Engagement versus candidness on the street

R

rkm

Well-known
Local time
4:20 PM
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Messages
252
View My Gallery
Yesterday I took some photos at the local train station. Some were of people congregating in a bus shelter, from a distance.

From closer up there was an elderly gentleman sitting on a bench who looked a bit worried. He saw me take a shot of him, and he engaged me in conversation. He pulled a kitten from his little two wheel 'old lady' shopping cart and explained that he lived in a one bedroom flat and his cat had five kittens, and couldn't look after them all. I had no solution for his problem, but after talking to him for a while I asked if I could have a photo of him with his kitten. He obliged.

I haven't developed the film yet, but there'll be two shots, one I took before and one after our conversation. I wonder which will be better? I'm guessing the one with the kitten, as I've got a story to go with it.

It got me thinking about how I should move forward with street photography (if you can call it that). Candid shots have a truth about them, but it can sometimes feel like you're taking something that doesn't belong to you. Alternately, having engaged this gentleman and taken another shot, I felt legitimized momentarily because I had heard his story. But what good is that, if my motive was only to find a story, without extending any real help to him. Perhaps being a passive observer is better then?

I'm not saying one mode of photography is better than another. I'm just trying to work out why I'm doing what I'm doing, and am curious about everyone else's experience.
 
i normally don't engage but there are times when i do.
i enjoy those times for the most part but it's usually the other person that initiates...i'm not exactly the shy type but it's not in my nature to chat up strangers...
i'm curious to see your shots...
 
They'll probably be rubbish, but will post them soon. Just got all my developing stuff, and will be doing this all for the first time.
 
Do you steal part of their soul or have them give it to you voluntarily ? I would hazard a guess that the candid shots are more natural but less happy ? About 4 years ago I asked an old man who I knew well if I could take some photos of him at work. He was the town window cleaner and a great character. He refused and I had not stolen a shot so I respected his wish. Further to this story, he has since suffered a stroke and will never work again. Part of me wishes I had shot first and asked later.
 
denizg7 said:
i wouldnt call the second part street photography.. decent picture nevertheless.
Click to expand...

It may or may not be decent... I'll see I guess.

And it probably isn't street photography. Maybe it needs another moniker... Like... Portraiture in the wild... Or something.
 
John Bragg said:
Do you steal part of their soul or have them give it to you voluntarily ? I would hazard a guess that the candid shots are more natural but less happy ? About 4 years ago I asked an old man who I knew well if I could take some photos of him at work. He was the town window cleaner and a great character. He refused and I had not stolen a shot so I respected his wish. Further to this story, he has since suffered a stroke and will never work again. Part of me wishes I had shot first and asked later.
Click to expand...

Shoot first, ask later then...

Maybe even if people object, it will be less strenuously so in the course of time.
 
Street photography is like taking pictures in a theater. You have to be quick, therefore there is no point and no time to ask for permissions.
Regardless of whether hou had the guy's permission or not, the better picture will be the one more interesting to look at, that's it. Only you will know the story behind it.
 
My street shots are really all candid by and large, I prefer it that way. Then again I also enjoy doing some street portrait work, for which I often engage and then snap away.

Street portrait example after a nice conversation:
7907263806_9a5af06442_c_d.jpg
 
But if we get away from defining what is and isn't "street photography", are there some who prefer to engage their subject directly?
 
The candidness is the reason why most street photography is boring. Mostly no emotions shown, people are turned from people to elements/parts of the street landscape.

Maybe that is why there are so many street photographs of people living on the street, their poverty give give us the emotions needed to get past boring?
 
There's a really "scientific" book that explores the concept of street photography, from Atget to Cartier Bresson (Clive Scott) that I started reading a while back. It's 220 pages long with a vey academic methodology. I got through a third of it as I found it quite a heavy read for a commuting, so I may give it another go soon. It has a huge value where it corresponds photography, with literature, with paintings, with historical contexts, etc. etc. Hopefully the rest of the book is a bit more engaging.

