MartinL
MartinL
I've been taking lots of photos that superficially meet at least some "street photography" criteria. Many of these are compositionally pleasing and technically decent. Yet, even the best I mostly toss. It sure is rare for me to come up with one that I think is worth saving (not to mention, sharing).
The "decisive moment," (for me, I am learning) must exist at the center of a historical or emotional story. The moment I capture must evoke a narrative that engages the viewer who will complete the story. Temporally, the viewer must supply a past and/or a future to the moment I provide.
This photo: M8; CV75/2.5.
Martin
The "decisive moment," (for me, I am learning) must exist at the center of a historical or emotional story. The moment I capture must evoke a narrative that engages the viewer who will complete the story. Temporally, the viewer must supply a past and/or a future to the moment I provide.
This photo: M8; CV75/2.5.
Martin
Attachments
bottley1
only to feel
'The "decisive moment," (for me, I am learning) must exist at the center of a historical or emotional story. The moment I capture must evoke a narrative that engages the viewer who will complete the story. Temporally, the viewer must supply a past and/or a future to the moment I provide'
Eh? Geez, its only photography, you're not discovering a cure for cancer or putting a man on the moon, for Christs sake!
Eh? Geez, its only photography, you're not discovering a cure for cancer or putting a man on the moon, for Christs sake!
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
Do you feel that this photo meets your criteria?
SteveM(PA)
Poser
Just something rattling around in my brain, totally in jest...
Alvy:
Dialogue: (pretentiously) Photography's interesting because, you know, it's a new form, and a set of aesthetic criteria have not emerged yet.
Subtitles: I wonder what she looks like naked.
-Annie Hall, 1977
Alvy:
Dialogue: (pretentiously) Photography's interesting because, you know, it's a new form, and a set of aesthetic criteria have not emerged yet.
Subtitles: I wonder what she looks like naked.
-Annie Hall, 1977
MartinL
MartinL
Which photo? The one I posted? Kinda awkward, because I don't want to hijack this thread----maybe it's OK. Besides, couple of posts up a fellow quoted the central point I was making.J J Kapsberger said:
So yes, the pic I posted meets one of my important criteria for street photography. This is not a claim to the photo having special merit, only that it's not a portrait, it's not an abstraction, it's not architectural, but it's a moment in a public space that shows (to me) a small flake of the human condition. It evokes something that happened before and what might happen. The ages and gender of the participants, for me, add value to the image.
Martin
usccharles
Well-known
well if it looks good to the person who took it, its a good photo in my book.
throw your criterias in the trash and shoot what pleases your eyes. its more fun that way
throw your criterias in the trash and shoot what pleases your eyes. its more fun that way
MartinL
MartinL
LOL, my confusion shows because I didn't realize that my pervious post here was responding to a thread I started and not to another thread I've been posting on.usccharles said:well if it looks good to the person who took it, its a good photo in my book.
throw your criterias in the trash and shoot what pleases your eyes. its more fun that way
Re the quote above, that's a generous attitude, but doesn't seem to allow for much growth or dialog. IMO, there's value (and fun) in having criteria.
Martin
dryice66
Established
Just to throw my tuppence in as it were... we all have concepts of creativity that require some form of validation as either art / documentary. To me, street photography is one of those things that catches the eye of the beholder, catching fleeting glimpses that will be gone but for the lens at that moment.
Technical skills of course vary and indeed we learn from the great photographers and aspire to their abilities, we share our images with each other and critique and learn. Ultimately, we capture moments to please ourselves and hope others around us may like what we have shot as well.
As for the concept of the story - a picture should convey a story. It doesn't necessarily have to be as documented and indeed could be left to the imagination.
I must confess that while the image posted by Martin L was not to my taste - it told a story and it made me laugh as well.
I am probably rambling now... but hey.... it's photography, it's art, it's creative and it's fun... it's an outlet for our own expression.... enjoy...
BTW, I am not technically gifted as a photographer - especially in total manual mode, and many of my shots suck. It's a bit hit and miss as a process as my mind's eye doesn't quite match up to the reality!
Technical skills of course vary and indeed we learn from the great photographers and aspire to their abilities, we share our images with each other and critique and learn. Ultimately, we capture moments to please ourselves and hope others around us may like what we have shot as well.
As for the concept of the story - a picture should convey a story. It doesn't necessarily have to be as documented and indeed could be left to the imagination.
I must confess that while the image posted by Martin L was not to my taste - it told a story and it made me laugh as well.
I am probably rambling now... but hey.... it's photography, it's art, it's creative and it's fun... it's an outlet for our own expression.... enjoy...
BTW, I am not technically gifted as a photographer - especially in total manual mode, and many of my shots suck. It's a bit hit and miss as a process as my mind's eye doesn't quite match up to the reality!
Last edited:
R
RML
Guest
MartinL said:
Value and fun... maybe. But criteria are also stifling. Remember the "rule" of thirds? It's a criterium and it's broken all the time. Oddly enough, many photos that break criteria (self set or cultural) are more interesting than those that comply with them.
This is not a claim to the photo having special merit, only that it's not a portrait, it's not an abstraction, it's not architectural, but it's a moment in a public space that shows (to me) a small flake of the human condition. It evokes something that happened before and what might happen. The ages and gender of the participants, for me, add value to the image.
Why would "not a portrait" be a criterium for street? Aren't faces and their expressions the stuff we humans are build for? Aren't they the most interesting thing about people? IMO much of the best street is at least partially a portrait.
Abstraction in what sense? IMO you abstracted an ordinary event from its surroundings and context and thus put focus and emphasis on it.
It's not architectural, for sure. However, street is usually done in urban environments. To disregard architecture is IMO disregarding an important element.
Why public space alone? Can street not be done in places that are not public (where you may or may not have permission to shoot)?
Criteria can be useful but IMO they need to be reviewed all the time. If not, they become stifling as they restrict creativity.
sleepyhead
Well-known
Having a set of Criteria, or whatever you want to call some set of personal standards or goals, is a good thing in my opinion.
I think that it's a sign of "maturity" as a photographer to throw away the vast majority of your photos as not meeting a certain standard.
For me, a photo I took either "works" or "doesn't work" for me and I usually know immediately, and the vast vast majority just don't cut it. For me, that makes the pleasure of taking one that works much more real and intense.
I believe that consistently taking good street photos is really difficult. This is one of the most challenging genres in photography I think.
I think that it's a sign of "maturity" as a photographer to throw away the vast majority of your photos as not meeting a certain standard.
For me, a photo I took either "works" or "doesn't work" for me and I usually know immediately, and the vast vast majority just don't cut it. For me, that makes the pleasure of taking one that works much more real and intense.
I believe that consistently taking good street photos is really difficult. This is one of the most challenging genres in photography I think.
Carzee
unpimp deine auto-kamera!
Um, I think I would gear up and venture into a street somewhere with some strategy of some kind -minimal or complex. Rarely will lady luck show up with a scene that catches your eye. You may grow old waiting for her.
Maybe your interest is People In Material Poverty or other hardships, obese people and the barriers they find, disabled, ethnic, whatever, wherever, whenever:
What Would a PJ Do?
'See a story and depict it as best you can' seems a simple enough plan for me.
Maybe your interest is People In Material Poverty or other hardships, obese people and the barriers they find, disabled, ethnic, whatever, wherever, whenever:
What Would a PJ Do?
'See a story and depict it as best you can' seems a simple enough plan for me.
Last edited:
V
varjag
Guest
Quite contrary, it happens all the timeCarzee said:
One just have to stay alert for it.EDIT: this is not to imply that one need not to have an idea about what he's trying to do.. just don't write off luck that easily.
Last edited by a moderator:
steve kessel
steve kessel
Like the original poster, I also throw away more and more. I started with a D-Lux 2, with all settings manual which slowed me down but made me make my own decisions. Now I'm using a Bessa R3-M with a 50mm lens and black and white film and find the process entirely different - much more measured, less anxious.
As far as subject matter is conerned, I find that criteria are constantly evolving. Right now, I look for situations - settings where some interesting action is more likely to happen than just people walking on the street (though that's plenty interesting in itself if one really looks) eg stations, markets, street theatre, and also architectural settings that provide well known backgrounds or varying points of view - like from above or below. I'm also curious about when people pass one another, the single combined shape they make.
The great thing about street photography is that one can make one's own rules and feel free to break them
As far as subject matter is conerned, I find that criteria are constantly evolving. Right now, I look for situations - settings where some interesting action is more likely to happen than just people walking on the street (though that's plenty interesting in itself if one really looks) eg stations, markets, street theatre, and also architectural settings that provide well known backgrounds or varying points of view - like from above or below. I'm also curious about when people pass one another, the single combined shape they make.
The great thing about street photography is that one can make one's own rules and feel free to break them
iml
Well-known
I think the secret to street photography is to forget all talk about "the decisive moment", as there rarely is a singular decisive moment. Just try to find interesting pictures, using the same criteria you would apply to any other subject.
Ian
Ian
steamer
Well-known
Agree with Ian. Forget about anguishing over philosophical and artistic criteria and the decisive moment etc. Just because you use a leica doesn't mean you are spawn of HCB or bound to emulate him. Perhaps a little more attention to another sainted leica user is called for:
"I don't have messages in my pictures ... The true business of photography is to capture a bit of reality (whatever that is) on film." "No one moment is most important. Any moment can be something."
Gary Winograd
"I don't have messages in my pictures ... The true business of photography is to capture a bit of reality (whatever that is) on film." "No one moment is most important. Any moment can be something."
Gary Winograd
Last edited:
MartinL
MartinL
Quite a little rant you've got going here. To make your point maybe you don't have to characterize a strong interest as "anguishing"; maybe it's presumptuous to suggest that one "forget" about that interest; maybe you overstate the authority you think some people feel from their Leica ownership.steamer said:
The Winograd quote adds to the discussion, and it's not inconsistent with anything I believe. By rejecting "messges" he does not reject meaning. Also, "capturing a bit of reality" does not imply that he is indiscriminate in deciding which bits of reality to keep; neither does he reject (in the quoted snippet) decision-making structures (criteria) for choosing and adding a bit of Winograd to his bits of reality.
IMO, this added value from the photo taker (which I unclearly referred to above as "motive")----this characteristic imprint of the artist----shows up in great photography whether or not any particular artist makes it explicit in an interview.
Martin
Iron Flatline
Guy in a Suit
Thanks MartinL for sharing your thoughts and feelings on the matter.