Here's a way to think about the work-flow.
Let's invent a concept I'll call 'placement intelligence' (PI). PI is how intelligent a process, programme or person is when it comes to arranging things on pages in a document.
A word processor has very low PI. It will refuse to put something in too small a space, for example. Or it might be able to wrap text around something. But it will not try to figure out whether your image should go before the previous paragraph or after the next one or five pages later rather than here. It just slaps stuff where you say and, if it all spills over the place, it all spills over the place.
This may seem initially OK because you have very high PI. You are really good at figuring out where you want things to end up (even if you can't always persuade the software to put them there - we're talking design, not implementation).
The trouble is that if the stuff earlier changes, you have to revisit the placement to make sure it hasn't got screwed up because the word processor has too low a PI to make any serious effort to prevent this.
What about LaTeX? LaTeX has moderate PI. It is much more intelligent than the word processor. It can often tell it would be better if an image or table went a bit earlier or a bit later or, even, a lot later. At the same time, it is built on TeX which has a high but domain-specific PI. It is really good at working out when to break lines and, generally, pages of text.
However, LaTeX has much lower PI than you. Even TeX in its specialist domain has lower PI. Add images or tables and it gets trickier. This means that there are cases in which you have to intervene.
Manual intervention involves adding a one-off additional constraint which limits the degrees of freedom La(TeX has to exercise its PI. It says, e.g., 'whatever your other algorithms for placement say, this must (not) go here (there)!!' (There are interventions which are less forceful, but it is the most forceful which are generally used.)
Now the system must obey this additional constraint. So it has fewer and worse options (as far as the algorithms go). This is OK because it got it wrong in this case, so you have to impose this limitation.
But that's only true if the content of the document up to 'here (there)' is finalised. Otherwise, you don't know where 'this' would have ended up if LaTeX did its thing. So, in that case, you are forcing the system to consider fewer and worse options possibly for no benefit at all.
You can only tell if you need to intervene when the document content is finalised. At that point, you make changes one at a time going forwards. After any change, you recompile because what happens later may be changed by the intervention.
The goal is to intervene no more than necessary. This is a good idea because LaTeX has moderately high PI. If it had lower PI, it wouldn't be useful because it wouldn't make good choices anyway. If it had much higher PI, it wouldn't be needed, because it would make good choices all the time.
But it doesn't. It is in between. And that's why you get worse results if you intervene earlier than if you intervene only in the final stage.
For the record, this is the method I use to produce documents of 200-400 pages with lots of diagrams, pictures, tables etc. so don't say 'that's OK for a few pages but not a book'. It is of the greatest importance in a longer document. The longer the document, the greater the complexity, the more images, tables etc., the more crucial it is to wait until the content is finalised.
[I almost never intervene manually if I'm writing an article.]
Hisn't really recommended and is not standard, in any case. Better to use\captionoffromcaptionorcapt-ofif you don't want a float. @ OP An MWE is a minimal working example - code for a minimal document which shows how you are including an image into your document and what problem you are having when you do so. – cfr Jul 03 '16 at 01:15\clearpage{}to be able to see what im expecting... one image is fine working with a lot of images with diferent sizes and formats from scratch, meaning im actually writing on "LaTeX" rather that having a "mockup" and then "importing" which is think id be much better... – maco1717 Jul 03 '16 at 01:25\clearpage{}" Ah, then yes, you are doing something wrong, that is doubleplusungood. I have a feeling you need this: http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/39017/how-to-influence-the-position-of-float-environments-like-figure-and-table-in-lat?lq=1. Also what applies to tables applies also to figures – Au101 Jul 03 '16 at 01:29\clearpagevery often, generally you would not do it to control the placing of images and generally you would only issue it as a last resort when the document is entirely finished as a final, manual tweaking of the visual formatting to get things to look exactly how you want. The reason for this is because otherwise you end up doing what you're doing, having to change and move all the\clearpages every time you make a change. And then what if, 3 days later, you want to add something earlier in the document because you get a new idea? – Au101 Jul 03 '16 at 01:40\clearpageand why? Certainly you shouldn't use it in the document itself until the content is finalised. But you are likely using it behind the scenes anyway (or, at least,\newpagewhich is different). If you always want floats output before X where X is a certain type of document element, then you should configure your preamble to do that bit automatically. Of course, this might be irrelevant to you, but it is worth considering. E.g. sometimes people want floats cleared before\sectionetc. – cfr Jul 03 '16 at 01:54