position in this debate is clear. Which is no surprise, as the company is investing billions in AI infrastructure. And now, in efforts to encourage people to use its AI even more, Google is opening Dataland on June 20, which it's calling the world's first AI arts museum. Located inside The Grand LA, a Frank Gehry-designed building in Los Angeles, the museum spans 25,000 square feet. The museum is built around a collaboration with media artist Refik Anadol, who has worked with Google since 2016. The inaugural exhibition is called Machine Dreams: Rainforest, and is powered by an AI model trained on “an extensive dataset of the natural world.” It generates 1.2 billion pixels of visuals in real time and reacts to visitors dynamically. The space also generates soundscapes, real-time emotion sensing, and algorithmically produced scents. Image via: Refik Anadol Studio / Google Google says that the museum is powered by its Gemini models, which run on Google Cloud. So, everything is generated inside one of Google’s AI data centers and is streamed to the museum. Alongside the museum opening, Google Arts & Culture is funding an AI Artist Residency, giving four artists $25,000 grants each, along with mentorship from Refik Anadol Studio and access to Google's machine learning tools. Their work will be shown at Dataland and on the Google Arts & Culture website later this year. Google’s AI museum will undoubtedly initiate a fired-up debate on social media, and we can’t wait to see the first reactions. Via: Smithsonian Magazine
    • Calling GTA 6 overhyped crap doesn’t make you edgy, it just makes you sound like someone who hasn’t enjoyed anything since the PS2 era.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      With What earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      570
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      178
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      68
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!