« Journalistic tendenci… | Home | Dear Prime Minister »

Quality vs Quantity

Wednesday 14 January 2009 at 12:09 pm. Used tags: , , ,

This is what my father (a photographer in his time) referred to as the "age old debate", should you aim to be selective and precise with your choice of shot, or should you be prolific with the probability you'll hit the jackpot at some point during the process?

He use to tell me this narrative:

"A professor splits his photography class into two halves. The first half are given the task of taking as many photographs as possible without too much attention to selection and precision. The second half are given the task of only taking 100 shots each, and therefore be selective and precise when composing their shot. The class is to return in 1 week."
"One week later the first half of the class returns with over 2000 shots of varying nature, the second half return with the limited 100. After examining and critiquing the shots as a group they select the top 10. 7 are from the prolific half of the class, 3 are from the second, however the two best shots are also from the second half."

Which are you?

I confess being a perfectionist I have always leaned towards selection and precision, quite often abandoning a shot half-way through because by the time the viewfinder hit's my eye, I've decided it won't be good enough.

However recently questioning this approach (and taking into account my lack of recent activity) I undertook my roll-a-day project to see if prolificacy might be the way to go. Having received the processed films - for me at least - I can positively say NOT!

Is it that simple?

Admittedly the reasoning behind my lack of satisfaction with the shots is more complex than this simple statement, it lies more with my approach and attitude than taking lots of pictures. In retrospect I engaged this project more with determination than enthusiasm, and therefore it felt was forced and stressed, it is therefore with little surprise that I am now left disappointed.

The answer?

Ultimately the answer is different for every person. I do believe pushing yourself should be the mainstay of every photographer, but doing it beyond the boundaries of your true enthusiasm and preferred working practice/environment is time lost!

One comment

I am, like you, one of the select and precise photographers.

However, within that realm I tend lean toward prolific. I also tend to, with digital, lean very heavily on my LCD. I’ve often wondered how good my photos would be if I gave myself a limit on exposures and prevented myself from viewing the LCD.

I think I will try this experiment and see where it leads.

Jim Reverend (URL) - 01-02-’09 15:24



Emoticons
Remember personal info?
Notify
Hide email
Small print: All html tags except <b> and <i> will be removed from your comment. You can make links by just typing the url or mail-address.
 

Little Me

An enthusiastic and passionate semi-professional photographer for many years I took the decision in 2008 to side step my successful career as a Solutions Architect and devote my time to photography.

This blog is a catalog of my trials and tribulations on that journey.

Last Comments

Rob (Smile goes a long…): I think the B&W version is better. Not sure why, but just do.
Carl Millar (Rainy days): Nice shot.
Ian (A week in Charent…): @Nathalie: Thanks for your kind comments :) @Franca: So glad you liked it, and the pictures! @Jo…
Daniel (A week in Charent…): Even without the yellow sunflowers, that’s a fantastic landscape. I love long winding roads and lone…

Search

Stuff

Powered by PivotX - 2.1.0: beta 6b
XML: RSS Feed
XML: Atom Feed