35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
I would agree with this statement, with the caveat that masters are much more consistent and generally have a better vision of where they are going with their work, ie, a mismash body of work won't get published.
Is street photography difficult?
- Thread starter knodd
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 45
- Views 6K
I would agree with this statement, with the caveat that masters are much more consistent and generally have a better vision of where they are going with their work, ie, a mismash body of work won't get published.
Ray Nalley
Well-known
A lot of street shooters treat their cameras like a shotgun filled with #8 birdshot. They aim in the general direction of stuff and hope to hit something. The problem is that even with a shotgun and a sky full of ducks, unless you aim at a specific duck, you are rarely going to hit anything.
The thing that makes street photography even harder than shooting ducks with a shotgun is that those other birds surrounding that duck on the street are not other ducks but a bunch of buzzards! When I shoot street, I come home with a lot more buzzards than ducks. 🙂
The thing that makes street photography even harder than shooting ducks with a shotgun is that those other birds surrounding that duck on the street are not other ducks but a bunch of buzzards! When I shoot street, I come home with a lot more buzzards than ducks. 🙂
jky
Well-known
The topic is street photography so it's obvious I'm referring to the topic of the thread. Creativity applies regardless of the genre so yes there are a lot of boring landscapes and portraits....🙂
I've taken plenty of "crossing the street" shots, but none like this for example (Willy Ronis):
M4streetshooter
Tourist Thru Life
It's like anything else in life. Grab your camera and walk around looking for a part of yourself. Try to capture the piece, then if the viewer learns something about you, the way you think or what your feeling...it's a good image....it's all about trying to find yourself in your work.
If your not connecting with yourself out there.....go paint houses...but I kinda feel that if your out there...you'll find some missing pieces of you...
If ya ever get to Philly, I'll help ya look....shooter
If your not connecting with yourself out there.....go paint houses...but I kinda feel that if your out there...you'll find some missing pieces of you...
If ya ever get to Philly, I'll help ya look....shooter
R
ruben
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruben
....Over the pages of the Weekly Picks you will find some outstanding photographs, not an inch less good than the best ever produced.
Cheers,
Ruben
I admit not being the best referee about our Weekly Picks, since I belong there to the biggest fans of our RFF photographers.
I would almost agree with you about the "mishmash" if I was given the opportunity to see the diregarded images of the masters. Here at RFF we are amateurs and perhaps for this we dare to try showing images that pros would disregard automatically, and not show.
Nevertheless, I insist on the main. Some of the images displayed along the pages of the Weekly Picks are not an inch less good than those we atribute to the biggest photographers of all times. Of course this is very much a personal evaluation.
And, what attracts me more in those outstanding street images among those shown at the Weekly Picks, is that they display street photography today, with today's people and today's cities, making the whole concept of street photography actual and shining.
Of course, we have seen there timeless exceptions too.
We are a valuable-for-photography bunch of folks.
Cheers,
Ruben
Originally Posted by ruben
....Over the pages of the Weekly Picks you will find some outstanding photographs, not an inch less good than the best ever produced.
Cheers,
Ruben
I admit not being the best referee about our Weekly Picks, since I belong there to the biggest fans of our RFF photographers.
I would almost agree with you about the "mishmash" if I was given the opportunity to see the diregarded images of the masters. Here at RFF we are amateurs and perhaps for this we dare to try showing images that pros would disregard automatically, and not show.
Nevertheless, I insist on the main. Some of the images displayed along the pages of the Weekly Picks are not an inch less good than those we atribute to the biggest photographers of all times. Of course this is very much a personal evaluation.
And, what attracts me more in those outstanding street images among those shown at the Weekly Picks, is that they display street photography today, with today's people and today's cities, making the whole concept of street photography actual and shining.
Of course, we have seen there timeless exceptions too.
We are a valuable-for-photography bunch of folks.
Cheers,
Ruben
Last edited by a moderator:
Bingley
Veteran
The fun of street photography for me is precisely its difficulty: to try to make a good photo out of a situation in which I have very little (if any) control over the subject, and am working outside (sometimes far outside) of my comfort zone.
le vrai rdu
Well-known
Its difficult but so funny, imho it is nothing to do with performance (always wanting to be nearer, hip shots etc) just let people "play" with light, try catch therer gaze, let them be themselves with dignity and it become interesting 🙂
If you can, speak to them, it's always interesting the way they react 🙂
If you can, speak to them, it's always interesting the way they react 🙂
40oz
...
Considering you are not able to control lighting, location, or subject, *YES*, obviously street photography is more challenging than working with models. 🙂
And that, along with what others have said, is why I prefer it. It's social, a conversation starter, something to do when you are broke and bored, etc. It also allows me to look back and see where I've been and what things were like then. I'm not that old, but the pictures I've taken are more for my own pleasure than to show off what I can do with a camera. I enjoy sharing them, but I'm not shocked to learn some of my shots are not very interesting to other people lol. I am, however, constantly amazed at the fact that other people seem to like what I kind of like.
Last edited:
40oz
...
So you are saying the difference between "the masters" and the rest of us is "the masters" never let us see their junk shots? 🙂
pfoto
Well-known
Not the only difference, but it's a factor. Josef Koudelka got upset at some of the images that were in the HCB exhibit "Scrapbook" last year, and David Allan Harvey wrote about it in his blog. I saw Scrapbook and was pretty surprised at the quality level. Part of the issue was that a brilliant Martin Munkacsi exhibition was running concurrently at the ICP. In retrospect when I later read Harvey's blog I had some sympathy with Koudelka's point, because some of the HCB stuff was poor.
Harvey's blog on a place in history: http://davidalanharvey.typepad.com/road_trip/2007/03/a_place_in_hist.html
Harvey's blog on a place in history: http://davidalanharvey.typepad.com/road_trip/2007/03/a_place_in_hist.html
lorenbliss
Member
I really should be working on my book but...
I really should be working on my book but...
Comparing fashion photography to street photography is like comparing hardtack and gingerbread: about all they have in common is that they both contain flour.
As to street photography itself, my own opinion (and what I used to say to my students) is that purpose should always dictate approach.
For example, some street photography is the quest, a la Cartier-Bresson (who to me will always be the ultimate street photographer), for the "decisive moment." Other street photography -- including several specific assignments I shot years ago for various editors and/or clients -- is intended to capture the visual flavor of a neighborhood or a specific event. My own purpose in street photography is (and always has been) accurate portrayal of the random wretchedness inflicted by capitalism: hence my best street photographs are focused accordingly.
Several such images were part of my portfolio and thus survived the fire that destroyed most of my work 25 years ago. From 1965 until 1983, almost everywhere I went I carried a camera, initially a VT Canon, later typically but not always an M Leica (which after the long post-fire hiatus I have begun doing again) -- and about a dozen of my older images are even (badly) scanned into the "my pictures" file on this computer.
I tried to post a few examples here -- some assigned work, others the byproduct of merely walking in Manhattan -- but I have no idea how to make the images larger than the one example below; this is knowledge the FAQ apparently assumes we already have. As a result, the critical details of the other photos were lost in their smallness, so I gave up on everything but the picture of the gentleman demonstrating the principle of profit.
Alas, my ignorance of computer technology -- especially as it applies to photography -- is total, complete and (since I can't afford the time or money to go back to college for a couple of years), probably permanent. So I'm truly sorry I have no way to exhibit additional examples; it is profoundly frustrating. Though I understand mechanics (Newtonian or applied) almost intuitively -- logic alone is usually sufficient for me to diagnose a malfunctioning machine (and when the need arises, either to make effective repairs or recognize the need for summoning a specialist), the digital realm remains impossibly alien to me, infinitely beyond reach of the visualization process at the core of my comprehension of the world around me. Indeed it is only a few weeks ago I (finally) figured out how to transmit photos by e-mail, and perhaps a third of those don't go through on the first try.
That said -- having proven myself a total technomoron -- I find that having re-embraced photography, I have also re-embraced street photography, albeit with a couple of important qualms:
(1)-I now reside in Washington state, where street photographers can be sued for invasion of privacy and even physically assaulted, and where there is an opinion -- especially strong in the Seattle area and at least partially upheld in court -- that taking someone's picture without permission is tantamount to assault or at least "fighting words," and is thus subject to retaliation both physical and judicial. As a consequence, local editors will not publish street pictures unless they are accompanied by model releases, which mandates a pre-photo interaction with the subject(s) that nullifies the entire unposed slice-of-life purpose of street photography.
(2)-Cameras are thug magnets under the best of circumstances, and given that the ultimate identity of an elderly person in the urban United States is increasingly "prey," the hazards are multiplied geometrically.
Nevertheless...
I really should be working on my book but...
Comparing fashion photography to street photography is like comparing hardtack and gingerbread: about all they have in common is that they both contain flour.
As to street photography itself, my own opinion (and what I used to say to my students) is that purpose should always dictate approach.
