'Street Photography'

Sparrow said:
... well it simply means

reduce the variables to a minimum;Measure the ambient light so you can preset the exposure. Zone focus to cover your subject, about 15ft works for me, then don't muck about with it unless the light changes.

expand gamut to the maximum; Use a fast film that will tolerate overexposure so you shoot a couple of stops into the shadows and still have plenty dof to zone focus. My favourite at the moment is xp2 but I've used hp5 and fuji superia to good effect but I expect many print films will work.

PS I don't see snapshot as a derogatory term ... a good snapshot is a good photo, and likely more interesting than any other genre
Click to expand...

Taking your parameters to their logical conclusion, what would be even easier would be to get an auto-focus camera with a full Program mode and a high enough ISO that you'd have depth of field from here to Pittsburgh, then you could shoot without looking or even thinking.
Of course even then you'd still have to have the experience to see and anticipate situations, an eye for composition and the nerve to shoot from closer than across the street, or you'd still be producing dreck.
 
Ko.Fe. said:
I finally realise what exactly you were talking about.
Was trying to find some new "to follow" street photogs last night on Flickr.
After looking at these Flickr most popular Street Photography groups yesterday I understood why some are saying - street photography is dead.
Here is no composition, no light and nothing happening.
It is like sea of dead pictures with nothing but:"surprised people, or tramps, or funny looking people all taken at strange angles on the streets of our cities."

Gee, I don't think my stuff looks like that at all, and I consider myself to be primarily a street photographer.
Click to expand...
 
rbsinto said:
Taking your parameters to their logical conclusion, what would be even easier would be to get an auto-focus camera with a full Program mode and a high enough ISO that you'd have depth of field from here to Pittsburgh, then you could shoot without looking or even thinking.
Of course even then you'd still have to have the experience to see and anticipate situations, an eye for composition and the nerve to shoot from closer than across the street, or you'd still be producing dreck.
Click to expand...

... well yes, but that other chap asked what I meant ... not what was congruent with what I meant .... and anyway I'm happy not to think when I'm taking photos although I do admit to looking

Oh, and it's one would rarther than you would. Well unless you think my photos are ****e that is 🙂
 
sjgslack said:
That is certainly true... Though there are a disproportionate number of people defining themselves as 'street photographer'
Click to expand...

Silas, I remember the age of the cheap, yet surprisingly good, Synthesiser. There was a time when every man and his dog played and thought that they were brilliant. As time has told us, only the best synth' bands are remembered of the late 70's and 80's (very few bands indeed that is!).
Same with anything, as you well know. Have confidence in your own niche and rise in that place - pass on by the other stuff that's not for you.

Good luck
 
Sparrow said:
... well yes, but that other chap asked what I meant ... not what was congruent with what I meant .... and anyway I'm happy not to think when I'm taking photos although I do admit to looking

Oh, and it's one would rather than you would. Well unless you think my photos are ****e that is 🙂
Click to expand...

I had an opportunity to do some nearly mindless shooting last summer when I attended the wedding of a photobud. He asked his three photobud-guests to shoot the wedding.We all agreed but I reminded him that I didn't shoot digital.
He gave me his Canon dSLR with an excellent zoom lens and flash and put the camera into idiot-mode because there simply wasn't time for me to learn how to use it.
I took a ton of shots essentially only having to zoom to frame and compose. And the shots were very nice, beautifully exposed, and tack-sharp, but when asked if I'd now consider going digital I told him that I felt completely detached from the process and didn't like it all.
I'm used to thinking when I shoot, and prefer it that way. Always.
 
rbsinto said:
I had an opportunity to do some nearly mindless shooting last summer when I attended the wedding of a photobud. He asked his three photobud-guests to shoot the wedding.We all agreed but I reminded him that I didn't shoot digital.
He gave me his Canon dSLR with an excellent zoom lens and flash and put the camera into idiot-mode because there simply wasn't time for me to learn how to use it.
I took a ton of shots essentially only having to zoom to frame and compose. And the shots were very nice, beautifully exposed, and tack-sharp, but when asked if I'd now consider going digital I told him that I felt completely detached from the process and didn't like it all.
I'm used to thinking when I shoot, and prefer it that way. Always.
Click to expand...

