tomad Loc: North Carolina

So what do you do when you're traveling far from home on a photo trip; go to the room and sleep between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. when the light is not perfect? I try to make the best of the light I am given at the time I am present. Sometimes it turns out to be just snap shots and sometimes I surprise myself. As Linda said, change your perspective or shoot monochrome. Also, there is much that can be done with bad light in post processing.

selmslie Loc: Fernandina Beach, FL, USA

When someone complains that the light is not "right" it is usually because they arrive at a scene with a preconceived notion of how they want an image to look. Proceeding to capture the image you hoped you would find and then trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear is bound to fail.

If you want a lot of contrast, watch the weather and pick a sunny day. More color? Look for a colorful season or time of day. Saturated colors? A rainy day and softer light might be better.

But if your plans don't work out, don't just throw up your hands and go home. Change your plan! If the sky turns out to be uninteresting, point the camera somewhere else. If it's too sunny and contrasty you can look for subjects in the shade or look for a composition that can benefit from a lot of dark vs. light contrast.

Get your creativity working on ways to make lemonade out of the lemons you are handed.

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

lsimpkins Loc: SE Pennsylvania

Likewise.

bobmcculloch Loc: NYC, NY

I tend to shoot what's there, if I plan I try to get the best light but... I usually travel with non-photo spouse, you get the picture, now if she goes shopping near a good shooting location..., Bob.

wham121736 Loc: Long Island, New York

There is no bad light, only bad use of light. Dim light, bright light, side light, back light, twilight, golden hour light, blue hour light - they all provide opportunities for different types of images. A professional photographer must get the image his assignment calls for. Non-professional photographers have the luxury of taking those images which the current light supports. Just look for those opportunities in front of you.

quote=SteveLew]I watch considerable youtube professional landscape photographers demonstrate various techniques. The vast majority of these landscape photographer when they are venturing out, in the field, often announce that the "light" is not right or there is no light and they do not take any photos to return to the same location at a later date. Most of these youtube landscape photographers are attempting to take photos during the dream hours during sunrise and sunsets.

The question is how many of us deal with the lack of light the same as many youtube photographers or do we try to shoot anyway even though there is no light. Personally, I have been in many fairly remote areas and since I am there I always take my landscape shots anyway although usually I am disappointed with my results.[/quote]

Paul J. Svetlik Loc: Colorado

Oh, yes, that is a good subject!
I walk away from the picture every once in a while.

What I find is, that even coming back to re-do the picture in a better light might not be a good time, because if it is a month or more later, you may not see the same "magic" light?
It is the angle of the sun.
I say to myself: "Okay, will come next year!"
Or, sometimes the otherwise almost invisible smoke from burning forest fires - far away - spoils my photo trip.

On a trip to another Continent, I do, whatever I need to do - in order to get a decent RECORD of what I have seen.
But that is a different kind of photography.

tomcat

I encounter that often, but in my case, I know I'm not coming back. So I grab a shot anyway because I'd rather have a bad shot or memory than none at all. Then I sit and get aggravated with myself because I wasted time getting to the location or didn't plan better. One time my wife and I were racing the sunset to get to the large dune at Kill Devil Hills and climb to the top for a sunset shot, hoping to see the Albemarle sound and the sunset reflections in the water. All we got for our time was the back of a subdivision where homes had been built out to the edge of the sound. So having the "light" does not always give a pleasing composition......lol

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

In a studio-like situation, shooting a still life or a product, for instance, we get to place the lights- the goal being to create the illusion of dimension, control contrast, extenuate or subdue textures, and/or create various moods and ambiances. We can move the lights and the subject to effect the best angles of incidences, decide upon hard or soft ligh and carefully control the direction of our main light source. In color photography we can control "white balance" and color temperate as well. Of course, we place the camera for the best view of the object and make the position of the light compatible with that relationship.

When we are working out of doors with immovable subjects whether it is architecture, a mountain face, a vast landscape or a tree, we try to FIND the best natural and vantage point light to capture all of the above but obviously we mostly have little or no control over much of theses requirements. We are at the mercy of weather conditions, position of the sun at various times of day, air quality- smog, fog, haze and LITERALLY, God only knows what else.

Murphy's law of landscape work: You want a uniquely moody shot of some famous landmark or site, you get there, have only a few hours and it is is a perfect picture-post card day with puffy white clouds against a blue sky- DRAT. When want to shoot a "picture-postcard" then the air is filled with black smoke from a nearby forest fire. Last time that happened was 150 years ago!

If it a planned shot and you have the time to asses the light at various times of day, return to the site when the lighting, mood, or weather conditions suit our plan- no problems. If not- you take what you can get and move on! That's why I never like "guided" tours and such- I like to go someplace and hang in for a few days.

