Restricted photography between noon and five p.m.

[DoleWhipDVC]

It's been a while since I've posted, but summer is coming and I'll be heading back to the world soon for vacay! I have seen folks mention that they limit or even totally eliminate shooting between noon and five p.m. I'm curious as to why. I understand the light is harsh, but can't that be corrected in pp? Also, how can you stand to be without your gear for five hours? I would be obsessed with noticing all the potential shots I was missing! My family gets sick of me taking pictures throughout our trips, but they certainly don't mind enjoying them once we're home. They wouldn't care if I didn't shoot for several hours a day, but it might make me a bit crazy. Any thoughts on this, particularly of a technical nature, to rationalize no mid-day shooting would be appreciated. I need more info to think this one through.

 

[Hockeyman]

I think some of the more serious/professional photographers would say its because of the harsh lighting during those hours. I myself am like you and would have so many missed opportunities during those times, especially with my little ones. Also dont think I could put the camera away for that long either lol

 

[photo_chick]

I've never even considered not shooting because of where the sun is at a given time of day. I wonder how many great shots are missed by doing that?

There's always a way to work with the light, you just have to find it. And you don't have to resort to post processing. Learn to use your envrionment, look for shade or natural reflectors. Learn to use fill flash. There's a lot of options, you just have to look for them.

 

[2Tiggies]

This

I've never even considered not shooting because of where the sun is at a given time of day. I wonder how many great shots are missed by doing that?

There's always a way to work with the light, you just have to find it. And you don't have to resort to post processing. Learn to use your envrionment, look for shade or natural reflectors. Learn to use fill flash. There's a lot of options, you just have to look for them.

I can understand why - I have to be honest, there are some Photos I have taken mid afternoon where I can see that they would have been so much nicer in softer light, but if there's a choice of taking the photo or not, I'm going to take it. I wouldn't go trying to get a special shot of the Castle or something that is always there and could be photographed later in the day, but I am not missing memory moments just because of the light. I'm not selling or trying to impress anyone with my pictures. Those are mine so even when I am frustrated that they don't look the way they could or should, I'd rather have them than not.

As above, using a flash helps noticeably with softening harsh shadows and looking for shade where possible helps, although it's not always possible.

Last year at Epcot we were walking towards the World Showcase and Princess Aurora walked out the doors of the Innoventions building. She walked right up to my daughter and then took her hand and just strolled around with her for a few minutes chatting I took loads of pictures of them. They are awful from a photographic perspective and I wouldn't print them, but they are special because it's something she remembers as a highlight from that day.

I'd rather take the photos and decide at home whether I want to delete them. You can wipe them from the card, but there are situations where you can't go back and re-take them later.

 

[photo_chick]

This


Last year at Epcot we were walking towards the World Showcase and Princess Aurora walked out the doors of the Innoventions building. She walked right up to my daughter and then took her hand and just strolled around with her for a few minutes chatting I took loads of pictures of them. They are awful from a photographic perspective and I wouldn't print them, but they are special because it's something she remembers as a highlight from that day.

That right there... more important than the technical quality. An image doesn't have to be good technical quality to be a treasured photograph. even the best photographers have "bad snapshots" that they love because of the memories associated with them.

 

[Cafeen]

It's easy to delete a bad picture. It's impossible to recreate a special moment.

I'd venture to guess that the statement is more relating to static or controlled subject matter (e.g. The Castle, landscape shots, or specific portraits), where you can go back to reshoot for whatever reason. However, at Disney (outside the iconic images) this isn't always possible. It'd be a shame to miss something special just because the light wasn't "perfect".

 

[ukcatfan]

I wonder if it is a hangover from film days when every shot had a price? I probably take many less shots during that time, but I still keep it out. Not to mention that so many opportunities at Disney are inside!

 

[DoleWhipDVC]

Thanks. All good points to consider. I think you're right in thinking the prior comments were based around stationary objects or "common" shots that could be taken at any time. I totally agree that taking MY pictures for MY family is more important than always worrying about the overall quality of the shot (not that quality doesn't matter)

 

[mom2rtk]

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

I've walked away from many good photos thinking I'd get back later for a perfect photo. We all know that usually doesn't happen. So I've been trying to settle for "good enough" when necessary....... more mid-day photos, more hand-held high ISO night photos when I won't make it back with my tripod.

