This is street photography?

H

hlockwood

Well-known
Local time
11:31 PM
Joined
Jul 26, 2007
Messages
933
Location
Boston metro area
View My Gallery
The winner of the International Street Photography contest sponsored by Fotura has just been announced. Results can be seen here:

http://fotoura.com/competitions/int..._to_mail_lists_1_212_21_2012&utm_medium=email

I saw very few shots that I would classify as "street," and the winning photo, a distant shot of a nude man on sand dunes, strikes me as an amateurish snapshot, almost a joke.

Maybe I need to rethink the definition of "street" photography. What do you think?

HFL
 
The more important question is are those photos any good, do they make the viewer feel or think or what sort of reaction they produce in the viewer.

In my case, the reaction is complete indifference.
 
Everyone has their own nuanced definitions for words, based on their own experiences and biases.

For me, street photography has to include at least one person, outside, in a public space.
If there is no person, then the image is architectural, landscape, urban landscape, or still life, etc, etc.
 
Gustavo Minas (#2) is a really good photographer who consistently produces good material, IMO, at least things that I feel interested in looking at. Unlike the others on that list who leave me completely indifferent, I'm having a lot of trouble understanding this fine art-ish modern conception of "street photography"
 
Heres an invite to all here.
The official invite
FleetingMomentsPostcard_zps43ab5ccc.jpg
 
To me, a more apt definition of Street Photography is that it has to include a human element but not necessarily a person (though that is very often the case). What I mean by that, is that an insinuation of human presence or a human touch is enough for me to classify it as street photography (even if that is from the photographer him or herself). This is all very vague but here is an example that I would definitely consider street photography from Matt Stuart, who is a fairly well known present day street photographer:

http://www.mattstuart.com/photographs/colour/09-NEW-BOND-STREET

EDIT: I would add that the winner was not my favorite either but, I believe, each entrant was judge on a set of photos. Peter de Krom has others that I find "better" than the man in the dunes photo.


FrankS said:
Everyone has their own nuanced definitions for words, based on their own experiences and biases.

For me, street photography has to include at least one person, outside, in a public space.
If there is no person, then the image is architectural, landscape, urban landscape, or still life, etc, etc.
Click to expand...
 
hlockwood said:
The winner of the International Street Photography contest sponsored by Fotura has just been announced. Results can be seen here:

http://fotoura.com/competitions/int..._to_mail_lists_1_212_21_2012&utm_medium=email

I saw very few shots that I would classify as "street," and the winning photo, a distant shot of a nude man on sand dunes, strikes me as an amateurish snapshot, almost a joke.

Maybe I need to rethink the definition of "street" photography. What do you think?

HFL
Click to expand...

I think it was not a winning photo, but a winning gallery. Actually, I like the other photos of this particular gallery quite a bit. The one displayed on the title page is dull though, I agree.
 
I haven't seen the full list of winners yet as I can't get the page to load, but I have seen the winning photo in the mailout. Until I've been able to see more than a thumbnail I wouldn't like to comment on a person's work, but I can say this:

I entered the first year that the competition ran, (obviously not expecting to win, it was for fun), the shots that won that year were not what I would have expected from a street photo event, and as such (with only a minimum of sulking) I've decided that the event probably just isn't for me
 
v_roma said:
To me, a more apt definition of Street Photography is that it has to include a human element but not necessarily a person (though that is very often the case). What I mean by that, is that an insinuation of human presence or a human touch is enough for me to classify it as street photography (even if that is from the photographer him or herself). This is all very vague but here is an example that I would definitely consider street photography from Matt Stuart, who is a fairly well known present day street photographer:

http://www.mattstuart.com/photographs/colour/09-NEW-BOND-STREET

EDIT: I would add that the winner was not my favorite either but, I believe, each entrant was judge on a set of photos. Peter de Krom has others that I find "better" than the man in the dunes photo.
Click to expand...

Or I would say the better work is about visual elements working to support the subject like repeating shapes, leading lines and other elements that contribute to form.

A couple of great quotes from Bresson:

"What reinforces the content of a photograph is the sense of rhythm – the relationship between shapes and values." - Henri Cartier-Bresson

"To me, photography is the simultaneous recognition, in a fraction of a second, of the significance of an event, as well as of a precise organisation of forms which give that event its proper expression."- Henri Cartier-Bresson

"......content cannot be separated from form. By form, I mean the rigorous organisation of the interplay of surfaces, lines and values. It is in this organisation alone that our conceptions and emotions become concrete and communicable. In photography, visual organisation can stem only from a developed instinct." - Henri Cartier-Bresson

"In photography, the smallest thing can become a big subject, an insignificant human detail can become a leitmotiv. We see and we make seen as a witness to the world around us; the event, in its natural activity, generates an organic rhythm of forms." - Henri Cartier-Bresson
 
mmork said:
I think it was not a winning photo, but a winning gallery. Actually, I like the other photos of this particular gallery quite a bit. The one displayed on the title page is dull though, I agree.
Click to expand...

I think all of the entrants' galleries had better photos than the cover photos the editors chose. And in the Netherlands sand and frozen canals could be street photography : )
 
Honestly, I like the pictures. More than I like the term "street". The only objection that I have is that that everyday freak show of banalities as popularized by Martin Parr is beginning to get old - it is a bit too much a thing of a generation that has been into punk first-hand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom