Hello Roger
lol before i begin ...you do seem to upset some folks i notice dont you Roger haha...but i tend to notice your posts from a different angle..perhaps a critical analysis of someones coments in isolation to each other rather than a overall emotional person overview that many seem to recognise (just my thoughts on occassion), ah well
This is why I am ever less inclined to ask anyone their 'hit rate'. Everyone has their own criteria -- and mine are a bit different from what they were 40 years ago (or 30... or 20... or 10...)
of coarse i know where you are comming from here and obviously from a buisness point of view (particularly in days gone by) film was an significant overhead and not to be wasted, as time went on and auto cameras with quick/quiet motor drives, rapid fire flash and auto bracketing (not that i ever really used auto bracketing much--i was either too confident or too cheap too waste the film) came in, it was great to elimate the shots (in wedding photog) that were throw away because someone blinked! there should be a law against people blinking at weddings hehe
but what does give me pause to think is, because of digital or the relization that film is less expensive these days, is i notice there is less emphisis placed on composition with any particular shot taken...clearly there are many on RFF that are excluded from this critisiam but in general...
I have only ever shot weddings for friends, and then, only when I can't get out of it
yeah tell me about it...even tho i did it for hmm money most of the time, i think i got to the stage where i had to refuse for freinds and family because i just wanted to enjoy a wedding as a guest.
The thing is, I know mine aren't the only criteria, and I know that I'm a good enough writer to double my 'hit rate' (or better) if I press the 'Auto Adjust Bull****' level in my private writing/photography programs: you have no doubt read Tom Wolfe's The Painted Word.
well i am afraid you have that over me, i am still somewhat behind (not ignorant but behind) in software and computer skills, so i am still a bit old school but i'll catch up some day
😉
nah you know i have a couple of degrees and are reasonably well read but i havnt read a great deal on photog over the years (not by my reasoning or others anyway) which is strange considering it was my first interest and will probably be my be my last. so i havnt read Wolfe but i had a look at the synapsis and it looks appealing. hehe perhaps you think i have in common his satire, history interests or middlebrow veiws...
Depending on the photographer, it may be easier to get 10 good pics with 20 sheets of cut film or 200 frames of 6x7cm or 1000 frames of 35mm (or 10,000 digital images...) My own view, increasingly, is this: use the way that's right for you, and don't get too precious/pompous about what's 'good' and why.
i couldnt agree more...although i would like to see more thought involved with composition ect instead of snapping away and one will turn out right type of thing although that can be fun in its own right, but to visulize a picture before you have taken it is optimal IMO