AndyH Loc: Massachusetts and New Hampshire

How?

Do you delete right from the camera screen? Do you wait and view in your PP software? Do you think that more images may have potential than you used to think? or just delete as many as quickly as possible?

Far from "banishing" concerns, I think it might raise more possibilities for thought. Nothing wrong with that, IMHO, but I've often gone back and found merit in something I had rejected at first glance. The multiple shot capabilities and cheap storage allow us to save our "near misses" and flawed shots with ease and virtually no expense, but it doesn't tell us which images are worth the PP work - that's still the image-maker's job.

I don't see this as a bad thing, necessarily, and it doesn't have to really change the way we shoot. But I do find that it is sometimes helpful to use the self disciplined approach as an exercise in seeing. Some good suggestions on this above, but personally, my preference is to actually take out film equipment with a limited number of exposures. It's fun, it keeps up my skills with old equipment (when's the last time you hauled out a Super Ikonta and Luna Pro?), and I find it fun and relaxing.

If I were a pro, I doubt that I'd bother, but since this is now my recreation, and to entertain my friends and family with the images I make, I find that I like going slow from time to time.

Andy

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

I remain as intentional as ever. Back in the days when I was a multi-image AV producer, I had three Nikons, seven lenses, and burned through nearly a thousand rolls of Ektachrome every year. Every frame cost me between $.40 and $.90, mounted, depending on type of mount! That taught me to be disciplined in composition, exposure control, filtration (i.e.; the film equivalent of white balance)...

I'm still careful. I *hate* editing through multiple frames that look alike. So I limit use of the "motor drive" (continuous high speed shutter) modes to situations where it will increase my chances of capturing the right moment. I use auto bracketing only when the light cannot be controlled or the exposure cannot be measured correctly.

The best medicine for digital laziness is to THINK. Discipline yourself to think about every aspect of what you photograph. You're not SHOOTING it. It's not a violent, heartless process! You're recording it. How you compose, pose, expose, and time the moment of your exposure matters. Think constantly about what the scene is, what it requires to portray the subject the way you (or he or she) wants, and then execute deliberately. Change perspectives (tele, wide, medium, close-up, high, low, etc.). Seek to capture or record the right moments. Imagine yourself as a magazine editor and give yourself plenty of choices of what sort of image(s) you wish to run with a story.

captain ugly

I also started with my father, with a limit of 8 photos and work it in the dark room. My father said that a photo is a moment in time that did not exist before and will not exist again, Take the photo and enjoy.
I understand your feeling that your are not really in control of the final photo.
Try this. Take a walk and come back with 10 pictures that no one would notice on the same walk. I walk on the pier close to my home and come back with photo's of wood, ocean, wildlife and people that no one noticed.
Then I spend much time in the post process making the 10 shots into 10 more via cropping, enhancements, etc.
Main thing is enjoy.

JFCoupe Loc: Kent, Washington

I think almost everyone shoots more images using digital than we ever did shooting film. Recently my wife and I sorted through several thousand film prints (4' x 6") to have the best one scanned. I often noticed that the quality of my film shots were no where as good as my more current digital images. So digital has helped me improve my photography quite a bit.

When I find myself unhappy with digital images, it is usually when I took a shortcut and didn't take my tripod along. Yes, sometimes it is a pain to lug the tripod along, but it does help me slow down my workflow, and take more time on composition, checking aperture, ISO, WB and shutter speed.

jj56 Loc: Londonderry, NH

[quote=With digital, you still try to get a good shot, but you're not limited in your number of attempts.[/quote]

Film and processing cost forced me think before shooting when I started taking photos. I have succumbed at times to the spray and pray technique digital allows. But now the cost shifts to storage and if you can’t bear to delete any shots ..........

