The invention of the Leica--which uses 35mm film--revolutionized photojournalism.

Arguably, it invented photojournalism. Its miniature size, combined with faster lenses and faster film speeds allowed photojournalists to shoot in places never before possible unless you used flash--hardy conducive to candid photography.

A single camera body could carry a 36-exposure roll. Those who only know about digital “film” cannot appreciate the sea change this represented.

To shoot the same number of pictures, a photographer using a 4x5 Speed Graphic would have to lug around 36 film holders. That was a lot of bulk and a lot of weight.

In my college days, when I was shooting a Nikon 35mm, one of the university photographers still shot football action with a 4x5.

He would look at the scoreboard, study the formation, walk so many yards down the field, pre-focus at a certain spot on the playing field and wait. Almost without fail, the key action would occur exactly where he had expected it to happen.

It didn’t take me long to decide to follow his lead. If Frank pointed there, I pointed there. He knew the game.

Contrast this with what major newspapers would do at football games just before they switched to digital. It was common practice to have a staffer with a motor drive at each quarter of the field. At the end of the game, they would carry off their film in bushel baskets. It was not uncommon for them to collectively shoot 250 rolls of film per game.

That’s 9,000 exposures.

"The reason,” one photographer said,” is because now the sports desk is choosing  photographs by watching TV. The sports editor would see a great play in slow motion, call me on the cell phone and ask if I had the same shot. We have to shoot every play.”

Gone are the days when the photographer shot what he thought was the image that caught the essence of the game and delivered it to the sports desk.

A photographer at the Advocate recently went on an out-of-town assignment. This staffer was equipped with a digital camera that could shoot multiple frames per second. In three days, this photographer shot more than 1,000 images--the equivalent of 27 rolls of film.

The ability to preview an image when it is taken is one of the miracles of the digital age. But somehow, in the process, have we forgotten to do little pre-editing--through the viewfinder? All of us want to get “the” shot, but when I was actively shooting we called this kind of technique “shotgun” shooting. The idea was that if you shot enough frames, surely something will come out.

Personally, I think many a photographer would benefit by locking his camera on single frame.

A perfect example occurred at the Missouri workshop of 1971. We were at West Plains, Missouri. One of the photographers attending had a brand new motor drive and he was proud of it. He decided to do a story on a school crossing guard.

The first time the school guard walked into the street to stop traffic, he shot of a burst of six frames.

Each afternoon, our photographs for the day were judged by leading editors including Bill Garrett from National Geographic. When the guy’s first frame was projected for us to see, Garrett asked him what he thought his photographed conveyed.

“Well, this is my establishing shot, he explained. “It puts the school guard in his work environment, stopping traffic and protecting the school children.”

Click. Up came his next frame, virtually identical.

“And what does this one convey?” Garret asked.

Click. Third frame. Same question.

By frame number six, the guy got the message. He unbolted the motor drive from the camera and started thinking--and looking--before he clicked the shutter.

I’ve never forgotten that lesson; if ever I went back into  teaching photography and photojournalism, I would title the course:

“I shutter to think.”