Queen Side Castle

I have just started playing seriously, and I have noticed that most, or what appears to be most, castling is done to the King side.  I was wondering what the disadvantages and advantages or a queen side castle are.  I am sure the specific advantage/disadvantages depend on the opening, but are there general advantages/disadvantages?

in my experience queenside castling only really works in bullet chess when your opponent doesn't know how to counter it. it is all dependent on pawn placement, because I play the stonewall attack my pawns are always too advanced so queenside castling is suicide. but if you queenside and your opponent doesn't have advanced pawns you can storm the kingside and put them in a really uncomfortable position. especially when the clock is ticking.

@TheCalculatorKid...thanks for the reply.  One of the things I was thinking was that it frees up a lot of space on the Kingside and allows for more freedom to attack the castled King.  Seems like it would really be much tougher to attack.  I think I'll look into some master games that included the QSC ...that is...as soon as I'm able to understand them...lol....thanks again for the help.

Queenside castling is the rarer form, and usually it's done as an aggressive posture. Opposite-side castling (where Player X castles short and Y castles long) basically always generates a big attacking game where both players are running their pawns as quickly as possible, trying to give the first check or sacrifice the first exchange. Some players will force opposite side castling as a matter of course: "Wherever you castle, I go the other way, and somebody gets checkmated." But this is more of a shock-value strategy than a sound approach to chess. 

In other instances, however, Q side castling is simply more convenient for one player (or both). It seems to happen a lot in the Petroff defense where both players go queenside. This is neither more or less positionally sound than kingside castling, it's just different. In fact, simply castling queenside when faced with an opponent that REALLY wants opposite sides might push the game down a more sane path. 

The final situation I want to talk about is the queenless middlegame where one player trades queens on d8 (or d1), the other player takes with the king, and castling queenside will give CHECK down the d file. This is a common enough situation, and usually the check isn't devastating, but it's often a very nice developing move that asserts the power of castling rights and gets a rook on an open file for free.

Really, there are two things to remember about queenside castling: (1) ALWAYS PLAY Kb1 - your king doesn't like being on c8 or c1, so, unless you think it will get you mated or lose material immediately, spend the move to put your king on b1 or b8. It's just the safe, sane way to play. (2) Examine the attack BEFORE you react. In opposite side castling (whether it was you or the opponent who initiated it), look to see whose pawns will reach their goal first, and - if you're on the bad end - try to avoid the opposite castle if you can. Keeping your king in the center might not be a bad idea (just figure out how to get your h1/h8 rook out of there), castling queenside yourself might also soften the blow.......but if you're getting there first, opposite castle, and make your opponent suffer. 

It takes a little longer to castle queenside (3 pieces in the way instead of 2) and the king is not as safe (a common move after 0-0-0 is Kb1 / Kb8). The advantage is 0-0-0 puts a rook on a center file. Also 0-0-0 tends to involve opposite side castling games. All in all it tends to sharpen the position.

Good work.  Thank you.