To shoot or not to shoot...

[98kellrs]

I guess whilst you are still in the early stages of learning how to take good photographs it's important to shoot whenever possible as repetition leads to familiarity, but when you're heading out to take a specific photograph, in a specific light then of course it doesn't make sense to go out when the light is poor, in the same way that it doesn't make sense for an astronomy photographer to go out at noon. They will still probably get good photographs (maybe), but not of what they set out to capture...

I think the more experienced guys have also invested a lot in their equipment, so raising their camera's shutter count unnecessarily doesn't make sense.

[Fantasyphoto]

Xen, if lighting conditions are flat (low contrast) I would normally consider re composing and shooting for a black and white result.

[Corakimick]

Absolutely yes. A dark and cloudy sky can add drama which is not there when the weather is clear. As for exposure one thing is certain you won't have any blown out highlights! You have to think - think about composition and how best to use the conditions u have. The only time i would pack up is if its raining and my gear might be drenched or if its that windy the camera and tripod are at risk. Check this image out taken sat a.m very O'cast and cloudy.IMG_5697NS.jpg

[Xebadir]

I tend to reduce my shooting if the conditions don't do much for me. Take for instance a situation that cropped up in May. Storms generated, initially photogenic but then went HP (IE rain everywhere in the way) I took alot less shots than on a day where the storm was nice and visible. Slate grey skies will stop me going for bird photography, but if it happens to be a wedding shooting day then I am jumping with glee. I see alot of insipid shots and many of them come from situations where someone has tried to apply the usual pattern to the scene, rather than realising the difference and compensating with their shooting. So I can see Xenedis's point with I won't bother, because it won't fit the shot I am looking for, but also the missing of photographic opportunity. At the same time, if it completely compromises the potential for a decent photo I won't bother either (say appalling conditions which push a camera to the limit, or hostile to photographic endeavours). I guess it comes down to your quality control on your shots...If I don't see something worthwhile in a scene (either colour or black and white) I won't take a photo, regardless of the conditions, mainly because I know that it won't meet my standard and be deleted anyway.

[gerry]

I have a little old motto which I think is applicable here - "you have to make the best of what you can with what you have"

A sign of good photography is one that can bring out a great image even though the conditions are not perfect. I mean, its a piece of cake to get a stunning picture of a stunning sunrise with perfect cloud and all teh trimmings, you could train a monkey to do that, However to get a great shot, (even just a good shot) on a day when conditions are less than ideal is a sign (imo) that you are progressing forward as a photographer. Imagine if you can capture stunning images irrespective of the conditions - that would then make the shots you take when the conditions are perfect absolutely stunning

Xenedis I hear your pain, I went out on saturday morning and was blown away by freezing winds and rain, but still persevered to get a few shots, it is discouraging when you get up early and are not rewarded with good conditions. There was some pretty crazy surf conditions tho.

[Xenedis]

Xen, if lighting conditions are flat (low contrast) I would normally consider re composing and shooting for a black and white result.

The problem I face 99.99% of the time is the opposite: extremely high-contrast, plain skies that are either cloudless, or have a clump of very dark cloud stretching all along the horizon.

Absolutely yes. A dark and cloudy sky can add drama which is not there when the weather is clear.

The dark and stormy, or cloud-covered and colourful is actually what I want. What I don't want is plain skies.

I have a little old motto which I think is applicable here - "you have to make the best of what you can with what you have"

All well and good, but not really applicable when it's a certain type of light and sky I seek.

I won't be sold a spanner if a hammer is what I need.

Xenedis I hear your pain, I went out on saturday morning and was blown away by freezing winds and rain, but still persevered to get a few shots, it is discouraging when you get up early and are not rewarded with good conditions. There was some pretty crazy surf conditions tho.

I would have been quite happy to have been under the sky you witnessed on the weekend. Skies like that are useful, and the sort of thing I want.

To illustrate, these are the kinds of skies I want:








And these are the kinds of skies I don't want, but more often than not, get:

[gerry]

I think you would develop 'tunnel vision' and miss the opportunity to 'see' other compositions/lighting scene if you only continued shooting if the conditions were perfect - if it is for specific paid gig where the brief required certain conditions than by all means, no point wasting time and client money.

I have found the best thing about seascapes is the variability, you are not guaranteed a good shot and the conditions can change forcing you to look at different ideas and compositions, this means you get different shots and your gallery is not full of all the same - unless that is what you are looking for - and that is not necessarily a negative thing btw.

I would have been quite happy to have been under the sky you witnessed on the weekend. Skies like that are useful, and the sort of thing I want.

nah, you would have got very wet

[Xenedis]

I guess whilst you are still in the early stages of learning how to take good photographs it's important to shoot whenever possible as repetition leads to familiarity, but when you're heading out to take a specific photograph, in a specific light then of course it doesn't make sense to go out when the light is poor, in the same way that it doesn't make sense for an astronomy photographer to go out at noon. They will still probably get good photographs (maybe), but not of what they set out to capture...

I think the more experienced guys have also invested a lot in their equipment, so raising their camera's shutter count unnecessarily doesn't make sense.

