I have heard many photographers comment that to be busy is good.
I think from a commercial/economic point of view, to be busy means more work means more income, hence it has to be good.
However, from an artistic development point of view, if i am a very busy wedding photographer, would I still be able to persist with the passion and fresness and the artistic "eye" everytime I approach a new wedding?

Debatable. Deep in my mind, i know that I am more of a "laid-back" photographer.
Call me lazy (my wife is very good at that), or crazy (she copyrighted that word on me as well), I don't want to be so busy.
I want to have time to do research by looking at more photographs, magazines---not just about wedding, but also about fine art, photojournalism, landscape; not just contemporary, but I would like to go back in time to see how people in the past did it too.

I feel that what the past masters did was something really classic and can easily stand tall against the test of time.
I see that many of today's photographers are too self-absorbed and self-indulgent. Maybe I am old already, but there are many images that they brand as "artistic" or "creative" which i don't quite understand, but let's keep that for another day.

I don't want to be so busy that I have to sit at the desk and post-process my images the whole day. That's not what I trained for and not what I am good at.

Time to explore, to do portfolio review critically, to experiment. That's what I love to do.

Do I want to be the famous cook who fries his signature hor fun again and again, day in day out, or would I prefer to use my culinary knowledge to experiment and come up with new dishes every month? I think the answer is obvious.

Guess the choice bogs down to between making a living and making a difference.

i am working towards the latter, and better still, to get paid for it.