Not good at all, but

[AgingEyes]

Not a good shot. Far from it. Allow me to shamelessly share it with you though cuz' I think most shots don't look like this:





After all, who would want to show you their bad shots

[SmartWombat]

If you don't show people your limitations, they don't think you have any !

[SpeedingSphere]

heh.. posting some of our worst shots would probably be a neat idea for a thread in viewfinder, although i dont know how many would post.. I'd post in it, and im sure some others would too.. haha..

It'd give an idea of what kind of things we sort through to find good shots we take and show everyone that even the best have a few junkers.. :frown2:

[Loupey]

I think most of us here have posted images which were admittedly not up to par.

With N&W images in particular, the failures far exceed the successes. Depending on where you are and how much of a stickler you are, the ratio might be in the range of 100:1. I don't think you would want to see my 99 other images since I post so many already

[AgingEyes]

I think most of us here have posted images which were admittedly not up to par.

With N&W images in particular, the failures far exceed the successes. Depending on where you are and how much of a stickler you are, the ratio might be in the range of 100:1. I don't think you would want to see my 99 other images since I post so many already

Talking about success/failure ratio, I saw a National Geographic documentary recently about a couple, husband and wife, wildlife photographers from France. They said they could be making about 8000 shots (husband's and wife's together) in one trip. But the good shots could be only about 30, 40 of them. Perfect ones, obviously, are even fewer.Then again, they shoot in burst modes. So that may account for the number of shots they take per trip.