jdef, I share your opinion on this...right now, if I find the right exposure/technique it is either an accident or something I spent more time working on than the image itself. That said, I also have noticed that even when shooting the same subject with minutes between exposures that one will be what I'm after but the other is not. Now that does not happen in the field, but once the negative is developed and the printing begins.
Andre, I understand what you were saying - light is light, I just feel that the quality of light does change - not always at a certain time of day, or even time of year..but there seem to be times when the quality of the light is quite good.
Thomassaurwein - have watched your different post with interest, because you seem to understand your light and use it to express your image. Think what you said about returning to the same place is very true if one is to learn about the light and the locations response to that light.
There are several members on this site that have mastered light (or should I say the exposure of light) and then there are the better know photographers that also seem to have this down. So I guess it really does come down to understanding the basic tools we use - film/exposure/development/printing, and letting those skills work behind the scene as we concentrate on the "art". I have learned to walk away from a scene that is flat or has no life...just haven't learned how to capture what is there when it is alive...