Now, this is a discussion.

As an example I will be going out in the next 2 weeks to do some infrared photography, the standard procedure will be take the first shot without a filter then take 5 shots at -2,-1,0,+1,+2 with the filter so as to give 6 frames that will easily fit in a standard negative carrier a4 sheet (first pic is a reference shot). Always I end up running out of pictures to take so the last say 6 frames will be unused, but wanting to get back and develop the film means I ignore this, the same happens with just black and white, I would rather miss the end of the roll and see what I have got rather than saving it.

But at the end of the day I have only 36 pics on one film...

Now, what do you digifots do? Do you take hundreds of photos of the same image and look at them on the computer when you get home or do you discard them at the scene of crime and take more until you get what you want? Do you think it stops you trying to get the right composition, the right time, first time, knowing you can easily check it after each pic?

Just out of interest....

Bit of both.

I tend to take a few (certainly not loads!) versions of an image, usually deleting all but one or two favorites straight away using the screen+zooming features of the camera.

I try to get it as close as possible first time, so as the scene changes there is less chance of missing the shot I want.

Also, as I work with computers 9-5, the last thing I want to do is spend hours sorting + tweaking images on the PC after a shoot!

I very rarely discard any shots in camera as I do my editing at home using Bridge or Lightroom.
Why? - for example I used a blurred, overexposed and rather vague image [that most people would bin] for a poster design. And I have enough card space not to worry about that running out and finally why waste photo time deleting images you cannot judge that well?

I certainly wouldn't shoot hundreds, or even dozens, of copies of the same shot but I often shoot a few variations, or maybe a sequence if the subject involves people in any numbers (like more than one). I like to think of it as bracketing - we bracket exposures so why not bracket the contents - just in case the groom's mum is pulling a face on one shot, or little Johnny is picking his nose!

I've seen this subject raised a few times with 'film purists' scorning the machine gun tactics of the digital generation, but at the end of the day it costs nothing to grab a few extra digital shots so, particularly where people or animals are concerned, why not increase your chances of a great shot.

I've seen this subject raised a few times with 'film purists' scorning the machine gun tactics of the digital generation, but at the end of the day it costs nothing to grab a few extra digital shots so, particularly where people or animals are concerned, why not increase your chances of a great shot.On the other hand why not edit in your head before shooting, it may cost nothing to actually capture image, but it costs time to upload, sort through, name and then actual money to store images on hardrives. Sometimes a little bit more thought before pressing shutter makes for a much better shot, rather than simply taking more pictures as way too many photographers seem to do with digital. I use digital myself and I still refer to some camera owners as machine gunners and not photographers. Those people will be using digital video next and frame grabbing.

I used to get the same amount of good shots from a roll of 120 film as a roll of 35mm film, simply because I had less shots and therefore took more care over what I shot.
Having said that grabbing more shots of the image you know you want as safety [especially if you are geting paid for it] is a very sensible thing. Especially as you say Imp, if animals or [untrained] people are involved. With some subjects you may simply take the first load of shots to get themn used to the camera.

I do a lot of dance photography and I do not use a motor drive to get action shots as I prefer to take shot at right moment instead. Out of curiosity I tried 5fps once and every frame missed the shot.
For example - I only took one frame of this set up, though I did do some other shots of the guy jumping on his own about 10mins earlier.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3161/2759504369_50e42a1615_o.jpg

I tend to take quiet a few on one subject but not from bad light or shadow etc.. because i photograph scale items that require you to get low. Depending on the ground i lay on and how best to set up for the shots due to the DSLR rear eye piece. Most of the time it's kind off guess work which does pay off, then sometime you have bad cropped headless shots and wild camera shake.

Have you tried using a right angle finder such as this.
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41YMM8R95GL._SL500_AA280_.jpg
I used to have one years ago and rarely used it andthen saw an article on one a few weeks ago about the canon one and thought, nah I'll never use it. The pic posted above and the others shot before hand would have been so much easier, as the camera was on ground pointing up. So looking through finder was literally a pain.

Have you tried using a right angle finder such as this.
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41YMM8R95GL._SL500_AA280_.jpg
I used to have one years ago and rarely used it andthen saw an article on one a few weeks ago about the canon one and thought, nah I'll never use it. The pic posted above and the others shot before hand would have been so much easier, as the camera was on ground pointing up. So looking through finder was literally a pain.

I've seen them kicking about on ebay but never done more than quickly look. They work well then and not a flimsy China product ?

You get what you pay for like with most things.