Embracing the cliché (or: the day I pretended to be a "street shooter")

Dogs aren't stupid! 🙂

First shot -- subject with potential -- hope you took some from 7 feet away or so. Like the alley shot with people in silho -- that scenario, for me has more potential. Bottom shot -- like the humor of the stuff on balcony. Would like to see a grittier / contrasty version on 1st and last shot. Landscape with ferris wheel and container loaders in distance -- like this -- might be cool if you could get closer to those container loaders -- they have intriguing silhos. I know some photographers don't like to hit "easy" spots like touristy areas -- but I say, why not?
 
Ah man, that's not real cliche' photography! We need to see;

A line of shopping carts.
A building reflected in a rain puddle.
Your shadow, anyplace.
You, taking your picture reflected in a store window.
A homeless person in a doorway.
Get with the program man.
 
Ha! I actually forgot about this after the first day or so only to come back to see it up to 22 replies.

Well, I actually edited myself for RFF. Over at PL I wrote:

"Got a bit stir crazy today, and decided to go down to Pike's Place Market. I hate this place. I really do. It combines my two strongest hatreds: overpriced "artisanal" goods and bus loads of tourists.

But, there are people there. Weird, interesting people. And when it's a disgusting, overcast, cold Seattle day, it seems only natural to take some b&w "street" shots. "B&W Street Shots" being my third strongest hatred.

So, basically, I went to an incredibly cliché place and took incredibly cliché pictures.You know what? ....... I kind of hate doing this! I don't like these pictures very much, and I hate the feeling of being some Leica guy with a pony tail who quotes Cartier-Bresson and takes himself far too seriously.

However, it was better than sitting on the couch staring at my stupid dog. Enjoy!"

http://www.photographerslounge.org/showthread.php?t=33855
 
I like the style of your train of thought. Encourage it to emerge more often through your photographs.
PS, you failed to mention pretentious and precious, two inherent factors at 'artisan' markets.
 
I wondered where that place was then I saw the cars were on the RIGHT side of the road so guessed it was in USA then reading the 'Edited Post' found Seattle- what a shame -- too far to go on my British Pensioner's Bus Pass ---
 
lattiboy said:
Ha! I actually forgot about this after the first day or so only to come back to see it up to 22 replies.

Well, I actually edited myself for RFF. Over at PL I wrote:

"Got a bit stir crazy today, and decided to go down to Pike's Place Market. I hate this place. I really do. It combines my two strongest hatreds: overpriced "artisanal" goods and bus loads of tourists.

But, there are people there. Weird, interesting people. And when it's a disgusting, overcast, cold Seattle day, it seems only natural to take some b&w "street" shots. "B&W Street Shots" being my third strongest hatred.

So, basically, I went to an incredibly cliché place and took incredibly cliché pictures.You know what? ....... I kind of hate doing this! I don't like these pictures very much, and I hate the feeling of being some Leica guy with a pony tail who quotes Cartier-Bresson and takes himself far too seriously.

However, it was better than sitting on the couch staring at my stupid dog. Enjoy!"

http://www.photographerslounge.org/showthread.php?t=33855
Click to expand...

You'd have been better off staying at home. And be nicer to your dog. He wasn't the one who started this stupid thread.
 
For all street photographers and would be street photographers - may I suggest you read about and study Robert Frank and especially the advice he got from Edward Steichen.

If you get a copy of Frank's The Americans and let it fall open to a page, then in most cases here and now on RFF, that is what I see on a very good day. This not a compliment.

Pictures without reportage or links (e.g. one paragraph to the next in a story - thus, one photograph to the next) are in the main futile and of the making of them there is no end (it would seem).

One further thing: If you have to give a description/explanation of what it is you have photographed, then in general terms you are fooling no one.

Food for thought.
 
Last edited:
Sparrow said:
.... that seems a bit harsh
Click to expand...

So it may appear at first but the truth is there, I believe. We are talking about 'street photography', yes?

Stewart, look at what dozens and dozens offer for portraiture. The same goes for Contre Jour and on and on. Chris (BLack) said it all when he was told to read the instructions first.
 
Sparrow said:
.... that seems a bit harsh

daves that is not Alistair
Click to expand...

I don't think so. These are bad, uninvolved, pointless pictures that anyone could make with any camera in half an hour.
There's also a perhaps unintentional but real nasty condescending tone to the accompanying words: hating people and places, clichés, use of scare quotes etc. Christ, the guy wasn't even nice about his own pet.
Instead of showing how far above the conventions of an established genre of photography he is by poking fun at soft targets like hipsters and tourists, I'd like to see this guy show us what he considers to be original work, preferably about something he has a small degree of warmth towards.
Failing that, I'd rather he stayed at home.
 
daves said:
I don't think so. These are bad, uninvolved, pointless pictures that anyone could make with any camera in half an hour.
There's also a perhaps unintentional but real nasty condescending tone to the accompanying words: hating people and places, clichés, use of scare quotes etc. Christ, the guy wasn't even nice about his own pet.
Instead of showing how far above the conventions of an established genre of photography he is by poking fun at soft targets like hipsters and tourists, I'd like to see this guy show us what he considers to be original work, preferably about something he has a small degree of warmth towards.
Failing that, he should stay at home.
Click to expand...

Charitable soul eh?
 
alistair.o said:
Charitable soul eh?
Click to expand...

I edited the final sentence, evidently while you were replying. I don't want to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't do, only what I'd prefer. I don't know if you're calling me charitable or not, but I am serious. I thought these were bad pictures and mean-spirited posts - and it's probably no coincidence that they go hand in hand.
 
daves said:
I edited the final sentence, evidently while you were replying. I don't want to tell anyone what they should or shouldn't do, only what I'd prefer. I don't know if you're calling me charitable or not, but I am serious. I thought these were bad pictures and mean-spirited posts - and it's probably no coincidence that they go hand in hand.
Click to expand...


Agreed ...
If the post was was meant to be ironic I apologise but I didn`t care for the tone.
 
daves said:
I don't think so. These are bad, uninvolved, pointless pictures that anyone could make with any camera in half an hour.
There's also a perhaps unintentional but real nasty condescending tone to the accompanying words: hating people and places, clichés, use of scare quotes etc. Christ, the guy wasn't even nice about his own pet.
Instead of showing how far above the conventions of an established genre of photography he is by poking fun at soft targets like hipsters and tourists, I'd like to see this guy show us what he considers to be original work, preferably about something he has a small degree of warmth towards.
Failing that, I'd rather he stayed at home.
Click to expand...

... yes he seemed fairly self deprecating in the OP, I took the tone as being slightly jocular, and at least it did have photos to look at which some posters never get round to doing.

All in all I still think you were a little harsh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom