If a "street photographer" shoots a picture inside a building..

Some people play golf or tennis and others spend their time trying to determine what is and what is not street photography. I wish them well.
 
bmattock said:
I think public photography is apt. It involves subjects not requiring model releases or copyright licences to record, because it is taken in public. Indoors can be public, but often is not. Outdoors is almost always public but sometimes is not. So when I think of street photography, I typically think public photography.
Click to expand...
Actually, that's not bad...

"Street photography" and "candid photography" have baggage attached - some of it not looked on favourably in some quarters.

"Public" is a bit wide as that would include landscape photography. I photograph the streets but I'm only interested in the urban environment - people just get in my way: so, strictly I do "street photography" 'cos I photograph streets!

Perhaps "public urban portraiture"? <grin>

(Question: assuming street photography is documenting people in the urban landscape, what do you call exactly the same kind of photography when not in an urban setting, say on a busy hiking trail in a national park like Yellowstone?)
 
RichC said:
Actually, that's not bad...

"Street photography" and "candid photography" have baggage attached - some of it not looked on favourably in some quarters.

"Public" is a bit wide as that would include landscape photography. I photograph the streets but I'm only interested in the urban environment - people just get in my way: so, strictly I do "street photography" 'cos I photograph streets!

Perhaps "public urban portraiture"? <grin>

(Question: assuming street photography is documenting people in the urban landscape, what do you call exactly the same kind of photography when not in an urban setting, say on a busy hiking trail in a national park like Yellowstone?)
Click to expand...

Yes. We need more labels!

lol... (good stuff)
 
We have landscape photography for outdoor scenes of nature.
We have architectural photography for buildings.
We have portrait photography for studio close ups of faces.
We have war photography...and so on and so on.

Why is it "street photography" when you're not photographing streets? 99% of it is of people in various locations, parks, clubs, etc.

It should be called "Humanity Photography".
 
goamules said:
We have landscape photography for outdoor scenes of nature.
We have architectural photography for buildings.
We have portrait photography for studio close ups of faces.
We have war photography...and so on and so on.

Why is it "street photography" when you're not photographing streets? 99% of it is of people in various locations, parks, clubs, etc.

It should be called "Humanity Photography".
Click to expand...

Hmmm... good idea. Good call.
 
colker said:
Hmmm... good idea. Good call.
Click to expand...
Calling it by another name doesn't change its inherent nature. You are, of course, free to call it anything you want. Good luck with getting anyone to go along with you though. The term "street photography" has been generally accepted for decades, and is unlikely to change to suit some outlier based on muddled reasoning.
 
What about those of us who live in rural areas? We don't have streets; we have roads. There are no sidewalks, no street lights, and only two traffic lights, both in the only borough in 192 square miles. So what do we do? Is it road photography, cow and horse photography, or just whatever takes our fancy? If it's that, what do we call it?
 
ptpdprinter said:
Calling it by another name doesn't change its inherent nature. You are, of course, free to call it anything you want. Good luck with getting anyone to go along with you though. The term "street photography" has been generally accepted for decades, and is unlikely to change to suit some outlier based on muddled reasoning.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you were calling my logic above "muddled" or something earlier in this thread. But I welcome you to clarify.

No, I didn't really mean for anyone to change the term. I'm just logically pointing out "street" photography isn't photographing streets. All the other names I listed are more intuitive. Not so much with "street photography".
 
presspass said:
What about those of us who live in rural areas? We don't have streets; we have roads. There are no sidewalks, no street lights, and only two traffic lights, both in the only borough in 192 square miles. So what do we do? Is it road photography, cow and horse photography, or just whatever takes our fancy? If it's that, what do we call it?
Click to expand...
"Public non-urban photography"... :angel:
 
Presspass, exactly! It could have just as easily been called "City Photography" if it's things most think of: people doing things on sidewalks. But at a park? What if the park is having a concert? Isn't that "Concert Photography?" To most people, street photography means: unusual looking people, or Decisive Moments, done in heavily populated, urban areas.
 
goamules said:
Presspass, exactly! It could have just as easily been called "City Photography" if it's things most think of: people doing things on sidewalks. But at a park? What if the park is having a concert? Isn't that "Concert Photography?" To most people, street photography means: unusual looking people, or Decisive Moments, done in heavily populated, urban areas.
Click to expand...
Street photography is a broad genre. City photography, sidewalk photography, park photography, and concert photography would be narrower genres, if they rise to the level of genres.
 
"If crime fighters fight crime, and firefighters fight fire, what do freedom fighters fight?"
-George Carlin

A name is just a name. This fixation suggests some deeper issue. Go out and make some photographs.

Phil Forrest
 
Great idea, Phil. But I'm not sure I can handle the contempt if I don't categorize it properly. Maybe I'll create a new genre - photos I like.
 
If a "street photographer" shoots a picture inside a building and there is nobody there to hear it is it still bear5hit?
 
Labels are rarely affixed or controlled by the first person. If you make a photograph whose ultimate purpose is to be consumed, how can you expect to control the way people react to it?

Just get over it, yourself, and whatever your opinions are (because that's what they are ...opinions), and shoot more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom