Do you only photograph in "good" light?

[robklurfield]

Good light? Oh, yeah. I've seen that. But, only in other people's work.

Some of my favorite shots were made on the street in NYC at night with Pan X ages ago (when I had a slightly steadier hand). A silly combination, but I still marvel at some of the results and wonder whether I have ever made images as good as I did with bad light and slow film.

Some of these are Pan X ... some Tri-X ... some, don't remember ... not much "good" light in any of them.

From around 1983...

[DominikDUK]

Rob plenty of light in your pictures, just not natural.

Dominik

[d_ross]

Originally Posted by Sparrow

... you clearly have never been to Manchester sir

That is true, but Ive been London and Glasgow and places in between, but sadly not Manchester, and I still say there's no such thing as bad light, just bad photographs made in the wrong light, there is a good photograph to be made in all and any light, making all and any light good :-)

[Phil_F_NM]

I only take photos in light that makes ME look good. I mean, that's what it's about right? The perception that others have of me while I'm shooting?


Phil Forrest

[DRabbit]

I'll photograph in any light, but I usually get better results when the light is more interesting and the sky is cooperating by not being completely blue

My family is tired of hearing me say "look at the sky..." and "stop the car!"

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I'll often go weeks without making a single photo if I think the light sucks. I also keep lists of things I want to photograph and will go back to them on days and times when the light will be right at that location to make it perfect. I do not have to shoot every day, I have literally hundreds of films to scan and edit piled up. I use my bad-light days to catch up on that.