The difference light makes

Chriscrawfordphoto

Real Men Shoot Film.
Local time
5:56 AM
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,390
2020-01-24-0001.jpg



2020-04-10-0002.jpg


The two photographs above are of a house in my neighborhood in Fort Wayne, Indiana. They were both shot with a 35mm lens, with me standing in about the same spot, at the same time of day, but on different days. The first was shot on a cloudy, overcast afternoon. The second was done on a sunny afternoon.

What a big difference the change in light makes!

The first one has soft light that flattens the scene, the second has harsher light that creates deeply shadowed areas and makes the white house stand out in the scene to a much greater degree than in the overcast light.

Which one is better? Well neither is 'better.' That's an artistic judgement. Some of you will prefer the first one, others the second. I usually prefer to work in overcast light, but bright sun can be very beautiful for architecture and landscape work.

A lot of photographers don't put as much thought into light as they should. It makes as much, if not more of a difference, than choice of film or developer or gear...all of which are obsessed over by many.

I often photograph the same place in different light to see how it changes the look of things. Sometimes I will find an interesting place when the light is not what I want, so instead of photographing it in bad light, I'll note the location and go back another time.
 
I’ve done the same. On dull days there’s often wonderful silver light late in the afternoon sneaking under the cloud cover. I’ll set off from home in heavy overcast after 5pm and so often will be lucky to catch that light. Some buildings won’t have sunlight on their facade except for late in the day or early morning for a few months in summer and early autumn. Some sites you return to for better light have been repainted, demolished or prettified or diminished in some other way and nothing stays the same.
 
I agree with Chris. A good rendition of light and shade adds dimensionality to an otherwise flat image and changes its mood - often entirely! When out in the field its often times the light and shade that catches my eye and makes me press the shutter button. Even if I intend working on the image in post, I suppose I can see its potential. Sometimes it works. Sometimes not.

I regard the play of light and dark as being so important to good (for which I mean interesting) photography that I even call my Flickr page "Life in Shadows" because I think that shadows and light are so critical to photography. I must admit I "cheat" - although I do not think of it as cheating. I think of the photos straight from the camera as my raw material and like any raw material more is needed to make it usable. If I waited for light to be perfect I would hardly make any photos. So I "cheat".

So, many photos I make are post processed (OK they all are post processed). But most of them have some manipulation specifically of light and shadows because with out that, to me, it's just another darned photo. Usually this just involves emphasizing or tweaking existing light and shadows but sometimes I will do more (hey, if its good enough for Ansel Adams it is good enough for me - he spent hours and hours in the dark room, dodging, burning etc).

Moral of the story as I see it. Whether you get good light by getting up at 4 am, trecking to a mountain and waiting for the dawn or by tweaking things in post we should all remember as photographers that its all about light and shadows and how they interact.

A recent example of mine - imagine how different this would be if it were just a "perfectly" lit portrait in the manner of studio portraits for an advert or something of that sort (boring):

Cafe Colombia - Adelaide Central Market by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

And two more from a few years back:

Urban Ecosystem 3 by Life in Shadows, on Flickr

The Light Shines Through by Life in Shadows, on Flickr
 
Thanks Chris, it’s this intentional but flexible attitude that often makes for better images than taking it just because you’re there...a good reminder.
 
Some buildings won’t have sunlight on their facade except for late in the day or early morning for a few months in summer and early autumn.

This abandoned church for example; I waited half a year for summertime to get early morning sunlight on its north-facing front as seen here. One of my Flicker contacts did the same, except in the late afternoon! I like this much better than had I shot it when it was overcast. As a bonus, I got a couple puffy clouds in the sky which is nice.

Several months later, the building was demolished.

582635085152a7e08066z.jpg


There is a saying in photography: "it was the light, it was the direction".
 
I don't get a chance to shoot landscape much these days, but I find that the light at both ends of the day is far more dramatic and usually more interesting. The other important factor that goes hand in hand is some interest in the sky. Flat white cloud is not very interesting.
 
We've been enjoying un-seasonally high temperatures, and for my permitted exercise walk, I went out the other evening at very close to sunset. I love the light at this time. The photo below, of the early 19th century Royal William Yard close to home, has been cropped only because my blasted scanner is adding thick lines at the top of each picture, so a panorama crop helped. Another 10 minutes and the light had gone.

royalwilliamsunset-1-of-1.jpg
 
We've been enjoying un-seasonally high temperatures, and for my permitted exercise walk, I went out the other evening at very close to sunset. I love the light at this time. The photo below, of the early 19th century Royal William Yard close to home, has been cropped only because my blasted scanner is adding thick lines at the top of each picture, so a panorama crop helped. Another 10 minutes and the light had gone.

Nice shot Charles. I shot my very first roll of HP5 (not +) near that spot at Mutton Cove 35 years ago!
 
Flat white cloud is not very interesting.

Sometimes it is!

yoder-road-corn.jpg


In a photo like the one above, the white sky serves as 'negative space' to isolate the subject (the trees sticking up from behind the corn). A blue sky, which would have rendered a middle gray, would have obscured the trees, while the plain white makes them stand out.

noble-cr250w-field-1.jpg


In other photographs, the blue sky and the clouds in it do add interest to the photo. I tend to prefer sunny/blue sky days for color work and overcast for B&W, though there are a lot of exceptions to those generalizations in my body of work.
 
Sometimes it is!

In a photo like the one above, the white sky serves as 'negative space' to isolate the subject (the trees sticking up from behind the corn). A blue sky, which would have rendered a middle gray, would have obscured the trees, while the plain white makes them stand out.

In other photographs, the blue sky and the clouds in it do add interest to the photo. I tend to prefer sunny/blue sky days for color work and overcast for B&W, though there are a lot of exceptions to those generalizations in my body of work.

I agree it works as part of that high key composition. In graphic images it can be another tool in the box.
 
I don't get a chance to shoot landscape much these days, but I find that the light at both ends of the day is far more dramatic and usually more interesting.

Yes, I agree. Light at the very beginning and end of the day is often VERY beautiful.

thiele-road-sunrise-3.jpg


Early morning. This is, believe it or not, a color photograph!


bruick-rd-2.jpg


Early morning


pure-sealed-dairy-6.jpg


Last light at the end of the day


hile-barn.jpg


Evening


sunrise-irrigation-2.jpg


Sunset
 
Nice shot Charles. I shot my very first roll of HP5 (not +) near that spot at Mutton Cove 35 years ago !

How funny! This was taken with my 28mm f2.8 Zuiko lens that I bought, new, when I lived at Bull Point some 39 years ago. Sadly the OM2n I used for this photo (I had an OM10 as my first Japanese camera) is now over-exposing horribly, so it's probably the last time this lens gets used.

The film here is Tmax 400 shot at 250 and developed in PMK Pyro. I too prefer pulling to pushing!
 
Back
Top