Our Street Photography . . . Post yours!

Leica M3, Color-Skopar 50mm f/2.5, 400-2TMY.

Erik.

35503671604_a4866769bc_c.jpg
 
Here's a few photos of Spruce street being paved.
l1000408_E.jpg


l1000417P_E.jpg


And here's a photo of the street when my camera strap failed and it hit the street.
L1005562_E.jpg


I don't like the phrase "street photography" when it really means something entirely different usually. Often times it means "backside photography" or "legs photography" or "just plain voyeuristic photography." Why not call it what it is? Not much in the way of pavement in street photography.

Phil Forrest
 
Phil, nice silhouettes.

Street photography . . .
Life on the streets, bristling or lonesome, straight or crooked.

The streets. Who knows what we encounter.
Some are proud enough with their camera to ask for a photo, I see that Airfrogus has these nice people, strangers to him, who he reacts to and who have confidence in him. Not a hit [the button] and run.
Others meekly point and shoot.

Nothing wrong with legs and arms for that matter, or heads, that could form an intricate pattern.

The obvious ladies. But there might be a pun implied like having a pricetag on a lady (see forceusr) where otherwise the picture would be a bit bland. But remember repetition gives an art where understanding and composition grows. For some crude, for others a style.

By the way, it surprises me how many candid pictures with a film camera often look more natural. Do the digitals press too often too quick? Me thinks so. Could be a reason for a leveling off of pictures. :bang:
 
Alberti said:
By the way, it surprises me how many candid pictures with a film camera often look more natural. Do the digitals press too often too quick?
Click to expand...

I think that the digital pictures are often too large. The composition can not be seen when only a part of the picture is visible on the screen.

In digital pictures composition is often neglected by their makers anyway.

Erik.
 
Erik van Straten said:
I think that the digital pictures are often too large. The composition can not be seen when only a part of the picture is visible on the screen.

In digital pictures composition is often neglected by their makers anyway.

Erik.
Click to expand...

I think composition should be all part of a personal way of seeing. Not some kind of formula. The way we compose along with exposing, processing and printing should be all part of a personal way of seeing. I'm not sure that what you say is any more a digital problem than it is a film problem. I think it's a problem with photography in general. Over the decades I've seen just as many uninspiring film photographs as I have digital photographs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom