I know we've read most of the anti-photographer blurb before and there is perhaps nothing too new or exciting in it, but the thing that caught my eye was,
'Both of them agree that to be a good street photographer you need to be, as Stuart puts it, "incredibly patient and dedicated to the point of obsessive". Of the 10,000 or so photographs he has taken in the past two years, around 50 have made it onto his website.'
If he was shooting film that would equate to one image approx. every 5.5 rolls, do you think digital has had some influence on this ratio? Or has he decided that the scatter-gun approach pays off, or yet again is he a slow learner not anticipating what's going on in front of him?
What people will do for their art