Arjay
Time Traveller
Could it be that you're just cultivating your prejudices?
Granted - sonofdanang presented us with a moving, even poetic story.
But what makes you suspect I am a 'friggin pusy-footed perv pretending I'm not really taking photos, then getting ready to assault with my camera'?
If you get the chance to visit Germany, I invite you to a photowalk in my home city Munich. Let's see then who will leave more people with a smile on their face...
PS: I'd love to see some of your street photography - I just couldn't find any ...
Last edited:
israel_alanis
The Laugher
Arjay I think you touch the point hahaha, come to Mexico too and try to make friends in central park... very hard. I did not see any street photo, I would too.
ampguy
Veteran
Is this "street photography ?"
ampguy
Veteran
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I had a really funny incident recently. I was in a small country town at a breakfast diner and there was an old eccentrically dressed couple sitting at the table just outside next to their beautifully restored and hot rodded classic car from the sixties ... a photo waiting to be taken!
I went and got my OM from my car stood a fair distance back so I could get them and the car in the shot and gestured to them with the camera and a hopeful look on my face. The old guy yelled out a trifle beligerantly ... "That'll be fifty dollars!"
To which I replied with a smile ... "That's OK then, you can pay me later!" and took the shot! He and his wife were still laughing as I walked away and it was a moment that stayed with me for the rest of the day ... unfortunately the photo turned out to be pretty crappy!
Oh ... and what's with ampguy's combative posting ... or is it just me reading it that way?
I went and got my OM from my car stood a fair distance back so I could get them and the car in the shot and gestured to them with the camera and a hopeful look on my face. The old guy yelled out a trifle beligerantly ... "That'll be fifty dollars!"
To which I replied with a smile ... "That's OK then, you can pay me later!" and took the shot! He and his wife were still laughing as I walked away and it was a moment that stayed with me for the rest of the day ... unfortunately the photo turned out to be pretty crappy!
Oh ... and what's with ampguy's combative posting ... or is it just me reading it that way?
Mister E
Well-known
I'd throw my urine on you two if I was living in the streets and you thought it might be fun to take my picture.
israel_alanis
The Laugher
Keith that was very fun, nice anecdote.
I respect all people and I do not make fun of any situation.
I respect all people and I do not make fun of any situation.
ampguy
Veteran
ok
ok
That is funny Keith!
I just think we should give Peace a Chance.
ok
That is funny Keith!
I just think we should give Peace a Chance.
...
Oh ... and what's with ampguy's combative posting ... or is it just me reading it that way?
israel_alanis
The Laugher
I think the same, but I can not believe you if hours back in some way insult the Mexican people and delete your comment, I did not attack people I photographed, but you made a racist insult in a way ... good that you want peace ... no? ampguy. I offend people because I caught the reality nobody want to see. You offend with words. Good for you.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Street shooting doesn't sit too well with me though since I was threatened by a very unpleasant and mean looking individual some time ago who just happened to be in the backgound of a shot I took. I genuinely felt in danger when this guy confronted me ... he was right in my face actually threatening to assault me and as fast as I tried to get away from him he persued me. It turned out ok in the end when he finally backed off but It certainly spoiled my day!
Arjay
Time Traveller
Not sure if I could tell you beforehand - this is a very spontaneous process.
I have been an amateur photographer for 52 years, and I feel that street photography leads me to the very essence of the experience of being alive, and it gets more intense as I grow older. The more I am aware of this when I'm out taking pictures, the more truth will be in them. Taking such pictures for me is like improvising jazz music - it's about living the very moment I shoot with highest intensity and compassion. If I'm successful in doing that, the picture will probably say as much about me and my vision as it will tell about my subject.
Of course, I am speaking about a fairly high ideal here. Looking at Diane Arbus's pictures might reveal what I am thinking of.
Anyway, if picture taking is based on this kind of openness, it will be highly unlikely to create troubles with the people pictured. But I am still learning ...
ampguy
Veteran
Israel, I did not mean to offend anyone, which is why I rewrote my sentence back there. The point I was trying to make, was that this group of folks I was talking about were, how would you say, hard core, likely carrying guns and knives, literally within 200 feet of someone shooting up something into his arm. Anyways, I'm not sure I can convey that to someone in say Mexico or Europe, but we have some rather bad neighborhoods, even in Calif.
Keith - has happened to me on a half dozen occasions, where an individual would confide in me, they had a warrant out for parking tickets, or whatever, or child support, or some other reasons could not be photographed. I had no reason to doubt them, and took heir word for it, and when possible (digital) erased the image, or if I hadn't taken it, made sure not to.