DavidThompson Loc: Asheville, NC

In a way, digital has made photography much harder. We have a bigger and more mobile population and between phones and cameras, seems EVERYONE has a camera. When I am on a trip, I assume 1 million pictures have been taken of a spot so unless there is a 1 in a million unique weather pattern today, I feel that I must really work hard to find a unique perspective and then hope that there is a moment when no one is blocking my “vision.”

Ron Dial Loc: Cuenca, Ecuador

Aah, the curse of digital. Just blast away, and hope you got a good one. At least with film, there were the economics of expendibles (film and processing). Digital has cheapened photography. All of the skills necessary to take a great picture are still needed, just so few people practice them. If you want to be a great photographer, you need to practice. One of the better books is "Learning to See Creatively". I recommend it to everyone. If you follow the skills in the book, it will slow you down and make your shooting more deliberate.

jj56 Loc: Londonderry, NH

I like the idea of simulating the film days by altering camera settings and “discovering” the final image later! (No Chimping or peeking at the histogram and if you must chimp, turn the blinkies off!! And no PP. All lens filters allowed.)
Oh, and manual mode. spot metering only. No evaluative metering (canon) allowed.
That would be a fun exercise.

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

Didn't Ansel Adams say (paraphrasing from memory) "12 good photographs a year is a good crop"?

csmith4math

A lot of views that seem to filter into two views:

1) Take your time and limit the number of shots you take, or come home with, to learn patience and composition, or
2) Take a lot of shots and delete most of them later.

I have a slightly different approach. I am a casual amateur photographer, still in the process of moving from a "snapshotter" to a more serious photographer. I can always see something in the shot when I download to my computer that could have been improved (less clutter from a different angle or depth of field, better lighting from a different angle or EV setting, etc.). Now each time I compose a shot, if I have time I try to remember what I didn't like about earlier shots in PP and take a few seconds to look at the image in the EVF or on the screen more critically, thinking of how I will view it in PP. Then I shoot a number of subtly different shots, giving me more opportunities to consider the differences when I have more time, learning even more about composition to apply on my next outing. I'm not at the point where I delete half or more of my shots, but thinking about the posts in this thread, shooting with that in mind as an objective could be a good approach--worth trying on a future outing.

Digital allows amateurs to take the same attitude that many professionals have always taken: take lots of shots, composing each carefully if you have the time, recognizing that only 1 in 10 may be a keeper, perhaps as few as 1 out of 100 or 1,000 may be a "great" shot--but better to take plenty and delete most than to miss that one great shot.

Diocletian

Although I'm not sure why that's a problem.....(because it isn't for me) why not just go back to film?

Nikon1201

I think lazy is good. Where I would spend along time taking a photo with film , now I can be reckless and take many more photos . I am very conscious of my settings but at an air show I enjoy shooting 200- 300 photos and it’s cheap.

george19

I typically shot Ektachrome 200...no real chance to fix either composition or exposure...so you gotta get it right.

Unless it’s an action shot, I take ONE. I might do a burst if is an animal running. I also rarely crop.

kenievans Loc: Dallas

So many interesting comments from experienced photographers.

From a "newbies" perspective (a year and a half and self teaching) I have found the most enjoyable times for me and the least amount of shots taken have been the shoots that I planned and researched. Back in January I spent weeks planning and researching shooting the once in a hundred years "Super Red Blue Moon". Location hunting, photographers ephemeris, tutorials on moon exposure and lenses. I was consumed and just as happy as a pig in slop. I have also just sat in the yard and shot the babies playing on a hot summer afternoon.

I think how we choose to shoot and how much we enjoy either process depends on what type of person we are. I am an analyst by nature and by trade. I think that reflects in my process and ultimately in my photographs. I like shooting in manual mode. Others folks are more about the moment and spontaneity. The digital technology gives us both the freedom to do what we enjoy, in the way we enjoy doing it.

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Pretend your SD card can be used only once. Remind yourself that you have personal standards to meet. Remind yourself that the camera is just a tool. Compared to our old film cameras the new digitals just provide more things that used to came naturally with practice. They have evoked lazyness, yes.