ruthenium wrote:
First, I like the experience of observing a scene as much as photographing it. I very rarely shoot something important that requires fast shooting. Thus, my numbers are limited naturally by me stopping to observe a scene and sometimes deciding against pushing the shutter, rather than taking pictures and thinking later.
That's what I mean about this being quite variable depending on subject, approach to photographing, and more.
In some situations I work very slowly, often taking a long time to photograph a single subject, though I make expose for it several times. Often for landscape work I first consider a scene/subject by looking at it through a framing card, a pseudo-frame formed by my hands, or even th viewfinder... and then decide whether or not to go further. (See my previous comment about a recent visit to Big Sur.)
In other cases, I work quickly and intuitively — because to stop and think too much means missing shots entirely. That certainly true of my approach to street photography. It is often true when photographing people. It is obviously the case with certain kinds of wildlife photography.
Bottom line: There's no one "right" way to do this. Sometimes a single carefully-considered shot that takes a long time to make is the right option. Sometimes firing off a sequence of frames in burst mode is the right way. Sometimes shooting quickly when it looks like something _may_ be about to happen is the only way to go.
In any case, unless one only works in the "take only a few carefully considered frames a day" mode, sometimes you'll come back with lots of frames. And only a small subset will be worthy.
