I said: > > "And I'm not saying that taking piles and piles of photos with a > smaller ratio of "winners" is a bad thing - it's always been said that > taking lots of photos is a key to improving."
And, Tom Reese answered: > > I don't know if I agree with that. I believe that the key to improving > is to slow down, take your time and think about what you're doing. John > Shaw recommends asking yourself the questions: "what is it about this > subject that I find interesting" and "how can I best capture that > characteristic using the equipment that I have?" That method obviously > wouldn't work for a sports photographer but it's certainly helped me > improve my average. <snip> Well, Tom a few others took me to task for that statement. First, note that I said it's ~a~ key to improving, not ~the~ key. In and of itself, taking lots of piccies ain't gonna do squat. It has to be part of a "programme" where the photos are analyzed, mistakes are recognized and solutions are proposed (and then implemented next shoot). BTW, shooting lots can go hand in hand with slowing down and taking your time. I"m not advocating rushing and forgetting all the other good things at the expense of shooting more, because clearly, that's no good. Once the shot is planned, considered, composed, and you're ready to shoot, do you only then take one shot? Of course not! You take several, changing the angle slightly, bracketing, etc, etc. As well, by shoot lots, I also meant, "take photos more frequently". Going out once a month with your camera won't let you improve as quickly as going out several times a week, or even daily. Again, I didn't mean to propose that one merely shoot lots and lots and ~that~ in and of itself will make you better. Far from it! cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