Arjay, perhaps I am not that familiar with Diane Arbus, but the works I have seen of hers were of staged and setup people for the most part. I think most of her subjects knew her, or were tracked down later (twins, giants, grenade boy, Anderson CNN guy), if she did spontaneous street photography, I guess I haven't seen much of it.
I like the street photos that were recently found from the '30s or so, a different era than now ... Vivian Maier stuff, the reason I like it, is because it is not stuff that could be captured easily or respectfully today, IMHO.
Keith - has happened to me on a half dozen occasions, where an individual would confide in me, they had a warrant out for parking tickets, or whatever, or child support, or some other reasons could not be photographed. I had no reason to doubt them, and took heir word for it, and when possible (digital) erased the image, or if I hadn't taken it, made sure not to.
Arjay, perhaps I am not that familiar with Diane Arbus, but the works I have seen of hers were of staged and setup people for the most part. I think most of her subjects knew her, or were tracked down later (twins, giants, grenade boy, Anderson CNN guy), if she did spontaneous street photography, I guess I haven't seen much of it.
I like the street photos that were recently found from the '30s or so, a different era than now ... Vivian Maier stuff, the reason I like it, is because it is not stuff that could be captured easily or respectfully today, IMHO.
daninjc
Well-known
paulfish4570
Veteran
II wish, ampguy, you could understand that Arjay was not trying to take a picture of the gang of five; he was aiming at some fellows playing chess some distance away. The gang of five apparently figured Arjay for a wuss, and more than likely wanted his camera, too.
So Arjay, you've been shooting for 52 years. I reckon that puts you close to 60 years of age, just guessing. Here we have a 60-year-old guy minding his own business and five thugs make him a target.
I think you handled yourself well, Arjay. If you had run, the punks would have taken that as a sign of weakness, and run you down to commence the assault. Self-defense courses worldwide teach potential victims to stand and make a fuss to attract the attention of as many other people as possible - and, one hopes, the police. I cannot for the life of me understand how anyone could interpret Arjay's action as anything but correct under the circumstances ...
So Arjay, you've been shooting for 52 years. I reckon that puts you close to 60 years of age, just guessing. Here we have a 60-year-old guy minding his own business and five thugs make him a target.
I think you handled yourself well, Arjay. If you had run, the punks would have taken that as a sign of weakness, and run you down to commence the assault. Self-defense courses worldwide teach potential victims to stand and make a fuss to attract the attention of as many other people as possible - and, one hopes, the police. I cannot for the life of me understand how anyone could interpret Arjay's action as anything but correct under the circumstances ...
rdeleskie
Well-known
Frankly, if one was supposed to stop and ask before taking a street shot, some of the best photographs in the historic archive wouldn't exist.
Personally, I have no problem with walking into a crowded area and taking pictures of strangers. I use a small rangefinder, but don't hide the fact that I am photographing. If someone wants to talk to me about it, I'm happy to chat. I will sometimes start conversations with interesting-looking individuals, then ask them if I can take their picture. Sometimes I don't ask. I mix both approaches.
As a rule, I don't photograph the homeless, the marginalized, drug addicts or people in mental distress. I have relatives who fit into those categories, they are not exotic to me. Such individuals play out many intimate aspects of their lives in public, and the line between their public and private selves is blurred, or in some cases, virtually non-existent. Photographing them in the street is practically akin to someone walking into your house and photographing you in your living room or bedroom. You'd be pretty p*ssed too if someone did that. As has been pointed out in this thread, it can also be unsafe. Furthermore, I find it a photographic cliche - the "meaning" of such pictures is easily reduced to simplistic categories (pathos, desperation, humility, the "beautifully ugly," etc). We have all seen a million such pictures.
What motivates me when it comes to shooting in public places is trying to discover who is really there when you look close enough. Who are the people who cross this intersection, utilize this beach or park, ride this bus, etc.? What do their faces - or body language - tell me about how these usually private individuals are feeling at a particular moment in the midst of a crowd, and what emotions they bring with them into a public place? In the middle of all this hustle and bustle, do they look bored? Do they do something unguarded like scratch an itch in spite of being surrounded by other people? I don't mind if they look at the camera - I'm part of the environment they are reacting to. If they give me a look of hostility, annoyance, etc., it tells me how they feel about having a stranger point a camera in their direction. That's fine.
I am also interested in how people change mundane locations into something different through their actions. Beach-goers who seem to transform Lake Ontario into the Ganges through the way they relate to the water; or who use the point where land and water meet for religious gatherings. I wouldn't describe this as street photography, but it does involve me taking pictures of people without asking for their permission.
As an aside, I too once found myself surrounded by people after taking some shots of people playing chess in the park, wanting to know what I was doing. Some of these folks were obviously up to more than playing chess. I told them the truth: I was interested in the people that come to play chess and the environment, the scene, I like chess myself, I wasn't photographing the specific individuals who were accosting me, and I'm not taking pictures for anyone other than myself. I was calm and genial. Within a few minutes we were talking about other things, and they actually thanked me for taking the time to talk to them, as opposed to snapping photos and running off (which I guess is what a lot of people do there). Perhaps it was because I had spent about half-an-hour before hand watching and listening, being part of the scene, making my presence obvious, before I started snapping away. I didn't just barge in there loaded down with camera gear and a fanny pack and start firing away like I owned the place.
Anyway, I fully expect to get accosted again, or even to get a fist in the face one of these days. I try to stay away from people who look like they might throw urine. But as long as it is nothing more serious than that, or even a broken camera, I will probably survive. I might even post my experiences here, and we can debate about whether or not I deserved it.
To the OP, it sounds like the experiences you described have caused you to re-evaluate your approach, which is a reasonable response. If you want to photograph people on the margins for reasons of photo-journalistic interest, then undertake a true photojournalist approach. Research, get to know them, their lives, their environment, build trust, etc. Or you may choose to photograph the world you are more familiar with, and think about what you feel and have to say about that. In either case, I believe that if you can see yourself in the people you photograph (as opposed to them being an alien species), you are less likely to have trouble, and more likely to walk away with a good picture (and dryer to boot!).
Personally, I have no problem with walking into a crowded area and taking pictures of strangers. I use a small rangefinder, but don't hide the fact that I am photographing. If someone wants to talk to me about it, I'm happy to chat. I will sometimes start conversations with interesting-looking individuals, then ask them if I can take their picture. Sometimes I don't ask. I mix both approaches.
As a rule, I don't photograph the homeless, the marginalized, drug addicts or people in mental distress. I have relatives who fit into those categories, they are not exotic to me. Such individuals play out many intimate aspects of their lives in public, and the line between their public and private selves is blurred, or in some cases, virtually non-existent. Photographing them in the street is practically akin to someone walking into your house and photographing you in your living room or bedroom. You'd be pretty p*ssed too if someone did that. As has been pointed out in this thread, it can also be unsafe. Furthermore, I find it a photographic cliche - the "meaning" of such pictures is easily reduced to simplistic categories (pathos, desperation, humility, the "beautifully ugly," etc). We have all seen a million such pictures.
What motivates me when it comes to shooting in public places is trying to discover who is really there when you look close enough. Who are the people who cross this intersection, utilize this beach or park, ride this bus, etc.? What do their faces - or body language - tell me about how these usually private individuals are feeling at a particular moment in the midst of a crowd, and what emotions they bring with them into a public place? In the middle of all this hustle and bustle, do they look bored? Do they do something unguarded like scratch an itch in spite of being surrounded by other people? I don't mind if they look at the camera - I'm part of the environment they are reacting to. If they give me a look of hostility, annoyance, etc., it tells me how they feel about having a stranger point a camera in their direction. That's fine.
I am also interested in how people change mundane locations into something different through their actions. Beach-goers who seem to transform Lake Ontario into the Ganges through the way they relate to the water; or who use the point where land and water meet for religious gatherings. I wouldn't describe this as street photography, but it does involve me taking pictures of people without asking for their permission.
As an aside, I too once found myself surrounded by people after taking some shots of people playing chess in the park, wanting to know what I was doing. Some of these folks were obviously up to more than playing chess. I told them the truth: I was interested in the people that come to play chess and the environment, the scene, I like chess myself, I wasn't photographing the specific individuals who were accosting me, and I'm not taking pictures for anyone other than myself. I was calm and genial. Within a few minutes we were talking about other things, and they actually thanked me for taking the time to talk to them, as opposed to snapping photos and running off (which I guess is what a lot of people do there). Perhaps it was because I had spent about half-an-hour before hand watching and listening, being part of the scene, making my presence obvious, before I started snapping away. I didn't just barge in there loaded down with camera gear and a fanny pack and start firing away like I owned the place.
Anyway, I fully expect to get accosted again, or even to get a fist in the face one of these days. I try to stay away from people who look like they might throw urine. But as long as it is nothing more serious than that, or even a broken camera, I will probably survive. I might even post my experiences here, and we can debate about whether or not I deserved it.
To the OP, it sounds like the experiences you described have caused you to re-evaluate your approach, which is a reasonable response. If you want to photograph people on the margins for reasons of photo-journalistic interest, then undertake a true photojournalist approach. Research, get to know them, their lives, their environment, build trust, etc. Or you may choose to photograph the world you are more familiar with, and think about what you feel and have to say about that. In either case, I believe that if you can see yourself in the people you photograph (as opposed to them being an alien species), you are less likely to have trouble, and more likely to walk away with a good picture (and dryer to boot!).
ampguy
Veteran
Hi Paul
Hi Paul
Let's not speculate on what happened there.
