Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/04/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I've never understood how it's somehow immoral to shoot a lot. Whatever it takes. I love the way people convince themselves that 'if only' they had 20,000 rolls of film and a Nat Geo expense account they too wouldd be able to get great shots. How do you think them NG snappers got the film and the expense account in the first place? They shot great shots. If you had the skill and the determination, you too could get the 20k rolls and the expense account. Fortunately with the advent of digital the who hit-rate argument seems to be fading away. No-one is particularly interested if you shoot 10 or 100 or 1000 frames on a CF card. As for the whole skill thing, weeeelll... If you're shooting pack shots in a studio, or LF architectural stuff, then you better be able to get every shot lookin' damn fine. If you're shooting portraits, or landscape stuff, well, you get cut a little more slack. If you're shooting docco, then we cut you yet more slack. It takes time and film. If you're Garry Winogrand or Robert Frank or HCB, who cares how much you shoot? Your method is high-risk, that's the whole point. Over the weekend I made approx 1500 exposures. What's that, the equivalent of ~50 rolls of 35mm? So far, only one good picture. http://www.pinkheadedbug.com/wip/360easter/1000px/source/krazykidz.html Was it worth it? You bet. Could I have made that picture without exposing the other 1443 frames (this is a composite)? No. - -- John Brownlow http://www.pinkheadedbug.com http://www.unintended-consequences.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html