I have stopped doing street photography

So youre saying youre done......?


Nh3 said:
[FONT=&quot]When I first started out, the idea of taking my camera on the street and photographing strangers without their permission was thrilling. It made me feel more courageous and extrovert, I also felt 'cool' because I knew that not a lot of people can do what I was doing.

I would bring the pictures home and admire them. The pictures were basically of what you might see normally on the street. Street performers, people walking about etc... But the more I photographed on the street the more uneasy I felt about it. First of all the pictures were boring and they were "so what pictures". Basically when you looked at them and asked, so what?, there would be no response within... Even the ones which I got the composition right was nothing special to me at least, because I was always more interested in the feel of a picture rather than its looks.

Finally it dawned on me that the whole street photography is great practice but it leads no where and in the end most of the pictures are clichéd and boring. And also another interesting fact was that a lot of the people that I see on the street I would not want to "bring home with me", so why the heck take their pictures...?

So, I got burned-out (posted a thread in rff about it) and stopped street photography. Instead I turned to landscape and wildlife (for recreation) and turned my focus to documentary work and working on projects which might take years. The only time that I would do street photography is if I'm photographing during a street festival otherwise I have totally stopped photography on the street as I used to.

To be honest with you, photographing birds and animals, especially in a contemplative and stalking mode is far more pleasing and a sheer joy than photographing people on the street. I would also take a beautiful landscape any day, especially when you have time to work with the view, and really give it thought... And of course my documentary work is also very satisfying because now I work with a theme and subject and the people simply fit into my overall view of the subject so its far more satisfying and challenging. It has also made me really pay more attention to technique and prepare really well because it feels more like work and I have to be at my best.

/This feel like a blog post but I thought I get it off my chest and see if people have had similar experiences or perhaps motivate those who might be bored with street photography.

P.S. the post which I made about personal street photography manifesto applies to my other work.
[/FONT]
Click to expand...
 
I've debated about this and here I'm back again - subjects we choose to photograph has connection with what we are and how we feel. When inner state changes, subjects one chooses most probably will also change. That's OK.
 
I have to admit, I sort of increasingly feel the same way. Partly because I recognize that I'm just not very good at 'street photography' conventionally conceived and, like quite a few people have written above, feel much more comfortable documenting an event or process. I've been extremely happy with photographs I've taken doing that sort of work, and consistently unhappy with most of the 'street' stuff I've taken.

It's what suits us, I suppose. I certainly know people who take street stuff, in the town where I live, whose work I really like. It clearly suits them.
 
Nh3 said:
[FONT=&quot]When I first started out, the idea of taking my camera on the street and photographing strangers without their permission was thrilling. It made me feel more courageous and extrovert, I also felt 'cool' because I knew that not a lot of people can do what I was doing.
Click to expand...


Who suggested to you that street photography involves taking photographs of strangers? Do like some of the masters did and set your shots up, using friends or hired models. Who cares if its authentic or not?
 
I agree too. I've been doing street photography for almost a year now, and I am tired of it. It's hard to get pictures that I care about, but every once and a while I get one. I've started to shoot more architecture again, and I mostly shot it when I originally picked up photography.
 
I guess it depends on what you call street photography. Sneaking picture of strangers made for lousy pictures when I did it, and they don't engage me when others do it.

Pictures of "street" scenes by some folk who are having fun seem to be more, um fun.
 
Nh3 said:
[FONT=&quot] . . . Finally it dawned on me that the whole street photography is great practice but it leads no where and in the end most of the pictures are clichéd and boring. And also another interesting fact was that a lot of the people that I see on the street I would not want to "bring home with me", so why the heck take their pictures...? . . .
[/FONT]
Click to expand...

I suppose it depends on your perspective and approach. I've met, and made connections with, people that I never would have met any other way. Last summer I watched some folks playing chess in Pioneer Sq in Portland, OR. Between games I asked if they'd mind if I took a few photos. I explained that the camera is quiet and shouldn't disturb them. They consented, so I pulled out my Crown Graphic. I got a few comments and some great shots, and I chatted with some interesting folks between matches.
 
I think learning about / trying good street-photography is useful because it encourages us to be observant... no, make it super-observant. And also potentially allow some of us to grow some confidence to interact with others in ways we normally wouldn't.

These are just a few of positive things I can name about this particular style.... despite the tendency to attract bombastic, cynics, know-it-all personalities :rolleyes:

(but every pursuit has its share of these, I guess :) )

So instead of turning your back totally on it, you could use these principles in your other photography pursuits. Genres are out there to help in explanation or discussions... or marketing, but they shouldn't restrict us in exploring and discovering.

I think the word I'm looking for is synthesis. You don't pigeon-hole yourself into a specific style, instead, come up with your own interpretation of how you see the world.

Cliche maybe, but true nonetheless.

Just something to think about.
 
Street Photography

Street Photography

The hard part to me is to go beyond a "catalog" of what's happening to something that stands as abstract or evokes emotion in the viewer. We all can't be HCB, Friedlander or Winograd, but I have seen some very good street on this site. One that struck me as achiving his own style was the user Benilam. Maybe I have the name wrong, but i can't seem to find his gallery. They were very good.
 
Another thought...

NH3, were you shooting this street as film or digital?

Perhaps the "time gap" from when you push the shutter to seeing the final image, which is long with film and immediate with digital has something to do with it. Maybe your mind's eye needs some time to process what you saw and then apply that to the neg. Film work forces you to do that, while with digital, you have to force yourself to do it.
 
Nearly every time I try to define or summarize "street photography," whether by accomplished photographers or relative newcomers like me, I find I have to revise what I've said or thought.

I can tell you why I'm out there snapping. To me the street is attractive, disturbing, sometimes beautiful, and frequently changing.

Sometimes the photos I like tell a story but more often they don't. And even when I look at my own photos -- the ones I've "kept," that is -- I've find I've kept them for different reasons.

But street photography is just one kind of photography. It's not inherently better or worse than any other kind of photography, it doesn't interest everyone, and not everyone enjoys it or wants to do it, which is fine.

Recently, at the suggestion of some more experienced street photographers, I've occasionally tried just paying more attention to the light and less to the action on the street.

2350631981_238c86d9a9_o.jpg
 
..."She treated me nicely and said something really interesting: 'don't be a shutterbug, young man,' she said. 'All these photographers with their 35 millimeter cameras go snap, snap, snap and can't get anything that way...You have to set something up and use a large negative so that you can get the detail.'"--Berenice Abbot, quoted by Allen Ginsberg in Snapshot Poetics
 
"snap, snap, snap ... " Funny quote attributed to Abbott. And I don't doubt she said it -- more than once:

http://www.able2know.org/forums/about9442.html

She was a great photographer, but accd'g to the above link, her work with the large view camera took its toll on her back in later years.

Moreover, while I suspect she might have been talking more about portraiture than street shooting ["You have to set something up ... "], I disagree with her for two reasons:

1. Modern gear allows you to capture quite a bit of detail with smaller cameras and lenses, whether film or digital.

2. For most street photos, the presence (or absence) of fine detail rarely makes or breaks the shot, in my opinion.
 
Michael S said:
Nearly every time I try to define or summarize "street photography," whether by accomplished photographers or relative newcomers like me, I find I have to revise what I've said or thought.

I can tell you why I'm out there snapping. To me the street is attractive, disturbing, sometimes beautiful, and frequently changing.

Sometimes the photos I like tell a story but more often they don't. And even when I look at my own photos -- the ones I've "kept," that is -- I've find I've kept them for different reasons.

But street photography is just one kind of photography. It's not inherently better or worse than any other kind of photography, it doesn't interest everyone, and not everyone enjoys it or wants to do it, which is fine.

Recently, at the suggestion of some more experienced street photographers, I've occasionally tried just paying more attention to the light and less to the action on the street.

2350631981_238c86d9a9_o.jpg
Click to expand...

You've made your point with that shot. Beautiful.

Harry
 
FYI, I only do wildlife and landscape for recreation. Those two genres of photography are extremely challenging and needs a larger budget, a lot of time and travel.
 
I take pictures of the places I go and the people I see. I don't particularly separate them into "genres" until after the fact. When I want a shot of the eagles near my parent's place, I go looking for one. But when I want a shot of the cafe on the corner with people out front, the bikes lined up, and the neon lit up, I go get a cup of coffee with my camera. Just like with the eagle, on the trip to get coffee I might carry a camera but don't always use it.

At some point, I'm convinced a person could go through my photography and see a lot of who I am. But plenty is still hidden. Although, if it is hidden from my contemporaries and from my descendents, does it even really exist? :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom