LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
But how do you communicate this with others who in general appreciate flowers, rainbows and kittens... who think that blur is no good, or tilted shots are weird. etc...
All your comments are appreciated, and I'm not here to start any ruckus... I want to find the best way to communicate this to people who at this time do not appreciate SP.
I completely agree with that...Its like my words...whatever others say there is a tendency in today's photography in macro, wildlife photography etc...I like street photography and I like interacting people with people in their daily lives. It is not only people that I take photos of but that is my favorite subject...
Today everybody loves to buy a macro lens and a SLR and starts shooting flowers kittens etc and they love to play in photoshop so that it looks so unreal that it becomes out of photography definition...How many times you saw unnecessarily sharpened child's portrait that it looks like an old person but people give tonnes of "wow"s...
Nevermind I think I talked too much
Merkin
For the Weekend
you can also plug in the connections to photojournalism, and use some of the more famous images from that genre.
ETA: Also, you can try to bring in comparisons to the photography they like. Point out that choosing the decisive moment is the same process as waiting for the light in landscape photography, except it happens in a much more compressed space of time. Point out the amazing amount of thought that can be given to composition in a very short time. Compare the skill required to grab that perfect position of bodies or looks on faces to grabbing effective shots of wildlife or bringing out the most flattering details in a wildflower. Get them to the point where they realize that street shooting isn't necessarily all that different than what they do, and then challenge them to take their varied skillsets and knowledge bases out in to the street to give it a try for themselves.
ETA: Also, you can try to bring in comparisons to the photography they like. Point out that choosing the decisive moment is the same process as waiting for the light in landscape photography, except it happens in a much more compressed space of time. Point out the amazing amount of thought that can be given to composition in a very short time. Compare the skill required to grab that perfect position of bodies or looks on faces to grabbing effective shots of wildlife or bringing out the most flattering details in a wildflower. Get them to the point where they realize that street shooting isn't necessarily all that different than what they do, and then challenge them to take their varied skillsets and knowledge bases out in to the street to give it a try for themselves.
Last edited:
Al Kaplan
Veteran
Stick a wide (the actual wide is not critical but you need to KNOW its coverage) lens, on your camera, take a wrap of neckstrap around your wrist, shove some film in it, get a handle on what exposure for the situation(s), and carry the camera everyplace. Taske pictures of whatever moves you and have the good sense to not take pictures of anything else. Some days you might not take picture number one. That's OK.
40oz
...
IMHO, I wouldn't start by showing pictures from famous photographers. By showing "generally accepted as good" shots and asking for impressions, you are setting people up to fail a test.
IMHO, most people think of a photographer as knowing what they are going to shoot when they pick up the camera. They have a "shoot" planned, and the subject is in mind from the get-go.
Street photography is not having any idea what you are going to shoot when you pick up the camera. It's walking around carrying the thing waiting for a shot. You might take a picture of a bus stop, then a storefront, then a group of kids playing soccer. It's not pre-planned, and entirely dependent on what happens in the world as it goes about it's business.
The significant factor to "street" photography to me is the uncertain nature of it. You might be walking through the woods looking for something to shoot, and that's "street" shooting IMHO. The main thing is you keep your eyes open for a scene you want to shoot. Without arranging anything ahead of time. You might ask a person to walk into the frame to make the shot, but unless you set it all up long before you picked up the camera that day, it's still street.
If it were me, I'd try to explain what I've just written, then show a handful of shots of my own to try to convey the point. That would be the time to share some shots I like by other photographers, regardless of fame or "generally accepted goodness."
I don't like the idea of asking people for impressions if it is seriously an introduction. Especially not before they've even been given an explanation. I think most people are "street" photographers more often then they think, they just don't know it. It takes a shift in perspective to see an unplanned shot as "art" instead of "not pretty" and "irrelevant/out of context."
IMHO, most people think of a photographer as knowing what they are going to shoot when they pick up the camera. They have a "shoot" planned, and the subject is in mind from the get-go.
Street photography is not having any idea what you are going to shoot when you pick up the camera. It's walking around carrying the thing waiting for a shot. You might take a picture of a bus stop, then a storefront, then a group of kids playing soccer. It's not pre-planned, and entirely dependent on what happens in the world as it goes about it's business.
The significant factor to "street" photography to me is the uncertain nature of it. You might be walking through the woods looking for something to shoot, and that's "street" shooting IMHO. The main thing is you keep your eyes open for a scene you want to shoot. Without arranging anything ahead of time. You might ask a person to walk into the frame to make the shot, but unless you set it all up long before you picked up the camera that day, it's still street.
If it were me, I'd try to explain what I've just written, then show a handful of shots of my own to try to convey the point. That would be the time to share some shots I like by other photographers, regardless of fame or "generally accepted goodness."
I don't like the idea of asking people for impressions if it is seriously an introduction. Especially not before they've even been given an explanation. I think most people are "street" photographers more often then they think, they just don't know it. It takes a shift in perspective to see an unplanned shot as "art" instead of "not pretty" and "irrelevant/out of context."
benlees
Well-known
The challenge of street is a cliche: making the mundane interesting. You can do this any number of ways. Use shadow, use the light of the early morning or an hour before dusk, find interesting people, funny moments, juxtapositions, on and on. In most street photography it is the scene/situation that is in the frame of your camera that is the subject, not the people. How much can you ever know about the life of a stranger in a photo? Next to nothing. But that is not really the point.
If you need special access then you are doing something like photojournalism.
If you need special access then you are doing something like photojournalism.
R
rpsawin
Guest
Incorporate random nudes...
Best regards,
Bob
Best regards,
Bob
marke
Well-known
Think of it the same as wildlife photography, except that you can get a lot closer to the animals and shoot in urban areas.
This brings up a significant reason why I moved from wildlife to street a couple years ago. I wanted to get closer to my subjects. There were times when I was able to do just that, like when I used a P&S on this guy. But I began to get bored with sitting outside of the action with a 500mm lens, and realized I wanted the challenge and excitement of being in the middle of the scene while I photographed with a 35mm lens, like this.
When I started in wildlife photography about 10 years ago, the last thing I wanted in my pictures were people. These days, people are the one thing I really want in my photos!
Thardy
Veteran
The challenge of street is a cliche: making the mundane interesting. You can do this any number of ways. Use shadow, use the light of the early morning or an hour before dusk, find interesting people, funny moments, juxtapositions, on and on. In most street photography it is the scene/situation that is in the frame of your camera that is the subject, not the people. How much can you ever know about the life of a stranger in a photo? Next to nothing. But that is not really the point.
If you need special access then you are doing something like photojournalism.
Here's what I think could be done concerning street. A previous post mentioned getting close to the subjects.
I mentioned that seeing the homeless and photos of them became boring. Why? No connection. Sure, I agree there has to be all those things you mentioned above.
Look at it this way, you go out and you take photos of the homeless, yes they are on the streets and quite pitiful, but most people either walk past them and gruffly say "get a job" or feel a sense of fleeting pity until the next thing captures their attention. That's just how it is on the streets of a big city.
But if you, the street shooter, get a little information about Jeremiah Jenkins "homeless guy" then you might have something of interest. He'd might tell you that he was released to the streets via deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill if he's not "too off in the head". One day he was enjoying three hots and a cot, the warmth of being indoors, clean clothes, etc. The next day he is free to go due to the hard fought efforts of an unknown to him entity fighting for his civil rights. How's that for irony?
What about rolling up on a group of young people behind New York's Bellevue Hospital, or Bronx Lebanon or Downstate Medical Center at 2AM. Bellevue is a big grimy city hospital that has a Psych and prison ward that everybody thinks of when the hear the name. The others are similar.