Speaking of engagement, I hold that once you are acknowledged, engaged, or otherwise become noticed by the scene, you yourself become a secondary subject within it. Fascinating really, you're in the picture, without being in the picture!

If you go up, strike a conversation with somebody on the street, then take their photo, I'd classify it as a portrait (street or otherwise). There's some really outstanding work done this way.

This is one of my favorites, and it's not something I do often. Don't speak burmese so, smiled, pointed to the camera, raised my eyebrows. He nodded, looked at the lens, click, smiled back, went on with my day. Now his soul is mine forever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!😉

U35930I1353749597.SEQ.0.jpg
 
The only problem with street portraits is that they don't work, they are mostly a bad portrait or a bad street photograph. Not necessarily "bad" but, you know, it just doesn't have that quality we all look for but can't name in a great street photograph.
 
reiki_ said:
The only problem with street portraits is that they don't work, they are mostly a bad portrait or a bad street photograph. Not necessarily "bad" but, you know, it just doesn't have that quality we all look for but can't name in a great street photograph.
Click to expand...

I disagree, I feel like most candid street shots are aimless and don't say much. Bresson shot half-rolls of the same people to get the right shot, I don't think he (or a lot of other street shooters) are always the "invisible cameramen" (or women) we imagine them to be.
Out of all the pictures I've taken, the ones where I got quick permission (such as Bonatto described) have given me much more intense, interesting results than when I snapped a quick one when the moment was right.
Granted, my favorite picture I've ever taken was without permission, so there are exceptions to everything.
 
We each have our style but I engage the subject most of the time. The shots are much more personal and not just objects in a situation although those shots can be good sometimes. I personally like to know something about the person. I tell people I don't think Ive ever met a person that didn't have an interesting story about themselves. Most folks love to talk about themselves and if you show genuine interest and take the time with them you can get some fantastic images. On the other hand the candid shot can be dynamic if all elements come together. Candid success depends on the random elements coming together to make a great image at just the right moment. Engaging the subject takes many of the random elements and puts them in your control.
 
Trust your instincts and do whatever feels natural to you. Over time you will figure out what the best way of working is for you!
 
I just stand there and take photos, people don't seem to notice me ... I would and do chat to them if they do, but it seldom happens.

I know other photographers who seem to always end up talking to their subjects ... mind it's girls usually
 
rohankent said:
Yesterday I took some photos at the local train station. Some were of people congregating in a bus shelter, from a distance.

From closer up there was an elderly gentleman sitting on a bench who looked a bit worried. He saw me take a shot of him, and he engaged me in conversation. He pulled a kitten from his little two wheel 'old lady' shopping cart and explained that he lived in a one bedroom flat and his cat had five kittens, and couldn't look after them all. I had no solution for his problem, but after talking to him for a while I asked if I could have a photo of him with his kitten. He obliged.

I haven't developed the film yet, but there'll be two shots, one I took before and one after our conversation. I wonder which will be better? I'm guessing the one with the kitten, as I've got a story to go with it.

It got me thinking about how I should move forward with street photography (if you can call it that). Candid shots have a truth about them, but it can sometimes feel like you're taking something that doesn't belong to you. Alternately, having engaged this gentleman and taken another shot, I felt legitimized momentarily because I had heard his story. But what good is that, if my motive was only to find a story, without extending any real help to him. Perhaps being a passive observer is better then?

I'm not saying one mode of photography is better than another. I'm just trying to work out why I'm doing what I'm doing, and am curious about everyone else's experience.
Click to expand...

You can easily find the answer by reflecting up on what sort of person you're. Do you enjoy talking with people, find it easy to talk and approach people or the opposite. In case it was the opposite, if you force yourself to talk to people and approach them, it will result in awkward situations and that will discourage you from street photography.

But the more important question is why do you want to photograph people on the streets? Do you have a deep interest in people on the streets, or street photography is sort of like the default genre for everyone with a camera?

Find a good reason first before photographing people on the streets or any other subject, the rest will fall into place naturally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom