Street photography during difficult times

Taking pictures of stockbrokers in panic is not gloating, it is just boring. Take a look at what the pros are coming up with to illustrate the story; not much. The sad truth is that finance is not very visual.

Maybe as the misery trickles down there will be better photo-ops for hobbyists to capture more dramatic misery where the homeless gather in camps.
 
ClaremontPhoto said:
sjones: Us people at RFF do not use the word c***.

Pitxu lives in a war zone himself.
Click to expand...

I apologize for the "c---" word.

OK then, if contentious political discussion is allowed, then let me point out:

I am somewhat aware of what is going on in Pakistan's North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA); about the Tehreek-e-Taliban of Pakistan (TTP) and Al Qaida; about the Taliban extremist suicide bomber who, on Friday, reportedly killed 30 people and injured more than 100 others after targeting a meeting of anti-extremist tribal elders; about the militants who recently bombed the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad, killing nearly 60 people, mostly Pakistanis; about the Taliban militants who seek refuge in NWFP and FATA after killing NATO and Afghan forces, as well as civilians, across the border.

Almost everyday I read about some all girls' school or video/CD shop torched or bombed because they are "un-Islamic." And this isn't just happening in the remote northwestern border region. Just last week, a number of people, including two children, sustained injuries when three small explosive devices detonated near juice stores in the Garhi Shahu area of Lahore. Police believe that Islamic conservatives might have planted the bombs to intimidate young unmarried couples that frequent the area.

And then there are the supposed pro-US spies, whose bodies are often found without head. OK, suppose they are informers for NATO or Pakistani authorities; one, if a Taliban sympathizer, might argue that they deserve to die, but maybe, just maybe, some of the victims are innocent. Don't see too many pictures of these beheaded civilians in the US media either.

Yes, the CIA is operating unmanned drones in Pakistan, which have increasingly targeted a number of suspected Taliban/Al Qaida positions or hideouts. Yes, as in Afghanistan, an inexcusable number of civilians have been killed during these attacks, and this information is readily available in the US media. However, the strikes are generally surgical in nature (due, if nothing else, to the logistical limitations of the weapons platform used), and the insinuation that carpet-bombing tactics are occurring will require further proof, please. More importantly, these strikes have possibly prevented attacks that would have claimed numerous more people; let's not give too much credit to the Taliban and Al Qaida as beholders of humanitarian concern.

Yes, there are "bombings" going on, killing or displacing many civilians; but this has generally been a result of Pakistan's military offensive in the Bajaur Agency and NWFP's Swat district. Are American units covertly helping out with offensive; I don't know, American intervention is, at least publicly, not popular, and Pakistani soldiers have allegedly fired on US/NATO helicopters that reportedly intruded into Pakistani territory, an action that the government publicly endorsed after Washington admitted to carrying out a commando raid within Pakistani territory. Could Islamabad and Washington be feigning passionate disagreement to placate the Pakistani populace---maybe, I don't know, but if you have proof that it is all one big conspiracy, please provide.
 
Last edited:
I think a great confussion is going through this thread.

Usually, the question of photographing distress, disgrace, tragedy, loss, etc - it is no question at all. We want to photograph it out of several honest motivations.

As far as brokers go, once many years ago I was presented with a close up picture of three of them talking among themselves, one of them smoking, and the photo was so nice and good that I still remember it. It was an exemplary case also of the photographer becoming invisible.

Now, if there is a question to photograph the present brokers disgrace, I suspect it is due to an ambivalent feeling towards them. So the fox that has eaten my chicken is now injured and crying - what are my feelings towards him ? Too complex for me.

I think we are discussing the wrong subject. We should be discussing about how to photograaph the dead chicken and the future chickens that will be dead by the foxes.

Regarding the fox, I feel far from feeling an eureca!, and I will extend him a tissue if he crossed my way crying. But I am very clear about where my path should take me.

Cheers,
Ruben
 
It seems many people discussing this are drawing a line in the sand which separates the hobbyists from the PJ's. There are the RFF'ers, and then there are "those pros out there in war zones." The supposition is that the PJ's have a responsibility to document what they see and share it with the world and the rest of us are just out for the pleasure of it.

While, of course, it's accurate to say that a lot of us go shoot for our own pleasure, I fail to see why our craft suddenly loses merit as a tool of communication unless we have journalist credentials around our neck. I see any opportunity to communicate to a broader audience as a worthwhile endeavor, be it stock brokers in good times or bad, or refugee camps in Pakistan. Our only responsibility with the content is to document it honestly and share it with the audience we can reach.

In the end, it will serve to broaden each of our world views, by observing and learning from corners of the world we may never see, or even looking in our own back yard through another person's lens. This is why I value the work of Nachwey and Salgado, among others. I believe that's the kind of work that uses the full capacity of our medium, and we all have the chance to contribute in our own way and in our own view.

</endsoapbox> :)
 
blackwave said:
It seems many people discussing this are drawing a line in the sand which separates the hobbyists from the PJ's. There are the RFF'ers, and then there are "those pros out there in war zones." The supposition is that the PJ's have a responsibility to document what they see and share it with the world and the rest of us are just out for the pleasure of it.

While, of course, it's accurate to say that a lot of us go shoot for our own pleasure, I fail to see why our craft suddenly loses merit as a tool of communication unless we have journalist credentials around our neck. I see any opportunity to communicate to a broader audience as a worthwhile endeavor, be it stock brokers in good times or bad, or refugee camps in Pakistan. Our only responsibility with the content is to document it honestly and share it with the audience we can reach.

In the end, it will serve to broaden each of our world views, by observing and learning from corners of the world we may never see, or even looking in our own back yard through another person's lens. This is why I value the work of Nachwey and Salgado, among others. I believe that's the kind of work that uses the full capacity of our medium, and we all have the chance to contribute in our own way and in our own view.

</endsoapbox> :)
Click to expand...


exactly said

The original poster may not understand that just because a photographer does not have PJ credentials, it does not mean that they are not serious, sincere photographers interested in documenting their world.
 
These are times that require courage. As photographers we serves as witnesses to life and our times. War photographers work in the most awful of horrors to "bring home" the story of the human suffering. For most of us we are happy to record the birth of our kids and the lives of our families.

Now is the time we each can bear witness to the tragedies going on in our communities. Stock market charts and articles about the economic system don't tell the story of what is happening to people around the world and in our neighborhoods.

When I shoot in the street I try to respect people by moving slowly, never 'springing' a shot. And I don't run off. If I act like I'm doing nothing wrong, then the people I photograph are more comfortable. If someone asks what I'm doing I tell them straight out, if I'm shooting a digital I'll show them the image. How well street photography goes is a directly related to my own comfort level.

Right now there's an important story to tell everywhere. We shouldn't let the story of the destruction of so many lives by a few greedy rich crazies go by unnoticed.

Have courage.

Hawkeye
 
ruben said:
So the fox that has eaten my chicken is now injured and crying - what are my feelings towards him ? Too complex for me.
Click to expand...

Ha, ha! I have a brother-in-law who is an 'investment advisor' - a fox, at one of Norway's largest banks. He's got very tough days. So, things are not great at the fox's den right now.

The 'crisis' has now turned into a stampede that no one can stop. There is no confidence in 'values' any more, if it is the value of an apartment down town or the value of a well run oil company in the stock market. Scary.

Look to Iceland. People can't get money out of teller machines anymore or use their credit cards. How do you get fed and fuel up your car? They will have to read the history books on Roosvelt's New Deal, and start all over.
 
blackwave said:
I fail to see why our craft suddenly loses merit as a tool of communication unless we have journalist credentials around our neck. I see any opportunity to communicate to a broader audience as a worthwhile endeavor, be it stock brokers in good times or bad, or refugee camps in Pakistan. Our only responsibility with the content is to document it honestly and share it with the audience we can reach.
Click to expand...

Well said!

'Credentials' mean nothing: I speak as a former NUJ (National Union of Journalists) card carrier.

'Sharing with the audience we can reach' means everything.

Cheers,

R.
 
The internet makes it possible for any person to document and share events that need to be witnessed.
 
tom.w.bn said:
Very good. Thanks for sharing. This topic is so complex. To cover it you need more than just a handfull of photos.
Click to expand...

So true, if you look at this video collage, the the actual photos themselves don't say much--they need context, Video, sound bites, editing, TV screen capture, etc., to tell us anything.
 
Hugs??? I question that one.

Hugs??? I question that one.

Gumby said:
These may be historical times. Give it a second thought. Just make sure you hug anyone who is threatening to jump out of a window!
Click to expand...

Qualify that hug a bit...

If they are truly committed... Hug them before they get on the ledge and do so very loosely.
 
tom.w.bn said:
They were jounalists. Most members here are doing street photography for their own pleasure. Of course it's disrespect if you photograph a person in a uncomfortable situation for your own pleasure.
Click to expand...
As others have commented, I disagree. For me, it's not about pleasure. Just because I am not paid to be a journalist does not mean I'm not doing journalism.

Roger Hicks said:
Except perhaps if they deserve it, i.e. if they were responsible for the cock-up -- the 'bonus culture' brigade who made what they thought were one-way bets. Then it's not just my own pleasure: it's everyone's. Reprehensible, perhaps, but reasonable.

The difficulty, of course, lies in determining whether they were responsible or not.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, getting pleasure out of blame is just not healthy.

Documenting the world as it is is an essential and, I would say, noble task. There is value in the act itself, not just the dissemination of the resulting documents/images.
 
Anyone can be a photo journalist whether they get paid or not, the statement is true, but has anyone involved in this thread taken any photos to back this up?

I don't see much journalistic work from posters in this thread in the galleries. Or was everyone going to get on this tomorrow?

I have to agree with Trius on the nobility of trying to document the world as it is, and finding joy in the misfortunes of others is really not a good thing.

So please post 'em if you got 'em, but pictures of sleeping homeless guys don't count unless they are extraordinary.
 
Last edited:
Photojournalism can be war, conflict, and famine.

It could also be small town life, festivals, and a changing neighborhood.

The 'Leica' rangefinder was made for all of this, and if you look you'll see examples of photojournalism - you'll also see photos of cameras, cats, and brick walls. But that's just part of the RFF nuttiness.
 
Some criticised the term "pleasure". What's wrong with having pleasure with our hobby? Is personal satisfaction a better term? And I was not talking about having pleasure with the scene that is photographed.

Many poeple here consider themself a photojournalist. I am not. I don't want to question your goals, personal attitude or altruism. But I think a photojournalist is someone who takes photos with the goal that the pictures will be published and they should have an impact (big or small). And with publishing I don't mean just putting pictures on flickr, rff or your personal homepage. There pictures have no real impact. Do they help to change the situation? Are they helpful in the future?

Do you agree that not only the genre makes a photojournalist but also the goal why a picture is taken? What are your goals? What impact do your pictures have. Why is the 1000th picture of a jobless broker important?
 
Most often the pictures I take only have an impact on myself, but that makes them no less valuable and not worth taking.

Why is another sunset/flower/insect/pet/baby picture important?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom