Beginner thinks out loud
- Thread starter JackForster
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 132
- Views 14K
JackForster
Established
Well, that's a good question. Why were you taught it was rude to stare? Obviously it's not because there is some arbitrary rule in place intended to squash your youthful curiosity (though it may indeed have had that effect.) You were taught it was rude to stare not because of what was going on in your head, but because of what might have been going on in hers. This is not a "social taboo that straps blinders on people," it's consideration for other people's feelings.
Children don't tend to realize that what is pleasurable or interesting for them may be unpleasant in the extreme for someone else. Adults, hopefully, realize that taking others' feelings into consideration is a matter of the conscious exercise of courtesy and compassion, not unthinking adherence to arbitrary rules. The comments in re: street photography and transgressing someone's personal space (and appropriating their image without their permission) that have resonated the most with me here are those that acknowledge the ethical complexity of doing so and suggest that when done, it is ethically less problematic if done with humanity and compassion. Probably artistically more successful too.
I think we can all relate to your amazement and fascination at the differences between people --I bet for a lot of us that's the motivation to pick up a camera in the first place. I like to think, though, that we can exercise that fascination with an awareness of the other person's feelings. Fascination without compassion runs the risk of mere voyeurism, which there is quite enough of already.
Jack
emraphoto
Veteran
the fascination. combined with the awareness is something I pass on to all the students I speak to. it opens the door to a whole other world of photography.
JackForster
Established
Haha, yes . . . I'm pushing fifty, as they say (never thought I'd live to see the day, but there you are.) USENET newsgroups, ASCII art, dot-matrix printers, casette-tape data storage . . . yep, these old eyes have seen it all 😀 .
J.
Neare
Well-known
@JackForster - Bresson had a reason for not wanting his own photo taken and it was not simply because he disliked having his photo taken. I said what I said as that if you are not truly comfortable with the action you are performing on others (partly due to the fact that you are uncomfortable with it yourself) then you are hindering yourself. Which is also why you have trouble taking photos of people without their permission.
But ethics, really? IMO, when photographing practice a little bit of Ethical Egoism as your success will always come at the expense of others. However, consider the idea that they have not really given up anything more than what they have shown to the world regardless. But like I said, you have created psychological barriers for yourself. A quote that I will always remember is "Art is about doing what you should not." - Araki
But ethics, really? IMO, when photographing practice a little bit of Ethical Egoism as your success will always come at the expense of others. However, consider the idea that they have not really given up anything more than what they have shown to the world regardless. But like I said, you have created psychological barriers for yourself. A quote that I will always remember is "Art is about doing what you should not." - Araki
Jack Conrad
Well-known
How does one discern the feelings of others without thoughtfully observing their expression and demeanor?
You refer to consideration of others feelings which of course is important, but to assume someones feelings
without observation is a type of projection.
In other words, you're placing your feelings of self consciousness on others as a sort of social ethos,
when in fact people thrive on being observed and noticed.
Glancing furtively at people does not denote politeness. It often appears more like shiftiness.
Screw that! Grab the world with your eyes, your senses, your camera and drink up!
You harm no one in the process.
Sometimes I think there is a concerted effort by the euphemistic "Big Brother" to spread the idea that street photography is somehow creepy, when in actuality, it's the cctv scanners in every streetlight that's repugnant to the feelings of people, since they are placed there as control mechanisms.
JackForster
Established
Haha, yes well that is a bracing call to arms 😉 but what makes you think I or anyone else is necessarily making an assumption that is not based on observing others? And what makes you think that my thinking about the ethical issues raised by taking someone's picture without their permission is motivated by self-consciousness?
I probably ought to clarify something, as some of you seem to feel put on the defensive --I'm not attacking street photography as unethical, nor am I claiming that taking someone's picture without asking is inherently and/or objectively unethical. I'm merely saying that for me, it raises some ethical questions, and that as I personally don't like having my picture taken without permission I can understand why another reasonable person might object.
And of course it is not true that _everyone_ thrives on being observed and noticed --I don't believe that and I don't think if you think about it, you do either 😉 . Lots of people prefer and cherish their privacy.
Jack
PS it's off topic but I agree about CCTV cameras, they give me the willies.
furcafe
Veteran
Really? Let's go to the tape, or rather your original post:
Third, taking people's pictures feels intrusive. I don't like having my picture taken myself, and taking someone's image feels like stealing on a very deep level (maybe it's just that like most people who pride themselves on being very rational I'm also deeply superstitious.) I seem to need to feel that a photograph on the street is philosophically justifiable in some way --aesthetically, journalistically, or what have you --otherwise it's an inexcusable exploitation of another human being on a very serious level; it's an existential exploitation, almost a form of involuntary enslavement.
At the very least you seem to be saying that without "philosophical" justification ("aesthetically, journalistically, or what have you"), street photography is an "existential exploitation, almost a form of involuntary enslavement." Hard not to take that as an attack on those who don't feel that way about taking photos of others without their permission.
