Originally posted by RioRico My upbringing (I just about grew up in my dad's small darkroom), my training (in various graphic arts), and my work experience (back when photography was my job) all pointed to: DO WHATEVER IT TAKES TO GET THE PICTURE! My composition studies showed me that any one frame may contain a picture, or only a portion of a picture, or many pictures. A single image might indeed be a carefully planned composition, or a lucky snapshot. Or I might stitch together a matrix of frames to build an otherwise-impossible image. Or I might find numerous stories to tell with that one frame, many ways to recompose, to isolate elements. That's one of the thrills of PP, the malleability of source images.
I think I know what you mean, but for me that just isn't as much fun. Also, I just don't have the time to do it that way.
Originally posted by RioRico Others just explained CIF (Catch-In-Focus aka trap-focus) and it's raised in posts earlier in this thread.
Ah, catch-in-focus. I used that a few times too.
Btw, I think my shooting priorities are different from yours. When photographing people, I have learned that I don't want people to object to having their photo taken. I like to travel, and have come across people who apparently were not so considerate about other people's feelings. Then I ask myself: how is it possible that you see every little detail inside the frame, but not see the overall picture
? That I don't understand.
Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor It depends on what you shoot. In some shots, focusing is so critical, you have to concentrate on it regardless of whether you're using AF or MF. Otherwise you're gambling with the ability of the AF system to lock focus on the detail you want in focus.
True, but then AF still helps me to get that out of the way quickly, so that I can move on to composing.