Arjay has chosen not to detail what the relationship was between the kids and the chess players - I suspected they might be family or friends, but I do not know. Arjay has also chosen not to detail what was said.
I find it hard to fathom, from the few details Arjay has provided, that the "thugs" would try to steal his camera with 200 witnesses nearby. Even Arjay mentioned it had something to do with his photo taking.
Hi Paul
Let's not speculate on what happened there.
Arjay has chosen not to detail what the relationship was between the kids and the chess players - I suspected they might be family or friends, but I do not know. Arjay has also chosen not to detail what was said.
I find it hard to fathom, from the few details Arjay has provided, that the "thugs" would try to steal his camera with 200 witnesses nearby. Even Arjay mentioned it had something to do with his photo taking.
II wish, ampguy, you could understand that Arjay was not trying to take a picture of the gang of five; he was aiming at some fellows playing chess some distance away. The gang of five apparently figured Arjay for a wuss, and more than likely wanted his camera, too.
So Arjay, you've been shooting for 52 years. I reckon that puts you close to 60 years of age, just guessing. Here we have a 60-year-old guy minding his own business and five thugs make him a target.
I think you handled yourself well, Arjay. If you had run, the punks would have taken that as a sign of weakness, and run you down to commence the assault. Self-defense courses worldwide teach potential victims to stand and make a fuss to attract the attention of as many other people as possible - and, one hopes, the police. I cannot for the life of me understand how anyone could interpret Arjay's action as anything but correct under the circumstances ...
maddoc
... likes film again.
To make an omlette you have to break some eggs Israel ... keep doing what you do and maintain your belief that you are exercising your right as a photographer and artist.
I have never heard this expression before but it hits the nail on the head.
kuzano
Veteran
Also since the "Great Depression of Now"
Also since the "Great Depression of Now"
Since budgets for mental health care facilities and jails/prisons/law enforcement are failing, the numbers of unstable people on the street are increasing in large numbers. It's also likely that most of these people who may normally be taking medication are not.
I will say this, sticking your camera in the face of a felon released early to the street is a direct invitation to a "fist" party. Invading the personal space of a "street schizophrenic" will invite uncertain and shocking results.
Street photography is beginning to create a less personal caring for your own welfare, not to mention a decrease in rational thought.
Remember that the numbers of these people are increasing as we continue to kick them back onto the streets.
Furthermore, I find it absurd to think that if your friends and relatives are standing beside your hospital bed or coffin, they will find comfort in the platitude, "He was exercising his rights as a photographer and artist." Simply ridiculous.
Also since the "Great Depression of Now"
Since budgets for mental health care facilities and jails/prisons/law enforcement are failing, the numbers of unstable people on the street are increasing in large numbers. It's also likely that most of these people who may normally be taking medication are not.
I will say this, sticking your camera in the face of a felon released early to the street is a direct invitation to a "fist" party. Invading the personal space of a "street schizophrenic" will invite uncertain and shocking results.
Street photography is beginning to create a less personal caring for your own welfare, not to mention a decrease in rational thought.
Remember that the numbers of these people are increasing as we continue to kick them back onto the streets.
Furthermore, I find it absurd to think that if your friends and relatives are standing beside your hospital bed or coffin, they will find comfort in the platitude, "He was exercising his rights as a photographer and artist." Simply ridiculous.
Last edited:
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I've never been placed in the position of being photographed in the street myself and I often wonder how I'd feel about it?
In the wrong mood I wouldn't like it I suspect ... but not being an agressive individual I'd be of little threat to the shooter!
In the wrong mood I wouldn't like it I suspect ... but not being an agressive individual I'd be of little threat to the shooter!
Steve M.
Veteran
My 2 cents on this is: I don't shoot photos of homeless people. Ever. But I do shoot on the street almost daily. I used to be healthy and had a great life. Had a lot of stuff. Then I was in an accident, got ill and lost everything. I mean everything. Slept on the side of the road and stayed at the Reno Gospel Mission. Owed hospitals tens of thousands of dollars. Pretty bad scene. I pulled through, got my life together, paid everyone off and now all is very good. But I vividly remember how it felt when people would take photos of us homeless, especially in the constant lines we had to stand in to eat and hopefully get a night on a cot. I hated it. The homeless folks have family too, and who knows who might see photos of them at their worst? The news people were our most hated. If it happened to me it could happen to any of us. It could happen to you. Tomorrow. Happiness is fleeting, but suffering can seem endless. For some it literally is. Better to show others as we would wish to be seen. In an instant our whole world could be turned upside down.
Last edited: