Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Al_Nowak
Now then, on the number of shots issue. My feeling is that if a photographer winds up with great shots... who gives a rat's ...er... behind how many shots it took!
Yes, I pay the price in sorting through a bunch of crap, but I also create an opportunity for those "happy accidents" and "spontaneous flashes of brilliance" that sometimes result in really great unplanned images.
Besides, who's keeping a box score? As someone else mentioned, the expensive toys we use can do 100,000 (some even claim 300,000!) clicks, so why the hell not use 'em up.
|
Unless you have a newer dSLR, most of them do not give you even 100,000 shutter activations. In the last year, the more expensive dSLRs do offer the 100,000 and higher range, but I suspect that most of us have dSLRs that are more than 1 year old.
The problem with shooting a multitude of shots is that often it is the method by which the photographer gets a few good shots. Sheer quantity of shots means that they eventually have to "luck out". But is this what we want? We won't always have the luxury of shooting unlimited shots. There will be times when the time period is too short so we want to be able to frame and shoot quickly and efficiently and know that we can get the shot.
I see lots of results from the "spray and pray" method of photography where 1/3rd to 1/2 the shots don't even have the proper exposure. That's a waste of time since most such shots will be difficult to work with. Better to slow down, observe good technique, and take 10 or 15 good shots of each set and then move on. If you shoot at a pro level (which in this case I'm defining as using good technique and having a good eye for what makes a quality photo), then of the 10 or 15 good shots you take in such an example, 8 to 10 of them will be pro level shots and highly usable --- and 1 or 2 will be outstanding shots.
But even with all the potential for luck in shooting many hundreds of shots of each set, it is surprising how bad some of the photos are from such sessions. I know dozens of "photographers" who never produce a decent shot, no matter how many shots they make. A thousand shots made with bad technique and no eye for what makes a photo will just produce a thousand poor shots.
This, of course, holds true in all disciplines. I have a friend who practiced doing a Side Steal (a sleight of hand technique with playing cards) for 20 years. He had practiced it hundreds of thousands of times. He did it absolutely perfectly --- unfortunately it was worthless because he used a bad technique and it was clear to any observer that he had done something suspicious looking. In other words, a good Side Steal must looks so normal to the viewer that they are unaware that anything out of the ordinary happened. I spent 30 minutes teaching him a "good technique" and he practiced it for a few hours and now he does a very good side steal. What is the moral of this little fable: practice the wrong technique thousands of times and you can do the wrong technique perfectly, and it has no value. Practice good technique for even a short time, and it has great value. Or another way to say it --- shoot a thousand shots at 1 1/2 stops overexposed and what do you have?
Cheers,
rfs