A comment I made in the Leica post made me think once again about the film vs digital days. I said that I would never want to return to the film days again and one of the major reasons was the cost and relative inflexibility of the film medium (processing, printing etc). Strangely enough, even though I've embraced the digital era with gusto, I don't seem to have shaken off my film days shooting habits. In the film days, when I'd go out shooting with say my 35mm, I'd take along two or three rolls of 36 film (even fewer if I was shooting 120 or 4"x5") and spend the day looking for shots. I might shoot one roll (mostly) or two, but rarely three in a day, as I would be considered with everything that I took. I simply wouldn't blaze away at everything and, when a scene caught my eye, I would take possibly 3-5 shots from different angles and exposures to hopefully capture what was in my mind's eye. When I got the film back from processing, I'd usually find that in a roll of 36 shots, I'd be lucky to have three that I'd consider acceptable (for a multitude of reasons). Today, with digital, I can't seem to shake that same philosophy and so I shoot in exactly the same way, even though I have the ability to shoot thousands of shots in a day and view the results immediately (within reason) of every shot that I take. Over Easter, while away in the mountains for four days, I took only 120 shots in total. I'm not sure if it's because of a hangover from the film days to simply be conservative with available film, or a desire to be more considered about shots taken, partly because of the limitations imposed by film. I've noticed this in the past and can't figure out why I'm so conservative with digital. Does anyone else operate this way?