 

[wbeem]

It depends upon your intent for the shot. If you're capturing a memory, do it when the moment happens.

If you're trying to make art, then avoid harsh shadows in noon daylight. Lighting is everything in a photograph. If you shoot in lousy light, then you get lousy results - when viewed as a work of art.

If it's your kid having a blast on a ride or interacting with a character, though, then that's a bit of a different issue. Even then, you try to work with the light.

There have been plenty of times I've passed up shots because of crappy daylight, but that's because I was trying to capture a scene in the best light.

 

[Shazzasmd]

I think people have covered the key points, but I'll chime in. I do a lot of travel photography (just for personal memories and sharing with family), so I don't hesitate to shoot mid-day. But, I generally use my point and shoot, or iPhone - and save my DSLR for early morning and evenings. I still don't capture a lot of "art," but can now see the difference in photos taken in bad light that I once thought were good shots.

The same with pet photography - it's often necessary to capture a cute moment with a quick iPhone (or even iPad) shot, than to run for the DSLR.

There's nothing wrong with using a DSLR at all times of the day - its a great way to learn more about your camera.

 

[wbeem]

I still don't capture a lot of "art," but can now see the difference in photos taken in bad light that I once thought were good shots.

The quotation marks suggest you're not comfortable with the word, as if art is something set aside from everything else. Is that how you feel about it? Are you uncomfortable taking a picture for the sake of art?

If not, then what's keeping you from capturing a lot of art?

 

[Shazzasmd]

The quotation marks suggest you're not comfortable with the word, as if art is something set aside from everything else. Is that how you feel about it? Are you uncomfortable taking a picture for the sake of art?

If not, then what's keeping you from capturing a lot of art?

No issue with the use of the word Art for photography - didn't mean to give that impression. It was meant more as a comment on where I am in the learning curve.

Absolutely, I continue to endeavor to take photographs I can be proud of. My biggest obstacle is often being too lazy to go where I need to go to capture the light, but I'm working on that

 

[WDWFigment]

It depends upon your intent for the shot. If you're capturing a memory, do it when the moment happens.

If you're trying to make art, then avoid harsh shadows in noon daylight. Lighting is everything in a photograph. If you shoot in lousy light, then you get lousy results - when viewed as a work of art.

If it's your kid having a blast on a ride or interacting with a character, though, then that's a bit of a different issue. Even then, you try to work with the light.

There have been plenty of times I've passed up shots because of crappy daylight, but that's because I was trying to capture a scene in the best light.

Couldn't it also be said that there can be 'beauty in the imperfection' in art?

I know a lot of artists who couldn't care less about technical perfection, but are hell-bent on capturing/creating emotion provoking works. To that end, a lot of the "rules" of photography (or other crafts) go out the window.

I think you're mostly right with your 'it depends upon your intent,' though. Lighting is very important to a lot of photographers, but not so important to others.

I'll shoot whenever, but I do find myself shooting less during those hours.

 

[NateNLogansDad]

Quick question. If the mid day sun is too harsh and would prevent you from shooting at all, why not look at a circular polarizer? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that what they're made for?

Seriously, if I'm wrong correct me before I finally pick one up!!!

 

[2Tiggies]

Quick question. If the mid day sun is too harsh and would prevent you from shooting at all, why not look at a circular polarizer? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that what they're made for?

Seriously, if I'm wrong correct me before I finally pick one up!!!

It is one of my indispensable accessories but if the angle of the sun isn't right I haven't found it to be a solution. It does seem to make a difference, but not always a solution. I took an hour off work to go to my daughter's school sports day this week and it couldn't have possibly been at a worse time of day or in worse sunlight for taking photos. Even with the CPL, it was pretty much a disaster in terms of photos! I am not sure if a ND filter would have been better for this purpose (?)