I do the same, but without the zoom and dslr, just look and press the button ... obviously I reduce the variables to a minimum and expands gamut to the maximum, as I may have said earlier 😉
 
Sparrow said:
I do the same, but without the zoom and dslr, just look and press the button ... obviously I reduce the variables to a minimum and expands gamut to the maximum, as I may have said earlier 😉
Click to expand...

Yes, you did say it earlier.
I on the other hand don't wish to limit myself by reducing the variables. I prefer to have options to build a photo the way I want it to be, hence the need to think.
 
The problem with that approach is that there isn`t necessarily time to do that.
Depends what you`re after , of course.
Often you are not building but reacting.
 
Michael Markey said:
The problem with that approach is that there isn`t necessarily time to do that.
Depends what you`re after , of course.
Often you are not building but reacting.
Click to expand...

True enough.
But I've gotten enough shots that were "built" (for lack of a better term) to know that it can be done if you are prepared.
 
rbsinto said:
Yes, you did say it earlier.
I on the other hand don't wish to limit myself by reducing the variables. I prefer to have options to build a photo the way I want it to be, hence the need to think.
Click to expand...

... I'm not trying to impose my opinion on you, sorry if it came across like that ... I was just answering another contributor.
 
rbsinto said:
Yes, you did say it earlier.
I on the other hand don't wish to limit myself by reducing the variables. I prefer to have options to build a photo the way I want it to be, hence the need to think.
Click to expand...
Well, yes, but equally, don't vary the variables that don't need to be varied. If your variables are ABCDEF, then prioritize them. Change B only when changing A alone won't suffice; C only when A+B won't suffice; D only when A+B+C won't suffice...

Cheers,

R.
 
I look for things like repeating shapes, leading lines, shapes, textures and how the subject is working with the background and all those other elements in the frame. I don't think when I'm working. I am responding to things and it happens so fast. So I practice and practice to train my vision and reflexes.

I spend time at art galleries, exhibits, museums, etc looking at paintings and photographs and at the work of the ones that did it well. I read about how they approached the medium and their philosophies.

The most important part is I get out there and work. I try to get out at least once a week usually more. The only way to get good at this type of work is to do this type of work, A LOT.

It takes a lot of skill to first see the moment, then position the camera in the right relationship to the moment and then have to have your technique down to capture it.

If it were easy everyone would be good at it and as we know not everyone is.
 
airfrogusmc said:
I look for things like repeating shapes, leading lines, shapes, textures and how the subject is working with the background and all those other elements in the frame. I don't think when I'm working. I am responding to things and it happens so fast. So I practice and practice to train my vision and reflexes.

I spend time at art galleries, exhibits, museums, etc looking at paintings and photographs and at the work of the ones that did it well. I read about how they approached the medium and their philosophies.

The most important part is I get out there and work. I try to get out at least once a week usually more. The only way to get good at this type of work is to do this type of work, A LOT.

It takes a lot of skill to first see the moment, then position the camera in the right relationship to the moment and then have to have your technique down to capture it.

If it were easy everyone would be good at it and as we know not everyone is.
Click to expand...

I like your style!
But for the fact that I always think when I'm shooting, we seem to be kindred spirits.
 
"One does not think during creative work, any more than one thinks when driving a car. But one has a background of years - learning, unlearning, success, failure, dreaming, thinking, experience, all this - then the moment of creation, the focusing of all into the moment."-Edward Weston

"Thinking should be done before and after, not during photographing."-Henri Cartie-Bresson

"Nothing that one could reasonably call thinking is taking place al this stage. The condition is total absorption; the decision (a picture) is spontaneous ... "-Aaron Siskind

"Don't think. Thinking is the enemy of creativity. It's self-conscious, and anything self-conscious is lousy. You can't try to do things. You simply must do things."-Ray Bradbury
 
"Don't think, feel - it is like a finger pointing away to the moon. Don't concentrate on the finger or you will miss all that heavenly glory" - Bruce Lee, Enter the Dragon.
 
Three books that are HUGE inspirations.
L1016116_zps579b403a.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom