[Mike McCarty]

This is just me talking, there are other valid methods.

I don't use artificial light set ups at all. I do, however, appreciate what they can do. Namely, produce predictable studio results. But the down side, apart from the expense and the burden of hauling them around, is that I think you can get the "lazy eye."

What I mean is you don't have to think too much, or see too much. You plug in your equipment, place your model the precalculated distance from the source(s) and then begin to shoot. This is all fine, and can produce very nice results, but take this same practitioner out of this sanitized environment and they can become timid and unsure.

I think there are too many creative circumstances which preclude the use of a "set up." Not only are you always searching for these spontaneous, quickly appearing and disappearing situations, but when they arise, your eye is nimble, unafraid.

Mine is arguably an intuitive approach, and the obvious downside is that I take a lot of bad pictures, and sometimes even have to call the whole thing off.

I suppose the best of all worlds is to have the option of both, and the eye which can move from one to the other - unafraid.