[datadrivenangel]

Yes/No.

Yes, as in that I do struggle, and ~98-99.9% of my photos are junk. Solution here is saturation: take 50-1000 photos to get a good one, and also plan.

No, as in I take photos separately for documentation purposes (I want a photo of something as record), and for artistic purposes ( The personal and social satisfaction of taking a good photo of wildlife is very large). I don't expect my documentation smartphone photo of a cool building to be award winning, but I will also go out of my way to be in the right place and time to get good lighting and angle for decent composition with a tripod and mirrorless camera.

[stevekemp]

I used to hire models to pose me, or have people volunteer. I'd expect to take maybe 500 pictures an hour, and out of that get ten average results and one perfect image.

Taking more images is absolutely a valid approach to photography! Of course it gets harder if you're shooting children or animals, where you need to react and be in the moment, anticipating.

It's also something that can't be done if you're planning to be constrained by analog film, or plotting and planning every shot in advance. But those styles never worked for me anyway - too much planning and trying to craft-in-advance just feels sterile and fake to me.