'Street Photography'

[MIkhail]

... how could you possibly know that?

Just part of visual education I took and self taught cultural baggage....
How do you know things of culture in general? There are sources for that.
Besides, some masterclasses I took parts of as well...

 

[Sparrow]

... ah, it's like your opinion then?

 

[sjgslack]

I think the problem you see is that there is a flood of **** street photography on the internet. Good street photography is really really good.

I know what you mean, however i feel the same about how people post pictures of flowers, or of their kids and pets.

I agree that there is a lot of very good photography taken on the street, just as there is a lot that is bad. My problem really is the quantity, the standard and the snobbery surrounding the definition.

"Lets hope that categories will be less rigid in the future; there has been too much of placing photography in little niches-commercial. pictorial, documentary, and creative( a dismal term). Definitions of this kind are inessential and stupid; good photography remains good photography no matter what we name it. I would like to think of it as just “photography” ; of each and every photograph containing the best qualities in proper degree to achieve its purpose. We have been slaves to categories, and each has served as a kind of concentration camp for the spirit.”-Ansel Adams

This is great and I've not seen it before - it goes a long way to clarifying my point to me.

Any kind of photography can be just a repetition, or perhaps something original. What I like about street photography, is that it shows people. Each of us has tried to be the second HCB at least once:

This is a fantastic image!

How about we each take pictures of what interests us and look at the same without dissing the thing?

I was trying not to be too negative and not to point any fingers, and I agree with you, but I also just wanted to gauge whether this was something that bugged anyone else or not!
I think the conversation has been remarkably civilised so far

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

here is a recent image:

Polypan F on the M6.
(excuse the dust)

 

[x-ray]

Groundhog Day at RFF.

When I was younger, there wasn't any such thing as 'street photography'. There were candids, and there was 'documentary photography'. There was even a whole school of New Colour Documentarists.

I photograph what I see that looks interesting to me. Some of that's on 'the street'. Because that's where I mostly am when I can use my camera.

But I'm not a 'Street Photographer'.

Same here. Forty five years ago it was documentary photography. That's what I consider myself. Very little of what I shoot is on the street.

 

[rluka]

Instead of getting less rigid things seem to have only gotten more rigid, unfortunately.

Talking of community outside photography, putting rigid limitations seems to be the thing when the community is getting dilluted by so many new peoples coming.

It helps break them into smaller groups that will hopefully retain the "hungry heart" they have when the community is still small
</sugar coating

Anyway, shoot first and categorize (and debate) later, if it's actually needed.

If just...
- everyone had more free time and trip to exotic places are easy and cheap
- everyone had access to model and the time to setup lighting and concept
And easy there means as easy as going out of the door on a stroll with camera

 

[Andrea Taurisano]

here is a recent image:

Polypan F on the M6.
(excuse the dust)

Lovely shot. And the dust does not bother me at all. On the contrary it adds charm, like on really old books.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I think the problem you see is that there is a flood of **** street photography on the internet. Good street photography is really really good.

I know what you mean, however i feel the same about how people post pictures of flowers, or of their kids and pets.

Both, faces macro guy and zoom to girls guy have dozens of likes under each photograph.
It hard to take really good street picture. But because of the Internet it is easier to find those who going to like what you like. Pictures on this page are another example. But I'm not here to judge.

 

[jsrockit]

Could be what he preferred John, but not what he always used.

And he had a long career too...

 

[Roger Hicks]

... ah, it's like your opinion then?

Dear Stewart,

No, no, no. He KNOWS! It's like religion.

Besides, he's taken [parts of] master classes as well. Be honest. Have you? I haven't. I've taken pictures, been to (and indeed had) exhibitions and read books, but I wouldn't pretend that this is worth anything as compared with taking [parts of] master classes. I'm sure you'd agree.

How many masters are there? How many of them give classes? How many people learn anything from these masters?

Cheers,

R.

 

[MIkhail]

Dear Stewart,

No, no, no. He KNOWS! It's like religion.

Besides, he's taken [parts of] master classes as well. Be honest. Have you? I haven't. I've taken pictures, been to (and indeed had) exhibitions and read books, but I wouldn't pretend that this is worth anything as compared with taking [parts of] master classes. I'm sure you'd agree.

