From the perspective of someone whose first language is not English, the term “shooting” does not immediately conjure the idea of cameras. However, it makes sense at some level, because the Continuous Shooting mode on your camera is a very fast-paced tool indeed. In this article, I will introduce the Continuous Shooting setting in photography and explain how to use it… usefully and peacefully.
Back in my early days with 35mm film, my camera of choice was a Nikon FM3a. A beautiful SLR with manual film rewind. Each “click” had to be followed by an automatic thumb movement that rewound the film to the next frame. Of course, the frame rate with manual rewind was not breathtaking.
After some time, I bought an external MD-12 motor on eBay. It was a hungry, heavy monster that needed eight batteries, but it was capable of rewinding film at the blazing speed of three frames per second (FPS)! If you can’t remember what those cameras sounded like, the Australian Lyrebird in this video, starting at 1:50, will remind you.
I then switched to digital cameras, which already had continuous shooting built into their algorithms, and the golden era of “pray and spray” could begin. But the beginnings were quite tentative. My first DSLR, the Nikon D70, had the same frame rate of 3 FPS as my Nikon FM3a. Not having to feed the MD-12 beast and not having to pay to press the shutter button, however, was a nice addition.
Today I shoot with the Nikon Z9, which can manage 20 FPS or more depending on the mode. It’s a great achievement, but what is all this speed for, and how can it be used effectively? That’s what I’ll cover in this article.
What Is Continuous Shooting in Photography?
Continuous shooting is a mode where your camera continues taking photos automatically as you hold down the camera’s shutter button. You don’t need to press the shutter button for each photo; rather, you can hold down the shutter button instead.
Continuous shooting does not always mean that you’re taking dozens of photos per second. Most cameras today have a “high” and “low” continuous shooting mode. The “high” mode might be able to take 10 or more photos per second. Meanwhile, the “low” mode may only take 3-4 photos per second (sometimes even less). But it still counts as continuous shooting, so long as the camera keeps automatically taking pictures as you hold down the shutter button.
Why Use the Continuous Shooting Mode?
The purpose of continuous shooting is to make it easier to take multiple photos in a row. For that reason, it is usually used whenever the subject of your photo is too fast and difficult to predict.
Although I agree with Henri Cartier-Bresson’s concept of the “decisive moment,” my perception of the world – and my reaction time – are not so fast that I can always press the shutter at the most decisive moment. It may work in street photography, but not so much in wildlife photography. That’s why I often use continuous shooting and then choose the right photo afterwards, once all the photos are safely on my computer.
A classic example of the appropriate use of continuous shooting is when photographing birds in flight. The smaller the bird, the faster it can flap its wings, and the harder it is to catch the right moment. Getting the right wing position on a hummingbird is down to luck – or taking a high number of photos per second. This is the time to use “continuous high” if you can, since it will maximize the FPS of your camera.
However, continuous shooting is also useful even when the subject is barely moving. For example, your subject could blink or change their expression in a small way. However, you usually don’t need to photograph slow-moving subjects in 20 FPS of detail. Keeping your camera on “continuous low” and shooting at 3-4 FPS is plenty in such a situation.
And why not take single frames? Along with the aforementioned problems of blinking or changing expression, there is also the simple value of taking photos for backup. Maybe there is some motion blur in one of your photos, for example. This is especially true if it’s getting dark and you’re right on the edge of using a safe shutter speed. By taking multiple photos, you make it more likely that one of them is sharp. And by using continuous shooting, you can take those photos as quickly as possible!
A unique type of photo that benefits from continuous shooting is if you want to create a composite to show multiple versions of your fast-moving subject in the same frame. A good example is the jump of Orlando Duque and Michal Navratil from the railway bridge in Vyton, Prague, taken by Dan Vojtech. This composite was created by taking multiple photos with continuous shooting and then stitching them together in Photoshop. (By the way, a bit of historical interest. The Vysehrad castle in the background dates back to the second half of the 10th century and was the seat of Czech kings.)
To end this article, let me show you an example – not from bird photography, but from family photography. If you’ve ever photographed children, you’ll probably agree that these energetic creatures are not easy to capture in a photo. They’re always jumping, running, and climbing. The following four photos were taken just 1/10th of a second apart, yet each one tells a slightly different story. If it weren’t for the “continuous high” setting on my camera, I never could have captured the full progression.
And that’s why it pays to learn about continuous shooting as a photographer – so that you don’t (metaphorically) face-plant when you’re taking photos of a fast subject!
As I take a lot of photographs of what I’d say are ‘urban landscapes’, there’s value in having a series of shots rather than just the one. Even if I know most viewers don’t pay close enough attention to notice or care, I like to avoid having people walking with one leg behind a trashcan, a head sticking out from behind a low wall, and such. It’s almost impossible to check for all those in the moment, and having a few shots usually has one or two that don’t have any of those issues. Even just one or two frames per second is good enough for that.
I do need to remind myself not to do this too much when I’m taking photographs for myself, because the amount of photos you collect doing this can quickly take all the fun out of the processing. I recall coming back from a brief visit to a nearby historic town with over 600 photos and just… giving up! That’s no good either.
I do not have the steadiest hands, nor, at 72 do I have the stamina I used to have. Considering these issues, I tend to shoot at about 5fps most of the time, thereby improving the likelihood of at least one keeper. I use a tripod or monopod when possible, but in some places, like a Botanical Garden, that is not an option.
With this approach, I do end up trashing 80-90% of the photos I capture, but I do tend to get enough good ones to be comfortable. This approach applies to both stationary and moving subjects to account for my shaking. Yes, the image stabilization is a massive help with focus, but the multiple frames allow to choose the best composition as my hands move.
I expect I will continue with this approach.
Is there a reason you don’t use a tripod? With a gimbal, perhaps?
Thanks for the education, Libor. Your son’s example confirms we all have to learn, sometimes the hard way.
That’s right. Mouth falls are one of the most memorable lessons. Personally, I prefer softer approaches to knowledge :)
Henri was talking about something else, when he made that remark – and if he was considering what you’re discussing here, I am qite sure he would agree with you 100%. This is simply any way of “capturing the decisive moment”. Humming birds, for example – I’ve watched them for hours, in the front garden, at my previous house! Bees are another – the ball coming off a baseball bat or tennis racquet. The faster the action, the greater the need to be able to capture it by using continuous shooting. You are still captuing the decisive moment – you are just doing it by a different method – one dictated by the speed of the action you’re seeking to capture.
I totally agree. Some moments are simply too fast and require a different approach to capture them. However, what hasn’t changed since Cartier-Bresson is that the photographer needs to understand which moment is the decisive one. Capturing it is just a technical question.
Also.. lightning. It’s impossible to know when it will strike, although in a good storm your chances of getting the right shot will increase dramatically (obviously). But on days when lightning will happen, but only once or twice a minute, continuous shooting is the only way to get your shot.
In the case of lightning photography I would probably choose a different method than continuous shooting. If I were a “lightning hunter”, I would probably get some kind of lightning trigger that can activate the shutter when the sky is illuminated by lightning. Otherwise, I’d probably use an ND filter. A combination of long, consecutive exposures (using the camera’s built-in intervalometer) greatly increases the chance of successfully capturing a “decisive moment”.
On TV when there are photographers shooting, even though they have digital cameras, they still add in that film motor drive sound effect. I guess it is a satisfying sound.
It certainly is! Too bad the animals usually have a different opinion about it. However, with the Z9, I have the quietest “shutter” click setting. At least for that old fashioned feel.
I hate wasting all those pixels. So once I have identified the best shot, I will often take the remainder and make (somewhat) slow motion video clips. My grandnieces and nephews love to watch the birds, animals, model rocket launches and themselves in slow motion.
Sometimes I get more satisfaction out of that than getting the perfect shot.
Sometimes I also run it at least on the camera display before sending the bad shots to “silicon heaven”.
Hi Libor, I very much enjoyed reading your post as usual. I would love it if you would include the species in the technical data of your photos. I’m familiar with most of the birds you are showing, but not all. Thanks!
Thank you, Rob. I’ll do it right away.
Photography gets more easy all the time…
Coming from analogue to digital the jump was enormous; no more waiting to see the end result ! ( like film vs video) You can learn instantly from your mistakes.
Now at 20 fps it is almost the speed of video, too bad it can’t do 24fps..)
Then there is eye-focus. so you can put you attention to the subject without having to be troubled if the focus is right; Eye-sharp instant portraits at f/1.2 is the new normal.
Photographers must watch out not to become lazy…
Doing much photography at performances I always use continuous shooting with the option shoot-priority and making use of the rear-AF-button only ( so i know when AF is engadget or not)
The workflow is now very different from the past:
You shoot thousands of images, then next is the problem how to select them.
Selecting has become a lot of work compared to the past. Also you need to trash a large percentage or else you can buy harddisks every week. ( a good thing is that if you accidentally throw away a fine picture- at least you will often not remember it)
Since some time I use Fast-Raw-Viewer for selecting, a program that also had a positive review on this site. Also you really need a fast computer and a large speedy harddisk.
Again : enjoy the new possibilities but don’t forget to use you photographic brain.
Photography may be easier technically, but getting a good image is just as hard — composition and noticing good light has not become any easier!
The mechanics of getting a properly exposed, sharp picture are getting easier all the time–and I’m all for it.
That leaves the emphasis on the composition, lighting, and most interesting moment, which is the part of photography that’s interesting.
If I wanted the mechanics of photography to be hard, I’d be like Spencer and shoot 8×10 film for fun ;)
It is really getting harder and harder to take a technically bad photo. This should make the index finger on the delete button all the stricter. Fortunately, there’s still a long way to go from a technically good photo to a really good photo. And it is very satisfying (and sometimes frustrating) to walk that path.
Thank you for this article. I’ll let myself try the technique. (I’m still shooting photos much like I did with film.) The sequence with the kid is wonderful.
I think, Gary, that keeping your film habits with a digital camera is very helpful. Your photographs can only benefit. Although I admit that 20fps on classic film would ruin me before this week is over.