Lucky Or Good?

I've seen some pretty amazing photos that have been taken by people who really didn't know their way around a camera. Conversely, I've seen some pretty mediocre shots taken by those who have a pretty good idea what they're doing (namely, me).

So (and this stems from a conversation had over dinner the other night), when it comes to getting excellent photo results, would you rather be consistently good, or consistently lucky?

Good and lucky is best. I'd rather be lucky than good however "Chance favors a prepared mind."

Like shooting a hole in one in golf, it's always a matter of luck. But if you're a good golfer, you'll get lucky more often.

Luck is the intersection of preparation and opportunity.

I agree...the two go almost hand in hand. Good photo ops are often a product of luck (being at the right place at the right time) and it takes skill to maximize the potential of the opportunity of luck. Hope that makes sense.

i'd rather be good. I'd like to think that every shot I take is because of my knowledge, skill talent and timing... but, a good portion is all about right place/ right time and luck..

sari

well I'd hope I'd be as lucky as some random person thats never used a camera, so I'll get those 'lucky' shots too. Only I'll mark them down as 'skillful' :P

Maybe if you're consistently good you just don't notice the lucky ones as much as picking one good photo out from a bunch of duffs?

It sure would be fun to say good, but being in the right place at the right time certainly plays a major role....but then again...perhaps you could attribute being in the right place at the right time to being good!