What I would say is have one in your kit. That said, I also found that you get what you pay for. In my naive ignorance, or innocence if you want to be kind I purchased a relatively inexpensive one the first time. The same day I ordered it (this is a classic case of research after the fact!) I read on here that if you're going to put a piece of glass in front of your expensive glass, make it a decent piece. So I ordered a Hoya Pro-1 CPL. I took both with me when I went away. Looking through the viewfinder I could actually see the difference with the cheap one, whereas it appeared not to make any visible difference with the Hoya. Well so it seemed anyway. When I put the images up on the laptop I threw the cheap one in the trash. I know nothing about the technical science of photography. But even I could see the difference instantly, and yes, it was that glaringly obvious. Not the case with everything, I'm sure, but as far as filters go, I am convinced you get what you pay for.

 

[NateNLogansDad]

It is one of my indispensable accessories but if the angle of the sun isn't right I haven't found it to be a solution. It does seem to make a difference, but not always a solution. I took an hour off work to go to my daughter's school sports day this week and it couldn't have possibly been at a worse time of day or in worse sunlight for taking photos. Even with the CPL, it was pretty much a disaster in terms of photos! I am not sure if a ND filter would have been better for this purpose (?)

What I would say is have one in your kit. That said, I also found that you get what you pay for. In my naive ignorance, or innocence if you want to be kind I purchased a relatively inexpensive one the first time. The same day I ordered it (this is a classic case of research after the fact!) I read on here that if you're going to put a piece of glass in front of your expensive glass, make it a decent piece. So I ordered a Hoya Pro-1 CPL. I took both with me when I went away. Looking through the viewfinder I could actually see the difference with the cheap one, whereas it appeared not to make any visible difference with the Hoya. Well so it seemed anyway. When I put the images up on the laptop I threw the cheap one in the trash. I know nothing about the technical science of photography. But even I could see the difference instantly, and yes, it was that glaringly obvious. Not the case with everything, I'm sure, but as far as filters go, I am convinced you get what you pay for.

I'm feeling a new purchase coming on.....

Thanks for sharing all of that. I've been looking at the Hoya's for a while but keep hesitating because I still hear my dad when he spoke about my sneakers..."You're only paying for the name!"

No cheapies for me

 

[2Tiggies]

I'm feeling a new purchase coming on.....

Thanks for sharing all of that. I've been looking at the Hoya's for a while but keep hesitating because I still hear my dad when he spoke about my sneakers..."You're only paying for the name!"

No cheapies for me

Look, I'm the last person to be giving advice about photography, but I do think with most things you get 3 levels:

1. Cheap crap
2. Paying for Quality
3. Paying for the name at a premium over quality.

Nothing wrong with the third one if it suits you, but at the very least, go with number 2

FWIW, Hoya is not the only company that makes decent filters. It's just the only one I can vouch for as those are the only ones I have.

 

[Shazzasmd]

A circular polarizer will help with washed out skies and cut down on mid day haze, and a graduated neutral density filter helps get a better exposure if one part (as in the top third or so) of your subject is brighter than the rest ... But neither of these will help much in many situations where you are shooting in harsh light. You still tend to end up with flat looking images.

You can try shooting in shade, using the sun creatively for back-lighting - check out wedding photo galleries, or using fill flash as someone mentioned previously.

You'll also find that a circular polarizer is great for cutting reflections, particularly in water shots.

 

[photo_chick]

If you're trying to make art, then avoid harsh shadows in noon daylight. Lighting is everything in a photograph. If you shoot in lousy light, then you get lousy results - when viewed as a work of art.

I'm going to have to disagree here.... Avoid harsh shadows if you're trying to make art? Maybe you should pick up a book on the history of photography as art. Go visit some galleries and museums and really look at what is there.

Look at Edward Weston. Henri Cartier-Bresson. Walker Evans. Diane Arbus. Dorthea Lange. And lets not forget Lee Friedlander. ... I could go on, there are so many to list. You find hard shadows. Uneven light. It's all over what is considered by most to be fine art photography. Not that you want that for a family portrait, but art isn't confined to that.


There is no bad light. There are only photographers who can't see how to use the light.