You might find them out there buying a sandwich and a Snapple from a vending truck of all places. That is their wind down ritual. You'd find out that they are physicians in training recalling a case about the guy with 5 gun shot wounds they just saved (Tupac Shakur), or the reporter for a major NYC newspaper who almost died during surgery from his injuries from a car crash while driving drunk on the freeway.
They'd brashly tell you that if those patients had been taken to a brand x hospital ( a cushy, pretty, suburban hospital) they'd be in a box now. (yeah the talk that way) Or they might tell you that they are scared that they won't find a job when they finish training due to the new administration's plan for health care reform (Clintons). All the while you're clicking away ... you got no special access other than being there. Then you'd have something, a street story. You would then know a little about them (folks, most people are dying to tell you a story) and the pictures are from the street to boot.
What about the pregnant lady with the stroller carrying a toddler trying to catch a train to NYC from NJ. She has a distressed look on her face and you find out that she's anxious that she won't get a seat because men always beat her to them. So she rides the train standing up for 40 minutes trying handle the toddler. But when she gets into the city, people will more than accommodate her on the subway trains going to her destination.
People in the mean city are nicer than suburbanites? You might also find out that she is concerned about childcare for the baby when he comes. Her maternity leave is 8 weeks but the day care won't take the baby until he is a least 12 weeks old. Of course you ask her if you can take her photo and she agrees. Again this is happening on the street.
Is this PJ, I don't know. You're certainly getting a story and pictures, but it does take only a tiny bit of time, it's on the streets ... but it's quality.
NathanJD
Well-known
Whichever way you look at it, street photography does one of 2 things – it either preserves a moment in time that you would have found interesting had you been there yourself or it captures the human beauty in a mundane, everyday moment or occurrence.
In as much, an appreciation of street photography requires an appreciation in the human condition. The difficulty comes when a photographer trained in all the rules which supposedly make a great still life or landscape image finds themselves faced with a capture of real life which may be blurred, or poorly framed or under exposed or any number of other silly little things and can’t help himself analysing the image like a Crufts judge analyses a dog.
so if you’re talking about photographers – unless they’ve seen the light like the members of this forum you’ll likely get the same wordless and blank response that I get if I paste my street photos onto digital photography forums where macros of bees and luminous red skies win ‘photo of the week’.
Rant over.
In as much, an appreciation of street photography requires an appreciation in the human condition. The difficulty comes when a photographer trained in all the rules which supposedly make a great still life or landscape image finds themselves faced with a capture of real life which may be blurred, or poorly framed or under exposed or any number of other silly little things and can’t help himself analysing the image like a Crufts judge analyses a dog.
so if you’re talking about photographers – unless they’ve seen the light like the members of this forum you’ll likely get the same wordless and blank response that I get if I paste my street photos onto digital photography forums where macros of bees and luminous red skies win ‘photo of the week’.
Rant over.
benlees
Well-known
Thardy, I agree with you partly, but I think we are talking about different things. If I understand it you are interested in the Magnum-type photojournalistic type process where the photographer themselves become involved with- or at the very least communicate, or even just acknowledge, the people they want in their photograph. No problem there. That is good stuff.
I am talking more of the end result of being out on the sidewalk. The photograph itself and whether it can stand on it own as a 'photograph' to other people; it need not tell a story (it can't!) nor even have a context that needs to be explained. Whatever makes the photo work is in the frames. There is no outside justifcation. This is what a good street photograph has, IMHO, and how it differs from journalistic point of view. Pretty difficult to do well.
I am talking more of the end result of being out on the sidewalk. The photograph itself and whether it can stand on it own as a 'photograph' to other people; it need not tell a story (it can't!) nor even have a context that needs to be explained. Whatever makes the photo work is in the frames. There is no outside justifcation. This is what a good street photograph has, IMHO, and how it differs from journalistic point of view. Pretty difficult to do well.
colker
Well-known
what is street photography? does it need a street? Bresson shot people in houses and against walls along w/ people on city streets.
the same can be said of JOel Meyerowitz.
there is no such thing as "street photography"as much as there is no such thing as "studio photographer" or "rangefinder photography".
there is good photography and bad photography. and then there is taste.
the same can be said of JOel Meyerowitz.
there is no such thing as "street photography"as much as there is no such thing as "studio photographer" or "rangefinder photography".
there is good photography and bad photography. and then there is taste.
Thardy
Veteran
Thardy, I agree with you partly, but I think we are talking about different things. If I understand it you are interested in the Magnum-type photojournalistic type process where the photographer themselves become involved with- or at the very least communicate, or even just acknowledge, the people they want in their photograph. No problem there. That is good stuff.
I am talking more of the end result of being out on the sidewalk. The photograph itself and whether it can stand on it own as a 'photograph' to other people; it need not tell a story (it can't!) nor even have a context that needs to be explained. Whatever makes the photo work is in the frames. There is no outside justifcation. This is what a good street photograph has, IMHO, and how it differs from journalistic point of view. Pretty difficult to do well.
I took a look around flickr and other sites looking for "street" and yes I think what I'm talking about is different. Heck i may have even done so "street" photos now that I think about it.
As they say, its all good to me.
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Put the boot on the other foot: imagine you were about to go and learn about photographing little fluffy cats! Now, make your talk on street photographing interesting and fast moving.
Start with photos they already know. Perhaps not know from a photography point of view but know from a popular culture point of view.
Show how a frozen moment can make us laugh, surprise us, show a truth, show emotion etc.
Be brisk.
Move forward to modern classics such as Martin Parr.
Sprinkle in some lesser-knowns such as Simon Lee (OurManInTangier at RFF).
Don't dwell on composition, lighting, exposure and so on. In street photography it's really only the subject that matters.
Be ready to explain (quickly) that street photography is neither candid photography or photo journalism if they raise those red herrings.
If the discussion moves into equipment and technique be ready to say that although many people have used medium format and large format cameras that 35mm cameras with small lenses are generally considered best-suited, and that a fair degree of pre-planning is needed inasmuch as setting exposure and focussing beforehand so you don't miss the photo.
Enjoy the evening, and let your enthusiasm bubble through.
Good luck - although they'll all likely go home and photograph a vase of flowers!
Start with photos they already know. Perhaps not know from a photography point of view but know from a popular culture point of view.
Show how a frozen moment can make us laugh, surprise us, show a truth, show emotion etc.
Be brisk.
Move forward to modern classics such as Martin Parr.
Sprinkle in some lesser-knowns such as Simon Lee (OurManInTangier at RFF).
Don't dwell on composition, lighting, exposure and so on. In street photography it's really only the subject that matters.
Be ready to explain (quickly) that street photography is neither candid photography or photo journalism if they raise those red herrings.
If the discussion moves into equipment and technique be ready to say that although many people have used medium format and large format cameras that 35mm cameras with small lenses are generally considered best-suited, and that a fair degree of pre-planning is needed inasmuch as setting exposure and focussing beforehand so you don't miss the photo.
Enjoy the evening, and let your enthusiasm bubble through.
Good luck - although they'll all likely go home and photograph a vase of flowers!
Last edited:
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
An afterthought about where we can do 'street' photography.
It does not have to be in the street as such, try...
Fairground
Park
Shopping Mall
Train Station
Covered Market
Sports Event
Supermarket
Parade
Cafe Bar
Car Park
Theme Park
and so on.
It does not have to be in the street as such, try...
Fairground
Park
Shopping Mall
Train Station
Covered Market
Sports Event
Supermarket
Parade
Cafe Bar
Car Park
Theme Park
and so on.
Last edited:
sjw617
Panoramist
Most of the moments in time preserved by street shooters are boring to people who were not there and do not have the shooters perspective.Whichever way you look at it, street photography does one of 2 things – it either preserves a moment in time that you would have found interesting had you been there yourself or it captures the human beauty in a mundane, everyday moment or occurrence.
In as much, an appreciation of street photography requires an appreciation in the human condition. The difficulty comes when a photographer trained in all the rules which supposedly make a great still life or landscape image finds themselves faced with a capture of real life which may be blurred, or poorly framed or under exposed or any number of other silly little things and can’t help himself analysing the image like a Crufts judge analyses a dog.
If an image is blurred, poorly framed or badly exposed why would you show it or post it on a website? Many people will blow off such an image as boring, amateurish or even flat out bad. And these are not "silly little things" but the basis of your photo.
Steve
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Most of the moments in time preserved by street shooters are boring to people who were not there and do not have the shooters perspective.
If an image is blurred, poorly framed or badly exposed why would you show it or post it on a website? Many people will blow off such an image as boring, amateurish or even flat out bad. And these are not "silly little things" but the basis of your photo.
True, if we're talking of a person with a camera who wanders down a main street and photographs everythig.
Not true, if we're talking of a person who pre-plans to a certain degree, and knows what works and what doesn't work and is prepared to wait for the photo.
MartinL
MartinL
True, if we're talking of a person with a camera who wanders down a main street and photographs everythig.
Not true, if we're talking of a person who pre-plans to a certain degree, and knows what works and what doesn't work and is prepared to wait for the photo.
I agree, and I have no solution for scanning and rejecting for further inspection most photos I come across. The risk, and my loss, is that I miss seeing a lot of good work because of my (necessarily) hasty judgments.
IMO, the best photographers are also the best editors. But until most of get a little higher on that learning curve, I think it's fair to ask the photographer (and helpful to understand oneself), "Why are you showing me this photo?" Why should I look at it? I won't judge the reason, but I'd love to know. (Because I want to share my photo skills, my lens, etc; because it's your grandson, dad; because it's a gorgeous mountain; the responses are no doubt endless.)
Further, knowing in advance the "point" of an experience can be useful pedagogy.
Let me try it. A late winter thaw in NYC and a walk through SoHo. M8 with new Leica Elmarit 28/2.8 asph hanging at waist level, guessing focus between 2 and 3m. A few of maybe 30 snaps seem to tell me stories; that is, I think I know (make up) a lot more about what is captured than is justified or verifiable. These represent for me the satisfaction "doing" of street photography. I'm showing them to you because they are yesterday's combination of wandering down the street, preparation, and editing. I'm also trying out new web photo-hosting sites.
Feedback welcomed
http://www.zenfolio.com/MartinL/p422132506/home.aspx
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
MartinL: I understand what you're saying; it resonates with my own way of working. However I didn't see your photos as ZenFolio requires that I create an account just to look at your photos, and I have way too many accounts already all over the place. I'm sorry.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Off mainline SP takes some understanding and education about the genre. I think you can teach someone to appreciate it, but I think it needs to start with the easier to understand notables, such as Kertesz, HCB, Erwitt -- the Magnum set. Going to exhibitions helps.
For instance, it took me a while to grapple with Alex Soth' and Diane Arbus' photography. Soth's photos are huge and I didn't know what to make of them. Arbus? How does one interpret? Some photos one has to appreciate the processes -- such as, platinum and dye-transfers. The art form is pretty interesting beyond the pretty pictures.
For instance, it took me a while to grapple with Alex Soth' and Diane Arbus' photography. Soth's photos are huge and I didn't know what to make of them. Arbus? How does one interpret? Some photos one has to appreciate the processes -- such as, platinum and dye-transfers. The art form is pretty interesting beyond the pretty pictures.
MartinL
MartinL
You answered one of my questions for me: every couple of years I think about changing photo-hosting from Pbase. I guess I'll stick with Pbase. Here's the 5 photos.MartinL: I understand what you're saying; it resonates with my own way of working. However I didn't see your photos as ZenFolio requires that I create an account just to look at your photos, and I have way too many accounts already all over the place. I'm sorry.
http://www.pbase.com/mnl/09-03-07_soho
Share:
-
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.