How many masters are there? How many of them give classes? How many people learn anything from these masters?

Cheers,

R.

Dear Roger.
Please don't take my words out of content.
I also mentioned visual education as of college, you know? And self-education, as of going to museums, and looking at works of masters, you know? Master classes were mentioned in regards to the fact that that's how serious photographers self-described their approach.
As well as serious painters, for example.
That's how he knows.

P.S.
But I feel that I irritate some here and disrupt the flow of mindless shots of people's backs that are called "street photos"...
I will not do that again, don’t even know why I got involved to begin with...
Please continue testing summicron.

 

[kbg32]

And he had a long career too...

I met him once John, years ago. He was using his M4 with a Leitz 28 on it. Just as he was in the video.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Roger.
Please don't take my words out of content.
I also mentioned visual education as of college, you know? And self-education, as of going to museums, and looking at works of masters, you know? Master classes were mentioned in regards to the fact that that's how serious photographers self-described their approach.
As well as serious painters, for example.
That's how he knows.

P.S.
But I feel that I irritate some here and disrupt the flow of mindless shots of people's backs that are called "street photos"...
I will not do that again, don’t even know why I got involved to begin with...
Please continue testing summicron.

Dear Mikhail,

Your assertion is still impossible to prove. I think you're almost certainly right, but "master classes" was NOT out of context. It was a substantially meaningless assertion: a self-aggrandizing appeal to a non-existent authority.

What on earth do you mean by "Please continue testing summicron"?

Cheers,

R.

 

[kbg32]

Deli by keithbgoldstein, on Flickr

 

[OurManInTangier]

^^^

Very nice shot Keith.

 

[kbg32]

Thanks Simon! Hope you're well!

Cheers!

 

[airfrogusmc]

Dear Mikhail,

Your assertion is still impossible to prove. I think you're almost certainly right, but "master classes" was NOT out of context. It was a substantially meaningless assertion: a self-aggrandizing appeal to a non-existent authority.

What on earth do you mean by "Please continue testing summicron"?

Cheers,

R.

Roger, many of the really great photographers that worked on the street have written about the esthetic approach that they take and there is a method to how they work and many stated it in their own words. Davidson, Meyerowitz, Evans, Bresson, Boogie, Lyon, all worked like this and they all wrote about it.
"That’s not how "great ones" work though. They work on subject, on idea, on theme."-MIkhail They produced the bodies of work and they wrote about it thats how we know. They told us and more important is they actually put those bodies of work together and they are all out there for us to see. Davidsons East 100th Street, Subway, Time of Change, Bressons Mexican Notebook, Danny Lyon The Bikeriders, Robert Frank, The Americans and most of the well known photographers that worked on the street worked as MIkhail stated.

 

[airfrogusmc]

^^^

Very nice shot Keith.

Agree!!!!!!!!!

 

[kbg32]

Thanks airfrogusmc!

 

[Roger Hicks]

Roger, many of the really great photographers that worked on the street have written about the esthetic approach that they take and there is a method to how they work and many stated it in their own words. Davidson, Meyerowitz, Evans, Bresson, Boogie, Lyon, all worked like this and they all wrote about it.
"That’s not how "great ones" work though. They work on subject, on idea, on theme."-MIkhail They produced the bodies of work and they wrote about it thats how we know. They told us and more important is they actually put those bodies of work together and they are all out there for us to see. Davidsons East 100th Street, Subway, Time of Change, Bressons Mexican Notebook, Danny Lyon The Bikeriders, Robert Frank, The Americans and most of the well known photographers that worked on the street worked as MIkhail stated.

Yes. It was just the "Master Class" bit I objected to. Well, that and the idea that a universal rule can be stated: hence my highlighting of "most" in your post. And, come to think of it, the idea that some of these "greats" weren't working ex post facto. For example, what was the idea or theme behind Cartier-Bresson's Rue Mouffetard? "I think I'll go and look for a small boy carrying two bottles of wine"? Fortune favours the prepared mind, certainly, and as I say, I suspect Mikhail is right: it certainly chimes with most of what I've read. But like Stewart, I found the "I know the answer" approach a little wearing.

Cheers,

R.