Blimey Andrew, 11000 a year. It's a wonder you have time to look at them all and evaluate properly what you have got .
It does beg the question, how many keepers a month would satisfy you?
Well, work flow has been something I've been working on since before Christmas because i did struggle to find time, but now i've pretty much got that sorted.
As to how many keepers i got each month seems to vary. I don't take pictures every day or even every week, I seem to go on whole or half day shoots and get about 200-400.
When i popped to Kew for the Butterflies there was no was i was gonna get away with a couple of shots. Animal shots are rarely caught in a single shot and often require the drive be moved to its highest frame rate. Then of course there is the desire to "get a banker". As good as the screens on the back of a camera have become - they still don't give a full picture - usually focusing off by a fraction.
I suppose what is different is my ability to "process" a picture - beyond the traditional exposure adjustment, dust removal etc. Whilst limited, the processing tools in LR can be quite effective and i'm learning to use them to greater effect.
But what constitutes as a "keeper" seems to have changed with the last few shoots, and by a country mile. Most pictures now meet the criteria of an acceptable record of the subject, but do not jump out and say "i'm a really great picture". I'm looking to submit for an LRPS accreditation - a while ago i thought i had a good 10 shots, now i think i may have 1 or 2. So i'm back to the drawing board on that.
Which brings me back to my opening question. Whilst we, as photographers, often review our work - how often do we reach a point where we almost downgrade our previous efforts from "keepers" to acceptable records of a subject? As opposed to "becoming bored with a picture we've looked at too many times since we took it".