Mathematical odds of a success.

["BIRKEY, DUANE" <dbirkey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

One major problem that many people have is the opinion that shooting a 
lot of film insures at least a few good pictures.  My experience is not 
so.  If you can't compose worth beans, your chances of getting a great 
shot is nill.  I can not over emphasize the ability to see a great shot 
before it's been shot and on your light table.

I do shoot alot of film, that's my job.  Certain situations do indeed 
require a lot of film, working with children, animals, candids of 
people who are forever talking or moving.  That's because any subject 
that is moving while you take the photo gives unpredictable results, 
especially when it happens during your SLR's blackout period.  For us 
who are expected to come up with great shots on demand, we keep 
shooting till we are sure we've got it on film.  Do you know what the 
odds of getting a perfectly composed wild life closeup shot of birds 
flapping their wings in flight or two animals fighting or sport shots 
like a baseball being hit off the bat etc. with a single exposure?????  
nill.!  You need to take a lot of shots to get that 1/1000 of a second 
timing.  I find I shoot in proportion to the number of people in the 
foreground as well as background because even an out of focus person 
sticking his tongue out ruins the shot.  The real trick is to be aware 
of every single element in the photo while your shooting. 

Working with subjects that aren't moving requires very little film.  
You have plenty of time to compose beforehand, look for appropriate 
foregrounds, walk around the subject etc.  I know some people who teach 
that you should keep shooting as you move around the subject.  My 
experience is that most of those get thrown away because the more you 
look at the subject the better your results are.  For me the best 
scenics are either the first ones shot or the last ones.  However if 
the light is changing or clouds etc. sometimes you keep shooting, if 
you know it's a great shot.  The difference often between a great photo 
and one that goes in file 13 is just a one frame and being there.  
The pitfall is that some people get to a point where if they don't see 
a great shot from their car, they won't get out a look around enough to 
find that there is a great shot there.  

As a part of my work, I spend a fair amount of time traveling through 
Ecuador.  I make a lot of mental notes about locations, lighting and 
shadows, amount of crops in the fields, times etc.  In doing that I 
have already selected a lot of places that someday, when the light and 
clouds are right or when the right people or animals are there, will 
make great photos.  I'll go back when the situation looks right, 
because the shot's are already conceived, it's a matter of getting them 
on film.  I also will put a lot of effort into finding great shots 
where none jump out at you.  It's fun to travel with a group just so 
when they see your pictures, they can all say "wow, I didn't see that, 
was I there?  Why don't my pictures look like that?"  
You won't ever get many great shots if you wait around for them to jump 
out at you.  Yes, you do need to edit ruthlessly for singular images, 
but if you want to tell a complete story with 80 slides, you're going 
to have some that aren't prize winners.

Duane

P.S.  The only thing I throw out are bad expressions on people and 
animals and the occasional overexposed image.  Doesn't mean I show 
everything though.


------------------------------