Last edited:
JackForster
Established
Well here I think you have made a good point, obviously if I'm seized with anxiety when I try to take a person's picture on the street that's going to be crippling. As I said before though, disliking having my own picture taken is a separate issue. I actually love taking people's pictures --a city without people is just a dead grid --but as I said in my original post, I don't think it's entirely non-problematic either. I'm not sure whether I agree that success always has to come at the expense of others, artistically or otherwise. (Actually, I'm sure I strongly disagree, but that's another thread, probably. Even from the perspective of ethical egoism there are many who feel that rational self-interest is inherently bound up with long term mutual benefit.)
I've looked at some of your images by the way, and I think some of them are very dynamic and interesting, and you are in lots of good company in feeling that making art is inherently transgressive (if I'm reading you correctly) --but it's not the only way to skin a cat, pardon the expression. Your best images of the lot I've looked at, if you don't mind my saying so, have a fair number of rather classic attributes, including good composition, and a moment well chosen for its expressive content. They are not especially transgressive in feel, in fact.
As far as HCB's motivations for not wanting his picture to be taken I suspect they were as varied and complicated as the man himself --he himself gave various reasons over the course of his lifetime; I mention it merely to point out that such an aversion is not, prima facie, evidence of an inability to photograph others.
Jack
JackForster
Established
Hi there,
I do think it is fairly clear in the original post that I am expressing a personal feeling, not a judgement about street photography in general or about street photographers in general. May I point out the copious use of the first person 😉 i.e "_I_ seem to need to feel. . . " etc. Had I simply said that street photography was inherently exploitive and unethical I think you would have a justifiable complaint, but even in hindsight I think it's pretty clear I was expressing my own perspectives, not prescribing one (or proscribing anything.)
To unpack the excerpt you've chosen, also note that I've said ". . .to be philosophically justifiable." I would actually stand by that. I think that merely assuming flatly that one has an absolute right to another's image, merely because they are in a public place, is exploitive. Also note that I have left the door very wide open as to what constitutes "philosophical justification." Even many who have responded here with annoyance at my original post obviously feel that the pursuit of aesthetic ends (for instance) constitutes such justification.
Jack
Jack Conrad
Well-known
It never ceases to amaze me how often the idea is propagated that street photography is somehow unethical, intrusive and done at the expense of others on these online forums that more or less cater to the specific art form of "street" photography.
Jack Conrad
Well-known
All in all, I'm enjoying this topic. Probably because I
have asked the same questions of myself.
Jack, you're welcome to your opinions, but why do I get the feeling that even though cctv systems give you the willies, whatever that means, you aren't likely to be waxing philosophic on sites that specialize in scrutinizing the public with hidden surveillance devices. No, you seem to be propagating politics at street photographers and then claiming cctv as being off topic. 🙂
Why not just accept your personal peccadillo's as your own and as a beginner in street photography, simply ask questions as to how to overcome them, rather than attempting to project your personal psychological baggage onto everyone that practices the photographic form called "street."
have asked the same questions of myself.
Jack, you're welcome to your opinions, but why do I get the feeling that even though cctv systems give you the willies, whatever that means, you aren't likely to be waxing philosophic on sites that specialize in scrutinizing the public with hidden surveillance devices. No, you seem to be propagating politics at street photographers and then claiming cctv as being off topic. 🙂
Why not just accept your personal peccadillo's as your own and as a beginner in street photography, simply ask questions as to how to overcome them, rather than attempting to project your personal psychological baggage onto everyone that practices the photographic form called "street."
JackForster
Established
You would be AMAZED at the places I've left opinions on the web over the years (or maybe not 😉 ).
My comments aren't political, they're personal reactions to the experience of taking pictures of strangers. And I don't think pointing out the ethical issues street photography raises is out of line for a "philosophy of photography" forum, do you?
"Projecting" is inaccurate. I'm not ascribing my emotional state to anybody (certainly not other photographers) nor am I soliciting advice on how to overcome some problem. I'm rather enjoying negotiation the issue myself, actually, though I'm also enjoying hearing how others do so.
Jack
Last edited:
celluloidprop
Well-known
It's odd to me that the act of questioning street photography is seen as an affront by some. I view this kind of personal interrogation as valuable for personal and intellectual growth - if more people did so, they'd probably come out on the other side as better streetwalkers... I mean, photographers.
I can't speak for Jack, but much of the photography that interests me can be called street in some way - from Garry Winogrand to Vivian Maier to Walker Evans's subway photos to Robert Frank, etc. etc. etc.. How they surpassed the lowest common denominator of public photography is one part of that interest - what is it about those bodies of work that enrich us as people?
I can't speak for Jack, but much of the photography that interests me can be called street in some way - from Garry Winogrand to Vivian Maier to Walker Evans's subway photos to Robert Frank, etc. etc. etc.. How they surpassed the lowest common denominator of public photography is one part of that interest - what is it about those bodies of work that enrich us as people?
JackForster
Established
Huzzars, a sympathetic ear 😀
Thanks, it's nice to know someone sees that I'm not attacking street photography! Actually you just named four of my favorite photographers; I think so-called street photography is one of the most challenging kinds of photography to do well (and one of the easiest to do badly) and I have nothing but the greatest admiration for those who can do it well (and envy I might add.)
One of the things that astonishes me about a good street photograph is when there's a fusion of great emotional content and great composition. I admire great landscape photography but (and again, this is _just_ a _personal_ preference) landscape photography doesn't move me the way street photography does; it's the human being in the world_ that's interesting.
It's a painting, but it fulfills a lot of the elements of what I think makes a really good photograph:
Breugel's "Fall of Icarus," and the poem on the painting (the one by Auden) is practically a manifesto of what it is that makes street photography interesting:
About suffering they were never wrong,
The Old Masters; how well, they understood
Its human position; how it takes place
While someone else is eating or opening a window or just walking dully along;
How, when the aged are reverently, passionately waiting
For the miraculous birth, there always must be
Children who did not specially want it to happen, skating
On a pond at the edge of the wood:
They never forgot
That even the dreadful martyrdom must run its course
Anyhow in a corner, some untidy spot
Where the dogs go on with their doggy life and the torturer's horse
Scratches its innocent behind on a tree.
In Breughel's Icarus, for instance: how everything turns away
Quite leisurely from the disaster; the ploughman may
Have heard the splash, the forsaken cry,
But for him it was not an important failure; the sun shone
As it had to on the white legs disappearing into the green
Water; and the expensive delicate ship that must have seen
Something amazing, a boy falling out of the sky,
had somewhere to get to and sailed calmly on.
FrankS
Registered User
Hi Jack, welcome again to RFF. I must say that you've responded very well to all those who misunderstood your position in your initial post. Hope you don't judge us too quickly or harshly for that.
I've dabbled in many different genres of photography and gone through learning phases in my thirty some years of photography. Lately! I'm finding people photography and street photography the most interesting, exciting, and rewarding. I'm working through my own apprehensions about taking pictures of strangers in public.
Looking forward to seeing some of your work, photography and whatever else, and reading more of your thoughtful and reasonable posts.
I've dabbled in many different genres of photography and gone through learning phases in my thirty some years of photography. Lately! I'm finding people photography and street photography the most interesting, exciting, and rewarding. I'm working through my own apprehensions about taking pictures of strangers in public.
Looking forward to seeing some of your work, photography and whatever else, and reading more of your thoughtful and reasonable posts.
Neare
Well-known
Specifically I meant that photography of people comes at their expense as the subject receives no personal gain at the time the photo was taken. However, photography also has the potential to give back, both to the subject and other individuals which may or may not equate for your mutual gain. But you cannot approach the photography with the attitude that you will only take aesthetically or emotionally strong imagery and that you will not take any photos lacking in either quality. Doing so is unreasonable. End of the day, photography rarely causes harm.
Bresson's reasons were more so in the region of as he was gaining fame, he thought that if his face were to be publicized he would lose a portion his anonymity which would hinder him when working in public. He wanted to retain the observer status.
Anyway, maybe this sort of photography is more up your alley http://kenshukan.net/john/archives/2011/06/11/the-beach-by-reiichi-murakami/.
JackForster
Established
Hi Neare,
to your first point I think I am in agreement --if I understand you correctly, photography need not be a one way transaction that only benefits the photographer (perhaps I was coming at the same idea from a different direction in talking about compassion earlier in this thread.) To your second point --that you can't approach photography with the idea that you will only make aesthetically or emotionally strong imagery --I agree with that entirely, insofar as I think taking pictures to fulfill some preconception is apt to lead to rather sterile, formulaic photography. (I've always had problems with any art that grows out of a manifesto, which is a different expression of the same problem.)
The link is interesting --very outside the kind of work I gravitate towards, but at this point everything is worth looking at, at least for me. You see, I don't know what kind of photography is up my alley. That is why I am taking photographs 🙂 .
Thank you for staying engaged with the question,
Jack
JackForster
Established
Frank thank you so much again for your welcome. This has been a much richer thread to read through than I had dared to hope and lots of interesting and challenging comments made. And thank you for relating my questions to your own process; misery loves company 😉 . Actually I can feel it changing already --my feelings about being out among people taking pictures. I don't quite know how to describe it --the physical movements and changing moods of people moving through space in a city create an infinite number of possible images every moment, and the more time I spend out in it with a camera the more I feel that energy. Maybe that's a big part of the attraction --the camera is a lightning rod for the hidden currents of energy running through the landscape in whose creation we participate by moving through it. Right now it seems incredibly rich with possibilities. The gap between the potential and what actually gets caught on film is still depressing to contemplate but heck, I hear your first ten thousand pictures are your worst 😀.
Thank you again,
Jack
JackForster
Established
By the way in the spirit of put up or shut up I suppose I ought to post a picture.
Readers of this thread may now enjoy a laugh at my expense as this is apparently as close as I want to get to, you know, an actual person. Cue music: "I'm gonna buy a paper doll/that I can call my own/A doll that other fellas cannot steeeeeeeal.. ." 😉.
Cheers and thanks everyone,
Jack