For example, some street photography is the quest, a la Cartier-Bresson (who to me will always be the ultimate street photographer), for the "decisive moment." Other street photography -- including several specific assignments I shot years ago for various editors and/or clients -- is intended to capture the visual flavor of a neighborhood or a specific event. My own purpose in street photography is (and always has been) accurate portrayal of the random wretchedness inflicted by capitalism: hence my best street photographs are focused accordingly.
Several such images were part of my portfolio and thus survived the fire that destroyed most of my work 25 years ago. From 1965 until 1983, almost everywhere I went I carried a camera, initially a VT Canon, later typically but not always an M Leica (which after the long post-fire hiatus I have begun doing again) -- and about a dozen of my older images are even (badly) scanned into the "my pictures" file on this computer.
I tried to post a few examples here -- some assigned work, others the byproduct of merely walking in Manhattan -- but I have no idea how to make the images larger than the one example below; this is knowledge the FAQ apparently assumes we already have. As a result, the critical details of the other photos were lost in their smallness, so I gave up on everything but the picture of the gentleman demonstrating the principle of profit.
Alas, my ignorance of computer technology -- especially as it applies to photography -- is total, complete and (since I can't afford the time or money to go back to college for a couple of years), probably permanent. So I'm truly sorry I have no way to exhibit additional examples; it is profoundly frustrating. Though I understand mechanics (Newtonian or applied) almost intuitively -- logic alone is usually sufficient for me to diagnose a malfunctioning machine (and when the need arises, either to make effective repairs or recognize the need for summoning a specialist), the digital realm remains impossibly alien to me, infinitely beyond reach of the visualization process at the core of my comprehension of the world around me. Indeed it is only a few weeks ago I (finally) figured out how to transmit photos by e-mail, and perhaps a third of those don't go through on the first try.
That said -- having proven myself a total technomoron -- I find that having re-embraced photography, I have also re-embraced street photography, albeit with a couple of important qualms:
(1)-I now reside in Washington state, where street photographers can be sued for invasion of privacy and even physically assaulted, and where there is an opinion -- especially strong in the Seattle area and at least partially upheld in court -- that taking someone's picture without permission is tantamount to assault or at least "fighting words," and is thus subject to retaliation both physical and judicial. As a consequence, local editors will not publish street pictures unless they are accompanied by model releases, which mandates a pre-photo interaction with the subject(s) that nullifies the entire unposed slice-of-life purpose of street photography.
(2)-Cameras are thug magnets under the best of circumstances, and given that the ultimate identity of an elderly person in the urban United States is increasingly "prey," the hazards are multiplied geometrically.
Nevertheless...
Attachments
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
yes, this is true.
we need to be objective and less emotional about our work. set it aside for a while. most of us don't match what Ralph Gibson throws away.
Igor.Burshteyn
Well-known
for me street photography is difficult. It's about overcoming personal shyness to intervene in other people's personal space. For me it's internal conflict. Last Saturday I wandered around Jerusalem Old City and took with me 300mm f2.8 optics (along others) - just in order to be able to shoot from the distance. I didn't get any keeper from 300mm. Shots from distance immediately loose that something - contact with subject maybe. So I am left with my internal conflict - if I want keepers I go close-up and personal. Next, street photography is easily spoiled with bad technics - very little time to react on situation. And last but not the least - originality. Work of masters tell stories. Most of our work is - err, just that, photos.
Still, I enjoy street photography 🙂
Still, I enjoy street photography 🙂
Attachments
lorenbliss
Member
In the frustrating struggle with computer technology -- frustrating because my sense I am always losing, never even breaking even -- I completely lost track of the other point I was about to make about street photography: that I don't think of it as "easy" or "difficult" -- that these considerations never enter into my thinking about the act of photographing.
I'm not even sure I can describe my mental state beyond saying that in some instances I'm more aware of the technical considerations, in other instances less, and that (something I realized in perhaps my 26th year), just as writing is an expression of my intellect, so is photography an expression of my passion. Thus I can't really answer this thread's basic question: is street photography hard? Is it easy? I don't know; it is merely something I do.
As to comparing our individual work with the work of the so-called greats, we should never forget that -- especially under capitalism -- "greatness" is ultimately a synonym for recognition, which in turn is mostly a matter of influence and connections: members of the working class -- unless they have remarkable good luck -- need not apply; the socioeconomic barriers that segregate our society generally do not allow working-class people social access to the circles that determine whether one is "great" or not.
And even among the well-connected, there can be huge barriers to "greatness." One classic example is the case of Gerda Taro: but for the fact she was Robert Capa's lover, her work would have been lost forever. Another example is to be found in the fact most of the "great" photographs attributed to Matthew Brady were in fact made by his assistants -- most of their identities lost forever to time and Brady's ego.
There is also something that was a common axiom amongst photographers in Manhattan during the 1960s: "Everybody's ten-minute effort looks about the same." In other words, the act of photographing is ultimately an act of understanding. At first we all see the same details -- but then the Zen sets in, the process goes beyond words and conceptualizations and becomes an encounter with essence and nuance. At its very best, the result is the music of light captured in silver: why the photographer, whether wittingly or not, is craft-kin to the legendary silversmiths of pagan Europe, whose patroness and guardian was the Muse herself.
I think what street photography requires more than anything else is a Zen state of at-oneness with your equipment combined with an instinctive sense of light and a complete understanding of zone-focusing combined with the ability to quickly readjust or refocus as necessary. Depth-of-field scales are particularly useful; so is the knowledge that, in sunlight, there is always two stops difference between light and shadow. Lastly there is the matter of equipment: does it help you make better pictures? (My choice of M Leicas is based entirely on my long-ago realization they are the best tool for the kind of work I do.)
Here are three images grabbed during demonstrations that, while not technically "street photographs," nevertheless demanded all the skills of the street photographer. The central image I know will show well here; I hope too many details are not lost to smallness in the other two:
I'm not even sure I can describe my mental state beyond saying that in some instances I'm more aware of the technical considerations, in other instances less, and that (something I realized in perhaps my 26th year), just as writing is an expression of my intellect, so is photography an expression of my passion. Thus I can't really answer this thread's basic question: is street photography hard? Is it easy? I don't know; it is merely something I do.
As to comparing our individual work with the work of the so-called greats, we should never forget that -- especially under capitalism -- "greatness" is ultimately a synonym for recognition, which in turn is mostly a matter of influence and connections: members of the working class -- unless they have remarkable good luck -- need not apply; the socioeconomic barriers that segregate our society generally do not allow working-class people social access to the circles that determine whether one is "great" or not.
And even among the well-connected, there can be huge barriers to "greatness." One classic example is the case of Gerda Taro: but for the fact she was Robert Capa's lover, her work would have been lost forever. Another example is to be found in the fact most of the "great" photographs attributed to Matthew Brady were in fact made by his assistants -- most of their identities lost forever to time and Brady's ego.
There is also something that was a common axiom amongst photographers in Manhattan during the 1960s: "Everybody's ten-minute effort looks about the same." In other words, the act of photographing is ultimately an act of understanding. At first we all see the same details -- but then the Zen sets in, the process goes beyond words and conceptualizations and becomes an encounter with essence and nuance. At its very best, the result is the music of light captured in silver: why the photographer, whether wittingly or not, is craft-kin to the legendary silversmiths of pagan Europe, whose patroness and guardian was the Muse herself.
I think what street photography requires more than anything else is a Zen state of at-oneness with your equipment combined with an instinctive sense of light and a complete understanding of zone-focusing combined with the ability to quickly readjust or refocus as necessary. Depth-of-field scales are particularly useful; so is the knowledge that, in sunlight, there is always two stops difference between light and shadow. Lastly there is the matter of equipment: does it help you make better pictures? (My choice of M Leicas is based entirely on my long-ago realization they are the best tool for the kind of work I do.)
Here are three images grabbed during demonstrations that, while not technically "street photographs," nevertheless demanded all the skills of the street photographer. The central image I know will show well here; I hope too many details are not lost to smallness in the other two:
Attachments
Last edited:
Igor.Burshteyn
Well-known
Loren, I like your definition for greatness.
R
ruben
Guest
I feel almost the need to apologize for reviving this thread, but I am under the very strong effect of a TV movie, "I am your man" - an autobiographic story by Leonard Cohen, in which he speaks quite few sentences, but of great artistic sense, which puts this thread and its starting question under a very interesting perspective
Perhaps the most striking common denominator on what the old aged Leonard Cohen has to say about himself is his deep humbliness. You hear him between the lines as if he was saying Poetry, Art, Life are great. Not me, I have been just a lucky guy.
What a great contrast between how LC speaks about himself and how HCB speaks about himself, if you take for example that UTUBE interview. HCB seen under LC light looks frankly ridiculous.
It seems to me there is another basic difference in both artists to be given attention. During the last 30 years, Cohen seems to have become better and better as aging advanced, re-inventing his styles according to several factors, while I ask if the same can be said about HCB.
Now, at this stage of my sermon, or even before, you are right if you ask what the hell is between all these and the former question of the thread. So here I go.
First, street photography is or can be approached as an Art too. In these grounds we can find some few common things with fashion photography, provided we approach the latter as Art too.
Now let ask ourselves "how difficult is Art ?", "is Art for me ?". And I think I can better answer these questions if I am inspired by LC, than by HCB.
From LC I can learn that I must be absolutely sincere with myself, and recognize the square I am in, now, or look for it and move forwards accordingly.
Furthermore, the word "square" I used here is meant to point the creative space I dwell in. This square will never be empty because it also includes my feelings, my wishes, my aspirations. But I must study it, perfection it, before mooving to the next one.
Kindly notice that in the question "how difficult is street photography", there is no dimension of time and progress. But definitely there is an extremely important ingredient: curiousity.
Each of us must not be a recognized big shot. On the contrary this motivation will make things harder. But we can find our own square in which we will excell, more and more, after a lot of traspiration and focus.
Cheers,
Ruben
Perhaps the most striking common denominator on what the old aged Leonard Cohen has to say about himself is his deep humbliness. You hear him between the lines as if he was saying Poetry, Art, Life are great. Not me, I have been just a lucky guy.
What a great contrast between how LC speaks about himself and how HCB speaks about himself, if you take for example that UTUBE interview. HCB seen under LC light looks frankly ridiculous.
It seems to me there is another basic difference in both artists to be given attention. During the last 30 years, Cohen seems to have become better and better as aging advanced, re-inventing his styles according to several factors, while I ask if the same can be said about HCB.
Now, at this stage of my sermon, or even before, you are right if you ask what the hell is between all these and the former question of the thread. So here I go.
First, street photography is or can be approached as an Art too. In these grounds we can find some few common things with fashion photography, provided we approach the latter as Art too.
Now let ask ourselves "how difficult is Art ?", "is Art for me ?". And I think I can better answer these questions if I am inspired by LC, than by HCB.
From LC I can learn that I must be absolutely sincere with myself, and recognize the square I am in, now, or look for it and move forwards accordingly.
Furthermore, the word "square" I used here is meant to point the creative space I dwell in. This square will never be empty because it also includes my feelings, my wishes, my aspirations. But I must study it, perfection it, before mooving to the next one.
Kindly notice that in the question "how difficult is street photography", there is no dimension of time and progress. But definitely there is an extremely important ingredient: curiousity.
Each of us must not be a recognized big shot. On the contrary this motivation will make things harder. But we can find our own square in which we will excell, more and more, after a lot of traspiration and focus.
Cheers,
Ruben
Last edited by a moderator:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
feenej
Well-known
Ha, one time I took a photo of some high school girls at a parade. When I saw the photo I realized that I knew each and every one of them, and one was even waving to me! Yikes, talk about a case of needing to put the camera away from my face once in a while.
The hard part is most of the time there is nobody around, especially in winter. Wisconsin, where I live, has a population density of about 10 times less than that of England.
I bring my camera with me sometimes when I walk though the downtown of our most populous city, Milwaukee. I have counted as few as three people on the street on a Sunday, as I make my way through downtown on foot in winter, to the Milwaukee Repertory Theater, where I've had season tickets for years. People are all in cars or buildings.
The USA is the third most populous country in the world, behind China and India, but you would never know it 'round here.
The hard part is most of the time there is nobody around, especially in winter. Wisconsin, where I live, has a population density of about 10 times less than that of England.
I bring my camera with me sometimes when I walk though the downtown of our most populous city, Milwaukee. I have counted as few as three people on the street on a Sunday, as I make my way through downtown on foot in winter, to the Milwaukee Repertory Theater, where I've had season tickets for years. People are all in cars or buildings.
The USA is the third most populous country in the world, behind China and India, but you would never know it 'round here.
Attachments
Last edited:
DownRange
Newbie
Street Legal?
Street Legal?
If you take a photo of someone walking down a public street, do you need their permission to publish and/or sell it?
Basically, can you shoot a passerby and legally sell ten million copies of the photo?
Street Legal?
If you take a photo of someone walking down a public street, do you need their permission to publish and/or sell it?
Basically, can you shoot a passerby and legally sell ten million copies of the photo?
pesphoto
Veteran
You can't sell it for commercial purposes without a release......