(quoting Marc Williams: > So, my question still stands...which has gone unanswered. A question > asked only to point out that shooting a lot of photographs is > validated by many, many highly respected photographers...and with the > use of digital capture it is a technique now more available to > amateurs without busting the bank. (end quote)
Marc, although I realize again we are probably at opposite ends of the spectrum and our views will not mesh, I would like to say I don't feel this is a reasonable suggestion to make to a photographer who is just starting out, nor to any amateur. If you read my last post about the concept of shooting a whole lot of film (or memory cards) you might catch my point. If one is shooting a high volume as a means of "gee I wonder what will happen, I'll shoot this 3, 5, 10 different ways to see what happens", but does not document or make note of conditions or camera settings then it really is a waste of time, not just money. With this scatter method, shots that are worth having but are fleeting in time may be misjudged since the shooter is not developing a sense of what will actually produce the right image. I do not advocate shooting 10,000 images a year even if the cost is nil, UNLESS every 12, 24, or 36 shots are documented and then studied later to see what works. I remember doing this myself many years ago, without a data back, writing down conditions, location, time of day, they type of sky/sun, and then my readings from my meter, and how I was compensating for the shot. Then I would shoot two versions; one straight from my meter's reading, and one that I felt was right based on what I studied. Maybe a third if I wanted to see "what would happen." It helps one develop a sense of what a stop, or half stop, or even a third stop looks like as well. After getting those slides back, I would sit down with my notes and see what the results were. Which choices worked, which didn't. Which produced surprising results. Then when setting off to shoot next, I didn't need to go to these lengths to get the good shots. I could fill up my film (or in your case it would be memory card) with keepers more often than shots destined for the bin. This is why I don't believe your or Michael's statement about shooting 10,000 images as being good advice for the amateur as a general rule, unless they are extremely disciplined and learning from their notes, they will continue to HAVE TO shoot 10,000 images to get the keepers. It doesn't matter if you're shooting digital or film, I feel the same that the suggestion of anything else is just not sound in time, or money mangement. It is just common sense. -Lynn