You've made an important point which essentially addresses people's stage of photography.

When I was a beginner, I shot anything and everything, without regard for the light or conditions. I wasn't aware of the quality of light and the effect it has on images.

I suspect the above is true of most newcomers to photography.

As I shot my way through anything and everything at any time, I eventually found what I liked and ditched everything else. I also became more fussy about the light.

These days I've reached a point where the style and look of the image needs to meet certain criteria for me to be happy with it, and the lighting conditions either make it or break it. I'm just not the kind of person who'll settle for unfavourable conditions. Consequently, I shoot less, but my output is of a higher standard than it would be if I accepted whatever was thrown at me on the day. I'd rather come home with one or two 'wow' images than a card full of images that really don't mean a damn.

Fortunately, as a strictly hobbyist photographer, I have the luxury of declaring the prevailing conditions unacceptable and going home. Naturally I recognise that a commissioned photographer does not necessarily have that luxury.

[Xenedis]

I think you would develop 'tunnel vision' and miss the opportunity to 'see' other compositions/lighting scene if you only continued shooting if the conditions were perfect

Ah, but I'm not after 'perfect' conditions; just a variety of great, interesting, pleasing conditions in which the sky contains colour, mood, drama, texture and quality light. Bad light is bad light, and most 'scape photographers avoid it for that reason.

I have found the best thing about seascapes is the variability, you are not guaranteed a good shot and the conditions can change

I've shot a lot of seascapes in my time, and yep, the conditions are very variable. I've seen light go from intensely rich red to dull and flat in less than a minute.

nah, you would have got very wet

I'm no stranger to that.

Remember the landscape photographer's motto: Pray for bad weather.

[peterb666]

Xenedis I hear your pain, I went out on saturday morning and was blown away by freezing winds and rain, but still persevered to get a few shots, it is discouraging when you get up early and are not rewarded with good conditions. There was some pretty crazy surf conditions tho.

Nice photos but the x-man likes crap weather. It is what you probably call the "good" weather that really gets up him.

[Steve Axford]

Depends on you. I walk away now if there is nothing I can shoot - particularly if I know a lot about shooting that type of subject. If I'm a novice at that type of photography I will experiment. For example - I will walk away from fungi if the light isn't right. Why put all that effort in if I know the results will be worse than my best. On the other hand if it is surfing (which I know very little about), I'll give it a go - but I'll know next time. Why waste time?

[jev]

A plain eastern sky at dawn is a nightmare when it comes to exposure.

Why don't you treat is as an opportunity to learn how to deal with the "nightmarish conditions" instead of knocking off?

I am willing and able to accept that some days just don't have the right conditions, and to simply not shoot rather than trying to turn nothing into something and settling for something that won't make me happy.

To me, conditions may force me to reconsider what or how I shoot but it usually just gets the creative juices flowing. Not finding a new angle, a new take on things is more disappointing to me than getting home without that pre-thought image. It's not a question of "trying to turn nothing into something", in my mind there always is something out there. In the end, it's just a state of mind. YMMV

[Xenedis]

Why don't you treat is as an opportunity to learn how to deal with the "nightmarish conditions" instead of knocking off?

Because I want a certain type of image, and if the light isn't right, it isn't right.

[bmeikle]

I tend to shoot as I am still coming to grips with the camera settings etc. I think it is good experience to see how different shots come out under different lighting and different settings. This may change as I gain more experience.

[peterb666]

I have a lot to learn about photography. One thing is, I believe, I have to learn when not to shoot...


Magic Morning at the Little Cove by peterb666, on Flickr

Maybe I just view the world differently.

[Scotty72]

Why? This is a perfectly good photo.

Perhaps, our expectations of the modern world is that everything should come neatly shrink-wrapped, wrinkle free, well glossed and just as ordered - with no imperfections tolerated.

This seems to pervade all of our thinking, even with our children - so, I guess photography is no different.

Scotty

[ving]

IMO a question not worth asking... got a hot date you are going to miss if you shoot? no? just shoot anyway, you are there... and hey its digital so it not costing you anything. you might even end up with a surprise or two

[ving]

I have a lot to learn about photography. One thing is, I believe, I have to learn when not to shoot...


Magic Morning at the Little Cove by peterb666, on Flickr

Maybe I just view the world differently.

what was the exposure length? I ask that cause that is all it has cost you... probably 30 seconds of your life. yeah its 30 secs you wont get back for sure but there you go.

[peterb666]

what was the exposure length? I ask that cause that is all it has cost you... probably 30 seconds of your life. yeah its 30 secs you wont get back for sure but there you go.

Well not even that. All of 3 seconds for that shot.

[enduro]

Like the OP, I often set the time aside and end up shooting nothing (scene is not right, too many people). This is normally the case when I take my trimonthly trip to Esperance. I drive right out the the national park or north to the pink lake and things are not right to shoot or I have the wrong gear for what I do see is available.

At times I start experimenting with what is around with much slower shutter speeds, creating motion blurs, perhaps multiple exposures or finding something I can shoot fine details of. In a natural area there is always something to shoot if one can set their mind aside from their original intention.

Limiting oneself to just one thing will be a slow progress.