Engagement versus candidness on the street

[denizg7]

If you ask someone if you can take their picture or tell them to do something while you are taking their picture it ruins the whole thing...

Suppose to be a spontaneous unplanned shot of an action that cannot be done again by nature..

 

[Exdsc]

Trust your instincts and do whatever feels natural to you.

I think the most natural instinctual response by any sane person doing photography is, "what is the point of taking photos of random people on the streets?"

 

[ReeRay]

I prefer to just "get in amongst 'em and snap away"

M6 50 'Cron XP2



Sometimes I ask them to pose tho!

 

[jsrockit]

i wouldnt call the second part street photography.. decent picture nevertheless.

I would call it street photography...it happened on the street. It might not be candid, but street doesn't need to be candid. In the book "Street Photography Now", there is still life included. People's definition of street photography is generally way too rigid at times. Well, street photography, in its most rigid of categories, only exists on internet forums. Outside of that, people just go out and photograph.

 

[jsrockit]

If you ask someone if you can take their picture or tell them to do something while you are taking their picture it ruins the whole thing...

Suppose to be a spontaneous unplanned shot of an action that cannot be done again by nature..

No, that is one way of doing things... not the only way. Not to mention no photograph in a natural environment, even a still life, can be done again... exactly the same way.

 

[icebear]

I usually try not to engage verbally that doesn't mean a look can't tell anything. The tricky point is to capture the unposed, "natural look" of the individual.
To get the shot when they look at you, realize a picture will be taken but don't have enough time yet to switch "I'm being photographed" mode.

 

[mawilliams]

The way you approach your subject will have a lot of bearing on the image - if they are unknown to you, guarded, surprised, whatever...they will look that way on film - unless they are preoccupied doing something else.

I think of the film "The Wind That Shakes the Barley" by director Ken Loach (great film by the way!) In the bonus features on the DVD, Loach talks about how he coaxed natural performances out of the actors in crucial scenes by hiding the film cameras within the set and using longer lenses at times. This helped the actors to buy into the period the film was set in, and to "forget" the camera. Yes of course they knew they were being filmed, but the actors said it had a much different feel than most productions they had worked on. So we see how Loach was keenly aware of the way the presence of a camera affects people's behavior - even when they fully accept its presence.

But maybe "natural" is the goal - maybe not - the key thing is knowing that how we move, how we interact with the scene and people within it is as critical as framing, timing etc.. Sorta got to feel your way through it - I often find being first accepted by strangers in an area and having rapport with them - if only a little bit - pays huge dividends in more "natural" images, which for me is a goal, and the sooner I can drop into the background the better.

 

[reiki_]

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.

Well you can be not-candid and still it doesn't have to be "street" portrait. That's my two cents anyway I lean more to the HCSP aesthetics.

 

[BlackXList]

I greatly enjoy shooting candids, and I'd really like to improve my on the street engagement with people, and to be able to switch between the two,

I'd like to have both tools in my street shooting toolbox.

 

[Bob Michaels]

Examples of 1) complete non-verbal engagement 2) I realize you are there but ignoring you 3) totally unaware, or in this case "drank so much we don't even realize the flash is going off".

All shot one night at Po' Monkey's juke joint which is surrounded by a cotton field on a dirt road 4 miles outside of Merigold MS.

 

[rkm]

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.

These are the shots that made me start this thread a long time ago. I thought I should share them to round out the story.


Candid (He noticed me the moment I shot)

Engaged (post conversation, post him pulling a kitten from his trolley)

 

[steve kessel]

They work togethr as a story though the second is more powerful. Well done.

 

[tunalegs]

You know Norman Rockwell used to pose people in his studio to photograph for reference - and in a good deal of those photos the people look more candid than in most people's candid street shots.

 

[jsrockit]

Nothing wrong with a good pose. Too many people have too many rules in place before they are ready to abide by those rules.

 

[airfrogusmc]

I ask sometimes but most of the time I'm looking for a moment when the elements all come together.

Didn't engage on these

Did on these

 

[grapejohnson]

I ask sometimes but most of the time I'm looking for a moment when the elements all come together.

I love the one of the dual iphones, but the bottom ones have so much more depth and character IMO.

 

[airfrogusmc]

I love the one of the dual iphones, but the bottom ones have so much more depth and character IMO.

thanks.....