laudrup
Established
You know what i meant, there is no need to debate semantics.
second attempt at street photography...
- Thread starter laudrup
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 41
- Views 2K
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
The only zoom I have got is a 24-48 Zuiko (for Olympus OM2).
Nice enough length for street and urban but the click clack body isn't as good as a rangefinder.
Nice enough length for street and urban but the click clack body isn't as good as a rangefinder.
V
varjag
Guest
Good shots Ad. Keep it going!
The other thing with teles is that they suck in the crowds. Random people keep wandering into sight, and DOF often doesn't allow for more than one person rendered sharply in the frame, thereby excluding most of situational shots. And when it is possible, people lump together into indiscriminate mass of clothes and bodyparts due to compressed perspective.
The other thing with teles is that they suck in the crowds. Random people keep wandering into sight, and DOF often doesn't allow for more than one person rendered sharply in the frame, thereby excluding most of situational shots. And when it is possible, people lump together into indiscriminate mass of clothes and bodyparts due to compressed perspective.
laudrup
Established
Thanks Eugene! Fair points on the telephoto lens. Now i've managed to figure out what was wrong with my turret finder i'm hoping to get some better shots next time.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
i myself like to use anything from 24mm up to 135 out there, depending on the situation. Sometimes i even get mad coz i don't have a long enough or short enough lens ready on the camera.
I made grab shots even with a 17mm that i find succesful
[sorry no rf but slr]
running across the street from under the church walls, kneeling down and clicking
all within 3-4 seconds
I made grab shots even with a 17mm that i find succesful
[sorry no rf but slr]
running across the street from under the church walls, kneeling down and clicking
all within 3-4 seconds
J. Borger
Well-known
A tele is for cowards but shooting a wide-angle standing beside somebody who is not aware he is included in the picture is not??
And how about a hidden cam .. like the one Walker Evans used in the subway ... another coward?
Winogrands hip shots ....... coward?
Harry Callahan did some great streetwork with a tele-lens as did Kertesz .. as did Eugene Smith.
How about the "from my window" series from Kertesz & Smith ... bunch of cowards? the tele lenses did not work?
We are gettin on very thin ice here. People tend to react different when they know their picture is taken.
I would say shoot whatever works for you .......... there is the point pf ethics however .. but that is a different discussion.
Han
And how about a hidden cam .. like the one Walker Evans used in the subway ... another coward?
Winogrands hip shots ....... coward?
Harry Callahan did some great streetwork with a tele-lens as did Kertesz .. as did Eugene Smith.
How about the "from my window" series from Kertesz & Smith ... bunch of cowards? the tele lenses did not work?
We are gettin on very thin ice here. People tend to react different when they know their picture is taken.
I would say shoot whatever works for you .......... there is the point pf ethics however .. but that is a different discussion.
Han
V
varjag
Guest
My point was about shooting in the crowds; if you ever try using a tele at a protest, fair, or any other crowdy event you'd indeed find it unwieldy and limiting, unless you shoot from above the head level. There is a reason why most press photogs use wide-to-normal zooms in such circumstances.
I have the (excellent) 85/2 and 135/4 for my Kiev, and excersise them as often as I can. Still they are hardly the most suitable tools for typical street work.
Oh, and Evans actually admitted that his motivation for sneaky Contax snaps was fear 🙂
I have the (excellent) 85/2 and 135/4 for my Kiev, and excersise them as often as I can. Still they are hardly the most suitable tools for typical street work.
Oh, and Evans actually admitted that his motivation for sneaky Contax snaps was fear 🙂
J. Borger
Well-known
OK Eugene ... understand the point and you are probably right.
In fact i do not know what to think of these issues.
In my experience a lot of people do not want their pictures to be taken.
So we have 3 choices:
- be sneaky
- be brave and just take the risk
- interact with the subject
My only point is a hipshot or a wide angle can be as sneaky as a tele.
Besides he choice you make leads to different kind of pictures.
I myself prefer a 35 & 50 ..... counting the cropfactor of the R-D1 in it is a 50 & a 75mm.
Han
In fact i do not know what to think of these issues.
In my experience a lot of people do not want their pictures to be taken.
So we have 3 choices:
- be sneaky
- be brave and just take the risk
- interact with the subject
My only point is a hipshot or a wide angle can be as sneaky as a tele.
Besides he choice you make leads to different kind of pictures.
I myself prefer a 35 & 50 ..... counting the cropfactor of the R-D1 in it is a 50 & a 75mm.
Han
Last edited:
V
varjag
Guest
Han, when you think of it, taking a shot of someone shouldn't be a big problem. Unless you stumble upon outright psychopath serious problems are quite unlikely.
Consider what would you do if a stranger made a shot of you fully openly? You might be surprised, puzzled, curious, or just could not care less; what are the chances that you'd attack the shooter? Thing is, most people would behave just like you.
9 out of 10 times I shoot people I don't receive any response, not even a glance! All that while setting the camera cotrols in full view, composing from the eye, and from distances as close as 1 meter. I never got into trouble from street shooting, except with police (but that's a local issue and by large an exception). That said am not a bold person by nature, but doing your work with confidence helps greatly with your perception by others. If you hesitate, nervous, rush, sneaky it immediately transfers to the subjects via non-verbal clues and then they're *more* likely to question your intentions.
Consider what would you do if a stranger made a shot of you fully openly? You might be surprised, puzzled, curious, or just could not care less; what are the chances that you'd attack the shooter? Thing is, most people would behave just like you.
9 out of 10 times I shoot people I don't receive any response, not even a glance! All that while setting the camera cotrols in full view, composing from the eye, and from distances as close as 1 meter. I never got into trouble from street shooting, except with police (but that's a local issue and by large an exception). That said am not a bold person by nature, but doing your work with confidence helps greatly with your perception by others. If you hesitate, nervous, rush, sneaky it immediately transfers to the subjects via non-verbal clues and then they're *more* likely to question your intentions.
J. Borger
Well-known
Yes .. i agree......... I prefer the open approach myself.
laudrup
Established
We've got a nice debate developing here. I think that all of the posters have made valid points, naturally what one person feels comfortable with can be uncomfortable for someone else.
"My only point is a hipshot or a wide angle can be as sneaky as a tele."
Upon reflection that's a pretty good point Han I hadn't really looked at it that way. It was my perception that keeping your distance and shooting with a tele was a pretty furtive way to shoot. I felt that actually being in amongst the people you are shooting was perhaps more open and less sneaky and to a degree less likely to arouse a negative reaction.
However Eugene makes a good point about attitude & how you carry yourself when shooting in public. I suppose if you skulk around people are naturally going to be wary of your motives and intentions.
"My only point is a hipshot or a wide angle can be as sneaky as a tele."
Upon reflection that's a pretty good point Han I hadn't really looked at it that way. It was my perception that keeping your distance and shooting with a tele was a pretty furtive way to shoot. I felt that actually being in amongst the people you are shooting was perhaps more open and less sneaky and to a degree less likely to arouse a negative reaction.
However Eugene makes a good point about attitude & how you carry yourself when shooting in public. I suppose if you skulk around people are naturally going to be wary of your motives and intentions.
sfb_dot_com
Well-known
laudrup said:
I think I'm going to throw some fuel on the fire here by going back to the basics of the original post and stating that none of the original posts was at all sharp. I don't think this was solely caused by misalignment of a turret, but a combination of that poor focussing and a slower-than-needed shutter speed. Why in broad daylight in an admittedly gloomy Manchester street are you using such slow shutter speeds as to blur people?. Examination of the images reveals definite signs of camera shake along with huge grain. I think I'm being kind rather than harsh when I say that attention to basic technique is needed rather than lengthy deliberations on which focal length to use. Use a faster film for starters would be my first piece of advice, and the second would be to get a more user-friendly camera than a Zorki which IMHO is a pig to use (having owned one many moons ago)
Well that's it rant over. As I said, don't mean to be harsh, but in terms of some the contributions here it does seem to be a case of the Emperor's new clothes. Being honest might seem to be a more helpful policy.
