This concept has been at the front of my mind for a while. I have always been a spontaneous photographer, reacting to what I find when exploring the world that I am privileged to witness...

As I explore, I'll see something and take one or two shots of it. Each idea gets only a few shots before I feel that I've got something in the can, and I move on...

However... I too have heard that professionals will take many rolls of film in the span of time when I might take one. It is a professional way to assure success...

Taking fewer shots, you risk coming away from the scene with nothing...

And here is the thought that has been hitting me in the forehead:

Because I didn't take a lot of pictures at the Russian River, I was forced to lower my standards when I printed the set. I selected several negatives that I would normally reject as unacceptably unsharp or with dust specks. I am genuinely pleased with the prints. But the flaws are clear and could have been avoided... if I had taken more pictures.

I had never lowered my technical standards before... But I felt in this case by taking some of the emphasis off technical quality and focusing on idea quality for a brief time was necessary as a step towards improving the overall quality of my work.

I am not one to go back after a scouting adventure to re-take shots. But many successful landscape photographers do that. And photographers who build sets and carefully light them, or bring in models or celebrities, or travel to far-away places... These photographers must shoot lots of film because the film is the least of the expenses...

But me, no. I'll still restrict my usage and work carefully.