
"For better or worse, lowered contrast, perhaps a bit of softness, blocked shadows, and grain are entrenched as part of the visual vocabulary of available light photography... when a performer is setting the mood, underexpose a bit, go for the drama, grit and atmosphere."
Shooting performers in nightclubs or coffeehouses is a subject close to my heart, and as group member Robert Hesse expressed in an email very well (above) – in low light there is only so much you can do. The joys and frustrations of this assignment taught me the fundamentals of photography pretty quickly. In the early days of nightclub photography, you had people wielding Weegee-like Speed Graphics with flashes attached. So all was sharp, but obviously the mood aesthetic suffered somewhat. But when 400 ASA film became available in the 50’s, photographers started to see what they could do with available light. When you see pictures made in this period by William Claxton, Carole Reiff, Roy DeCarava, you will find the camera of choice to be the Rolleiflex 6x6 TLR with its 2.8 Tessar and smooth-clicking shutter that would allow decent results at 1/30th of a second or even more with pushed development. But still, the most compelling "live" pictures are usually impressionistic.... You have the softness, the motion blur, the grain. Those pictures actually make up a small percentage of the output of the well known pros of the era, whose better known pictures are made in better lit environments – photo studios, recording studios, or even the street.. (though many of the subjects seem to be utterly unfamiliar with the concept of daylight.)
When I do no-light performance shots, where there are one or two dinky spotlights, usually with a red gel over them, I just put he camera on the widest aperture, a speed of about 60-125 depending on lens length, an ASA of 1600, and I hope for the best. I can crank up exposure more in RAW, and if I get nothing, well, there wasn’t any light.

I’ve dreamed up all sorts of workarounds, like maybe a snoot-gun pointed by an assistant at the singer, but you don’t want to raise too much ruckus doing this.... You have to stay fairly inconspicuous... my rules are don’t shoot for the first one or two songs, let the show get started while you study what the singer tends to do visually, hand gestures, head tilts or whatever to watch for. Look how the light falls when he or she moves here or there. Are you on the best side? What does the background look like and could you reposition to improve it?
When you start to shoot, do some anticipating for the moves in synch with the song. Try to wait for something visual to happen… you can’t photograph a note. There may be a fabulous note coming out of the mouth, but if there is no other reinforcing expression or gesture then the picture will be of your subject with her mouth open.
Obviously, don’t shoot during quiet, slow songs.... You don’t want to be blasting away during "My Funny Valentine.." Wait for the upbeat or louder tunes… there will be more movement anyway and the sound of your cameras will be covered… and be sure to be ready at the end of every song when the singer finishes, smiles, and acknowledges the applause. When all else fails, you definitely want those.
When I look at my coffehouse pictures from the early 90's, all I seem to see now are the technical flaws. But I know that I would rather have them than not - it is a miracle that they exist at all, and i knew that when I was taking them 15 years ago. The challenges are many but the rewards are great - you can get faces in transcendent states – far out of the ordinary and far into the soul.