I would as a final piece of advice say the following, "Do a basic risk assessment before you start shooting" - it's much easier to run away before they hit you!.
Regards
Andy
laudrup
Established
Hi Andy,
Thanks for your comment's I respect that fact that you were honest & frank with your opinion. I wouldn't say your comments were harsh. "Your photo's are dog-dirt, don't ever go near a camera again" Now that's harsh. 🙂
I'm more likely to take exception at people who have nothing better to do than point out the inappropriate use of the word zoom than someone taking the time & effort to post constructive criticism. I'm grateful for the sentiment behind your comments.
I do feel that I need to respond to your comments and I appreciate that it is difficult to do so without sounding like i'm making excuses or being confrontational. That is not my intention. I just want to explain my point of view, not sound like i'm chucking my toys out of the pram.
I didn't claim that the misalignment of the turret had any bearing on how the lens was focused, but i'm sure you can appreciate it's not ideal when it comes to composing a photograph.
If we examine the grain of the posted photos I did state that i was using 400 iso film and the prints themselves are fairly gritty. This is compounded by the fact that I had to crop and enlarge the close up images & then all images were scanned using a cheap flatbed scanner. Not ideal, but I don't have the luxury of a negative scanner.
When I took the photographs my intention was to have the people who were milling around the edges of the shot blurred to capture the hustle & bustle of a busy city centre and the characters I was focusing on looking sharply focused. I wanted to juxtapose the shoppers who were frantically dashing around xmas shopping against the protesters who despite being fiery were relatively static.
Because the film speed was relatively fast I wanted to use a small enough aperture to allow a fairly slow shutter speed to acheive this effect. I was shooting at a decent enough speed to handhold but the problem was that the protestors were involved in a pretty heated discussion and were animated. They weren't moving at the pace of the shopper's, but were moving nonetheless. With hindsight I would have benefitted from opening the lens up and also using a faster shutter speed. This may have rendered everything sharp but that wasn't quite the effect i was looking for.
I suppose this is part of the learning curve of moving from shooting landscapes and architecture to shooting with a rangefinder in the street. It's a different discipline with different techniques. I'll gladly post more photo's taken with a rangefinder or slr so that you can examine my basic technique further.
The one comment I nearly took exception to was regarding "lengthy deliberations on focal length". If you've followed this thread and my previous posting you will have no doubt gathered that I am new to using a rangefinder, this doesn't mean i'm new to photography and don't have valid experience or knowledge of focal lengths.
I have primarily used slr's, initially with a pentax me super and then for about 12 months i've shot with a canon t90 whenever I've got a spare moment. I've got prime lenses covering 24mm,28mm,35mm & 50mm. I also got variable focal length telephoto lenses (hereafter referred to as zoom 😉 ) covering 28-70mm and 70-210mm. I have used all of these lenses pretty frequently so I think that I can make a valid contribution to discussions on focal length. My preference is for wider angle lens, and it was this preference I was trying to put forward during this discussion.
Finally without wanting to sound like a petulant know it all
"Do a basic risk assessment before you start shooting - it's much easier to run away before they hit you!"
I've got this base covered....I usally make sure i alway shoot whilst wearing roller skates...it makes for a quick exit! Damn....perhaps that's why it looked like there was camera shake 🙂
Let me know what you think when i post the next attempt at the weekend.
All the best
Ad
Thanks for your comment's I respect that fact that you were honest & frank with your opinion. I wouldn't say your comments were harsh. "Your photo's are dog-dirt, don't ever go near a camera again" Now that's harsh. 🙂
I'm more likely to take exception at people who have nothing better to do than point out the inappropriate use of the word zoom than someone taking the time & effort to post constructive criticism. I'm grateful for the sentiment behind your comments.
I do feel that I need to respond to your comments and I appreciate that it is difficult to do so without sounding like i'm making excuses or being confrontational. That is not my intention. I just want to explain my point of view, not sound like i'm chucking my toys out of the pram.
I didn't claim that the misalignment of the turret had any bearing on how the lens was focused, but i'm sure you can appreciate it's not ideal when it comes to composing a photograph.
If we examine the grain of the posted photos I did state that i was using 400 iso film and the prints themselves are fairly gritty. This is compounded by the fact that I had to crop and enlarge the close up images & then all images were scanned using a cheap flatbed scanner. Not ideal, but I don't have the luxury of a negative scanner.
When I took the photographs my intention was to have the people who were milling around the edges of the shot blurred to capture the hustle & bustle of a busy city centre and the characters I was focusing on looking sharply focused. I wanted to juxtapose the shoppers who were frantically dashing around xmas shopping against the protesters who despite being fiery were relatively static.
Because the film speed was relatively fast I wanted to use a small enough aperture to allow a fairly slow shutter speed to acheive this effect. I was shooting at a decent enough speed to handhold but the problem was that the protestors were involved in a pretty heated discussion and were animated. They weren't moving at the pace of the shopper's, but were moving nonetheless. With hindsight I would have benefitted from opening the lens up and also using a faster shutter speed. This may have rendered everything sharp but that wasn't quite the effect i was looking for.
I suppose this is part of the learning curve of moving from shooting landscapes and architecture to shooting with a rangefinder in the street. It's a different discipline with different techniques. I'll gladly post more photo's taken with a rangefinder or slr so that you can examine my basic technique further.
The one comment I nearly took exception to was regarding "lengthy deliberations on focal length". If you've followed this thread and my previous posting you will have no doubt gathered that I am new to using a rangefinder, this doesn't mean i'm new to photography and don't have valid experience or knowledge of focal lengths.
I have primarily used slr's, initially with a pentax me super and then for about 12 months i've shot with a canon t90 whenever I've got a spare moment. I've got prime lenses covering 24mm,28mm,35mm & 50mm. I also got variable focal length telephoto lenses (hereafter referred to as zoom 😉 ) covering 28-70mm and 70-210mm. I have used all of these lenses pretty frequently so I think that I can make a valid contribution to discussions on focal length. My preference is for wider angle lens, and it was this preference I was trying to put forward during this discussion.
Finally without wanting to sound like a petulant know it all
"Do a basic risk assessment before you start shooting - it's much easier to run away before they hit you!"
I've got this base covered....I usally make sure i alway shoot whilst wearing roller skates...it makes for a quick exit! Damn....perhaps that's why it looked like there was camera shake 🙂
Let me know what you think when i post the next attempt at the weekend.
All the best
Ad
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
Ad,
you say you prefer wide angles
and in the same time you heavily cropped some of the images. I think that calls for a longer lens, at least a normal, maybe a short tele. Maybe even a - oh god! - wide-to-normal zoom!
I would advise you not to listen to those who are SURE that street = wide. Just try to find what works best for you.
Remember - if you crop a wide angle shot, it's like you shot a tele just with lower resolution and bigger grain. There's no difference.
you say you prefer wide angles
and in the same time you heavily cropped some of the images. I think that calls for a longer lens, at least a normal, maybe a short tele. Maybe even a - oh god! - wide-to-normal zoom!
I would advise you not to listen to those who are SURE that street = wide. Just try to find what works best for you.
Remember - if you crop a wide angle shot, it's like you shot a tele just with lower resolution and bigger grain. There's no difference.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
As to "zoom" versus "long focal" (versus "tele"), i think it IS important to be clear in what we say; they are not the same but get confused or mixed up. I'm sure you do know the difference but in general, lots of people do not.
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Roller blades sounds good for a fast exit! Nice thinking.
laudrup
Established
Hi Pherdinand, ordinarily i wouldn't have cropped but the viewfinder was out and meant that everything was shifted over slightly, so rather than including a firebrand of a chap screaming through a loudspeaker the background was instead full of shop signs etc.
sfb_dot_com
Well-known
laudrup said:
Hi again!
Phew! I realised when I made my post that I took a bit of a chance & I'm glad you made a moderate response. I'm sorry if any comments I made were not appropriate. It is very difficult on the net to pitch things just right, and attempts at humour often come across as being a bit on the heavy handed side. I guess I ought to explain the risk assessment bit though. I was out with my Bessa L & 12mm Heliar the other day, not actually taking pictures, but with it over my shoulder (mind you still ready to take pictures) and thinking about capturing some of the er characterful people milling around the local 'discount' (ie knocked off) store when one of the owners spotted me and began shouting. Fortunately I had been careful to keep well away from his huge bulk and avoided eye contact, and walked away quickly. Recently too I was talking to some graffiti artists, one of whom confessed to being a crack head, and was drinking a can of lager. He was quite friendly and no trouble, but I made sure I knew where my escape route was! Risk assessment is part of my job, so I do feel I have something to offer in that area.
Photographically I don't want to set myself up as an expert, far from it! just a fellow photographer also with much to learn! Your explanation of your workflow was interesting, and at least I understand what you were trying to achieve. That seems quite a difficult task you've set yourself there but I'm sure you'll crack it eventually and I look forward to seeing your next set.
Regards
Andy
Last edited:
casperc
Newbie
I'm loving this thread, because it's relevant on so many levels: equipment, technique, being affable, confidence in one's work.... I'll just add an experience of my own. Just an anecdote for your enjoyment. FYI, I have been shooting w/ a Canon EOS-1N with a large motordrive, which as you may know is a huge piece of gear. Even w/ a "pancake" lens, this thing is not unobtrusive. (I only recently picked up an RF, so I expect that I'll be able to be a little more subtle in the future.) Perhaps because I live and travel in largely cynical, metropolitan areas, my experience with subjects has been full of hostility, even though I try to act w/ confidence.
Anyway, at a Christmas parade last weekend (Solvang, CA), in the last 50ft. of the route a woman stepped out to get a photo of Santa in the sleigh and got run over by the "sleigh" float. The parade came to an immediate halt and "Santa" and "Mrs. Claus" were looking over the back of the sleigh at the crumpled woman on the ground. Looked like a great shot to me, so I angled in w/ my massive gear (20-35mm lens, BTW) and a 60-ish year old "elf" started getting nasty. "We don't need any pictures here," he said as he menaced me. He pushed me aside and stood in my way with his hands on his hips. I tried taking a picture of this 2-meter tall elf with a nasty look on his face, but he put his hand over my lens each time. I got so mad ... but there's little to do in that situation, I guess. I don't want to get into a shoving match over taking street photos.
Any other real-life experiences out there?
Anyway, at a Christmas parade last weekend (Solvang, CA), in the last 50ft. of the route a woman stepped out to get a photo of Santa in the sleigh and got run over by the "sleigh" float. The parade came to an immediate halt and "Santa" and "Mrs. Claus" were looking over the back of the sleigh at the crumpled woman on the ground. Looked like a great shot to me, so I angled in w/ my massive gear (20-35mm lens, BTW) and a 60-ish year old "elf" started getting nasty. "We don't need any pictures here," he said as he menaced me. He pushed me aside and stood in my way with his hands on his hips. I tried taking a picture of this 2-meter tall elf with a nasty look on his face, but he put his hand over my lens each time. I got so mad ... but there's little to do in that situation, I guess. I don't want to get into a shoving match over taking street photos.
Any other real-life experiences out there?
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
I'm laughing about the elf menacing you with your big man camera!