Sometimes even the most impressive architecture never receives ideal light on its most picturesque elevation so the best shots are obtainable at night or at dusk, the so called magic hour, if the building is artificially lighted.

Then, happily enough, there is also good happenstance- just the right kinda sunset, cloud formation- just the perfect amount of atmospherics haze and you grab a shot straight out of heaven- be prepared!

Oh- and quite watching too many of those video tutorials- get some fresh air and shoot and shoot some scenes! You'll get it!

Paul J. Svetlik Loc: Colorado

Oh yes, that is a good question.

I walk away from the picture every once a while.

Even when you come back to the same spot - but a month or more later at the same time of the day, you still may not see, what you have expected to see, lightwise.
It is the angle of the sun travelling on the sky during the year creating that magic light - for the moment.
So, I say to myself:"Okay, will have to come next year!"

Sometimes the almost invisible smoke from burning forests far away, can spoil my photo trips.

On the travel abroad, the best you can do is to work with the available light conditions - just to make a reasonable documantation of the trip.

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

We all love the early morning and the evening light. But that is not the primary element that makes a good photograph. Without the light, you still have subject, composition, contrast, etc. When conditions are less than perfect, I still make an effort to get the best qualities into the images possible. Never only a snapshot with a feeling of just going through the motions.

There are many ways to compensate for what you call "no light", because there is no such thing. If it is mid-day with sharp bright and shadows, bracketing is a possible solution. On a tripod, I do not rely on the camera's bracket function because I want to take more than one mage above and below the "optimal" exposure. We all know that skies before, during and after a storm can be interesting. Overcast skies are my favorite "no light" condition, because in PP you can get all the details, enhance the colors, contrast, saturation. Even though purists don't like manipulation of images, it IS possible to even optimize the light that is there without it looking fake.

Problem with light, it is never exactly the same over the space of minutes, even seconds. And it keeps changing over the hours, days, months. The scene itself changes more slowly, but still changes. Just as the light keeps adjusting, we need to keep adapting!

CamB Loc: Juneau, Alaska

I look at possible shooting days in two different ways. There are 'Light' days, when the light is good and almost anything can make a good photo. Then there are 'Subject' days, when the light is not so good and I look more for strong, graphic and dynamic subjects that don't rely on specific light. It seems a little silly to me to go somewhere, discover the light is not what you thought or hoped, and yet still not be able to find any good photos. Most of the time when you are shooting for the perfect light, it isn't there. That's when the true artist should open their mind and discover what is there. Don't get caught in the trap of only being able to shoot what you pre-envisioned.
...Cam

srt101fan

[/quote]

Bipod

Each lighting problem is different, and requires a different remedy.

Sometimes, you need to change your subject: e.g., go for a close-up of some feature, wildlife, etc.
E.g., if you can't shoot the forest, shoot some bark. Or a person. Overcast is bad for landscape
(low contrast) but good for portraits.

Sunrise and sunset light is a photographic cliche: pinkish raking light. Pictures of sunrises and sunsets
are dimestore postcard stuff. Take a piece of notepaper, write "SUNSET: 50 cents" on it and you've got it. :-)

Take another look at Eliot Porter's color prints (dye transfer process). He was a "nature photographer"
which meant he had a lot of possible subjects. You won't find any sunrises or sunsets among them,
and very little pinkish raking light. He approached each subject with a fresh eye.

I would suggest being an "everything photographer": when in the field, one can't afford to rule out
any subject as a "target of opportunity", if it will make a good shot, except a cliche subject.
Half Dome is almost as cliche a subject as Mt. Rushmore. (But Washington's nose might
make a good shot in B&W.)

I used to live near the beach, and all I shot was the shore, mainly rocks and seaweed. And a few
snoozing sea lions I couldn't resist. Sunsets, sailboats, no way!

One day in the redwood forest I met a journalist and newspaper phototrapher: they had a story about
the State Parks and needed a photo. The photographer asked me where he could a vew with some
ditance it in---this was an area of ravines and dense undergrowth. I said, "Look up."

I know people sometimes drive long distances to get a particular shot, but that's very dicey, and you'll
end up trying to shoot the image you have in your mind, rather then seeing anything new. It's bound
to be a disappointment.

“To see a World in a Grain of Sand
And a Heaven in a Wild Flower,
Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
And Eternity in an hour.”
― William Blake, Auguries of Innocence

AZNikon Loc: Mesa, AZ

If you are on a tour bus in Barcelona, holding up 60 people from their next stop, it's probably best to take your best shot and get back on the bus. I'd rather do that than come home empty, but that's just me.