Well, there's no right or wrong, is there? What works, works. Some of my favourite shots have come with me sitting on a bar stool, or in a cafe, and just looking through the viewfinder. If something appeals, I shoot. If not, I either re-frame, or I don't shoot at all. While walking about, I'll sometimes think, "there's a good shot". By the time I look through the viewfinder, I decide it's not so good afterall. Sometimes "throwaway" shots end up being among my favourites. Some shots that I think are ordinary, people rave over.
I guess what I'm trying to say, in my usual long-winded and rambling way, is that there's no rule for these things. Lots of different approaches work. Try them all. I rarely worry if the first shot, or any subsequent shot, will be a keeper. Shoot enough, and some will be worthwhile... cheers, frank Caveman wrote: > With primes you don't have much choice. Framing implies "dancing". With > zooms it's somehow easier - at least for cropping out the odd garbage > can in the frame corner. But... a prime is still a prime. And there's no > f 1:1.4 zoom. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>>One can over analyze a shot, dance back and forth > >>>for position, and try and try. Over trying can negate good results (in any > >>>art form, including, I would think sports). -- "What a senseless waste of human life" -The Customer in Monty Python's Cheese Shop sketch
