can it be street if shot with a 70-210 zoom?

One thing for sure is not street photography, and that is photographing on a sunny Sunday afternoon in your local tourist destination.

Its photographing on a Monday morning in one of the least photogenic places in your city that you finally earn your street photographer stripes.

You may say what about my job, well, you either have called sick or you've quit your job. 🙂
 
I go out on the streets and take photos with people in them, in an attempt to tell stories.
I use SLR and rangefinder cameras, and various prime and zoom lenses with focal lengths from 12 to 200 millimeters.
I don't care whether anyone else thinks my photos are examples of "Street Photography" or not.
I'm only concerned with getting the shot I want, and I leave the endless, (and to me pointless) arguments about what defines Street Photography and what is or isn't allowed under that arbitrary and meaningless definition, to others.
 
rbsinto
I go out on the streets and take photos with people in them, in an attempt to tell stories.
I use SLR and rangefinder cameras, and various prime and zoom lenses with focal lengths from 12 to 200 millimeters.
I don't care whether anyone else thinks my photos are examples of "Street Photography" or not.
I'm only concerned with getting the shot I want, and I leave the endless, (and to me pointless) arguments about what defines Street Photography and what is or isn't allowed under that arbitrary and meaningless definition, to others.
Click to expand...

Very well said! - jim
 
Street photography definitely has rules on what a street photograph is after all, that's why it's a distinct genre. To say that creating street photograph is based on the creativity is definitely wrong as creativity is limitless and may lead the photographer to create something not defined as a street photograph.

In other words, the photographer does not define what genre is his work, nor will the focal length, human vs. street ratio etc. The final photograph defines itself on what genre it is.

I think it's based on candidness and conciseness of a photograph taken on a street though...
 
Unless someone can cite the rules from an authoritative (or at least commonly accepted) source, does it make any difference what they are?


A lot of opinion and dogma in this thread, not very much in the way of useful information. some nice photography posted to back up some of the opinions. Tends to make their opinions more acceptable.
 
rbsinto said:
I go out on the streets and take photos with people in them, in an attempt to tell stories.
I use SLR and rangefinder cameras, and various prime and zoom lenses with focal lengths from 12 to 200 millimeters.
I don't care whether anyone else thinks my photos are examples of "Street Photography" or not.
I'm only concerned with getting the shot I want, and I leave the endless, (and to me pointless) arguments about what defines Street Photography and what is or isn't allowed under that arbitrary and meaningless definition, to others.
Click to expand...
One contentious issue relates the medium--the Forum format. Not the best approach to ask a question that elicits a "yes" or "no" or "that's-a stupid-question" response. Add to that, this is the Philosophy of . . ." forum, which gets some people mighty frustrated before they even begin to ferret out their own views--even to the point of denying the validity of becoming philosophical.

Philosophy, however, takes more effort, or at least introspection than tossing out those pithy comments. Here's an example of what I see as philosophy. I recognize it, possibly, because it addresses the narrative quality that is a central theme of what I like about street photos.
"I go out on the streets and take photos with people in them, in an attempt to tell stories."

​
This is not a correct or incorrect view, or rule, but it distinguishes one photographer from another in a non-random way. It's consistent. I'd say that if there is a consistent theme or pattern to getting the shot that you want, there's a philosophy lurking there, somewhere. And it's not pointless.

Now, to achieve this narrative purpose, I happen to like a 28 or 35 lens (explained very briefly in earlier post.)
 
Well now that settles it! A commonly accepted, authoritative source. No mention of zoom lenses being disallowed.

So the answer is, "YES".

and 42.
 


Nikkor 300 2.0 IF-ED AIS on D3

I think this photo ends the conversation 🙄 on whether telephotos can be used for street photography. There is no doubt a story is being told. If you look closely, you can see that little guy in the carriage is drinking a Slurpee 🙂.

Now, it's not the most exciting story but it is a story. This image is one of my personal favourites. To me it has all the elements of a good street shot.

It's funny, I've always thought of myself as a "street photographer" and have been taking these types of shots for over 20 years.

I never considered I might not be doing it right. Who knew 🙂.



Lost girl taken with Nikkor 300 2.8 IF-ED AIS D on F2AS



Nikkor 135 2.0 AIS on F2AS



Nikkor 135 2.0 AIS on F2AS



Nikkor 300 2.8 IF-ED AIS on F2AS



Street dancer

Nikkor 135 2.0 on FM2 Kodachrome
 
Last edited:
It seems to me that the one hard and fast 'rule' for street photography is that you spend more time attempting to define it than do it. I wonder if landscape photographers do this too?😛

Some seem to want a story, others a witty visual pun, while some prefer some hauntingly personal moment unnoticed by the rest of the world. Of course only black and white will do....or is colour now edgy and new?

I once sent some pictures to a rather well known street photographer for some helpful comment ( which had been agreed prior to me sending them.) However what I got was some pleasant compliments on the pictures but a definition of why they weren't 'Street.' I wish I still had the letter ( yep, a few years back ) as I can't remember the exact wording but it came across as a case of 'if you ain't doing it the way I do it, it ain't STREET.'

While I was thankful for the time taken to view and reply I was, and still am, a little perplexed by the rigidity that is imposed, by so many 'street photographers,' on the genre. I think the most truthful; and simplest thing to call myself is 'a photographer.'

P.S. My kit for (whisper it ) street photography is a 35mm and 50mm lens with a 28mm if needed. The reason for this is I'm too lazy and stupid to carry any more kit:angel:
 
The biggest misconception in photography in general is the idea that just because you carry a camera and shoot a certain subject you're automatically a photographer of a certain genre and so on.

For example I see a lot of women with a camera photographing on the streets, mostly photographing their family members and what they come across and they like. Are they street photographers? I don't know, I'm sure they'll laugh and say no if you ask them.

The same way, just because some guy owns a camera and walks the streets every weekend and takes photos, is that make him a street photographer? maybe in his mind, but would he be accepted in that mysterious exclusive club of street photographers? the answer is no.

You can't simply drive from your bourgeois suburb come to town and take a few snaps, and then maybe meet some other like-minded folks, go to Starbucks or have a beer or something, and maybe an artsy cafe populated with neo-hippie chicks and then later upload the images from your apple laptop onto your blog and twiter and so on and discuss it in your favorite forum etc... And call yourself a street photographer.

I'm sorry, but that simply won't do... You want to shoot on the street, you have to be a fish of the same river, in other words, not superior -- inferior is ok. Diado Moriyama calls himself a stray dog... that type of attitude...

You have to be also crazy to do it, if you're sane and rational and with a well defined self-reference-criterion then forget it, don't waste your time.

Am I a street photographer, maybe out of necessity, I like landscape photography. But I'm also so superstitious that i won't share my street photos of people because i think it would bring me bad luck, unless i don't present those photos in a formal contextualized presentation... So, i have one characteristic of a street photographer and that is the neurotic side of it. I'm happy with that much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom