I do tend to shoot more when I shoot digital - a lot more. And yes, I get into modes where I just hammer away. Mostly events, where the action is moving and flowing and things are changing quickly. I get around 600 shots to a set of CR-V3 rechargeable batteries, by the way, not 300.
I have shot as much as 1200 shots - sometimes even more - in the course of a day. Of course I could not afford to do that with film.
That does not mean that I have to shoot that way. Sometimes when I am shooting digital, I don't hammer away sequentially, I take my time and use the skills I have learned over the years to make the best photo I am able to make.
I find advantages to both methods, at times.
Sometimes, by hammering away, I take risks that I would otherwise not take on an off-the-cuff shot that I might otherwise have held fire on - and find out later that it is amazingly good. Sometimes by taking four or five shots of person passing by, I find that most of them are not acceptable for whatever reason, like eyes closed, head turned, awkward position, etc, and maybe one of them is a keeper - if shooting film, maybe I'd have gotten the one winner - and maybe not.
Over all, and over time, I have come to the conclusion that for me, I get about 1 in 15 or so shots I like and consider worthy of a second glance - that doesn't make them all masterpieces, but they have, in my humble opinion, some degree of merit.
That is 1 in 15 whether I shoot film or digital. Whether I go slow or go fast.
So shooting lots does not increase my 'hit rate', but having more shots increases the number of photos I consider acceptable.
I try to use the appropriate method for any given photographic situation. I may be wrong, but this works for me.
And yes, I have many thousands of photos in Flickr. I have my reasons for that.
