Who else doesn't get street photography?

[Ko.Fe.]

I still have no idea what OP is trying to explain here after his initial post and some following comments were questioned.
One of OP statements seems to be about "street" photography to be very special and glorified or somewhat hot in interests of mass. While it isn't.
I see same amount of different photo genre in museums, art galleries and on the internet. On the internet the RFF is only one place I'm aware of where "street" photography threads has pages of comments which are not only cries for privacy (they must be from cheaters 🙂 ) and "Think of the Children!" empty statements, but something related to the "street" photography. Just like airfrogusmc recently did it here.
On APUG they have very few "street" threads, photos. On POTN almost none. Leica forum almost nothing.
Flickr has huge groups dedicated not for street photography and I only scroll Flickr street photography groups to find old good names and maybe couple of new ones in months who are interesting. Many of the "street" photo threads, groups are loaded with landscapes and portraits. Is this is what OP is about?

 

[mep]

The vast majority of so-called 'street' photography does nothing for me.

Most simply do not exhibit any degree of photographic merit, often they don't have a subject and look like a haphazard, random snap. Poorly framed, out of focus, people looking down at the ground, it's kinda like watching a sitcom that's just not funny. 🙂 Just want to change the channel...

Very rarely there are those photos that *do* hold interest, instantly grabbing the viewer's attention and having photographic merit, but the only thing that the latter have in common with the former is that they were, well, taken on some street somewhere.

It appears that most such photographs are posted/shared just *because* they are street, regardless (in spite?) of whether they have photographic merit.

Does anyone else feel similarly?

I don't think there is an implied dislike of 'street photography'...I agree with the sentiments expressed.

 

[airfrogusmc]

I don't think there is an implied dislike of 'street photography'...I agree with the sentiments expressed.

Then why single out one area when it is clearly all areas that this over saturation is happening in? This is actually not the first time in the history of photography we have seen this. Kodak Brownie, instamatic, polaroid etc. It's just now it is so easy to put out there. Like I said lots of room to move around so either learn so maybe you might get it or not and only worry about the areas you do get.

 

[mep]

Then why single out one area when it is clearly all areas that this over saturation is happening in? This is actually not the first time in the history of photography we have seen this. Kodak Brownie, instamatic, polaroid etc. It's just now it is so easy to put out there. Like I said lots of room to move around so either learn so maybe you might get it or not and only worry about the areas you do get.

I get it. I just share the opinion expressed.

 

[airfrogusmc]

I get it. I just share the opinion expressed.

The OP doesn't get it and that is the premise of this thread.

 

[brennanphotoguy]

The OP doesn't get it and that is the premise of this thread.

Agreed.

10 characters.

 

[mep]

Agreed.

10 characters.

I think the OP gets street photography. I think the OP doesn't get the adulation given to mediocre street photography. I agree with him / her...

 

[airfrogusmc]

I think this was a tread created to get like minded people into it to rip on street photography thus the title. I would argue and rightfully so the OP by his own title states his ignorance. Why single out street and not other areas which are just as oversaturated? I think there is good work in all areas being created today just like in the past.

Good street work is very difficult. Just to get one or two is hard. Putting together a body of work of relating images and then throw on images that look like the creator that created them is really difficult and is usually a labor of passion. There generally is little to know money in it. How many would rather put a photograph of a stranger on the wall than a pretty sunset?

A lot of the work may in the future an have a historic element in it to. In some cases it can show life at a particular point in time. I say like or dislike whatever you want. But there is good work in all areas of visual arts being created today and that will continue whatever the future holds.

I do question a thread like this when it seems on the surface trying to villainize by singling out one area when the over saturation issue it is not relegated to just one area.

 

[jsrockit]

I think the OP gets street photography. I think the OP doesn't get the adulation given to mediocre street photography. I agree with him / her...

I don't get the adulation for mediocre food
I don't get the adulation for mediocre movies
I don't get the adulation for mediocre music
I don't get the adulation for mediocre products
I don't get the adulation for mediocre books
etc

I don't post about it though... I just ignore the stuff I don't care for.

 

[maggieo]

Sure, it takes a lot of practice. No one practiced more than Winogrand, who routinely shot huge numbers of rolls, leaving hundreds of thousands of undeveloped images after his death. But the quantity didn't necessarily equate to quality. There are many articles that have been about him and his prolific nature, and even about the deteriorating quality...

I think this has obliquely landed on the main point.

Yes, Winogrand shot tens of thousands of shots, or, for the purpose of this thought experiment, let's call them "takes."

Winogrand was very much like Stanley Kubrick- both shot more "takes" than most directors/photographers until they got or found the one that perfectly expressed that moment or moments. Then, in the editing room, they selected the best take. Sometimes, it wasn't the take they thought worked best when shooting. That take is the one they showed to the world.

The key to "good photography," much like making motion pictures, is editing.

As for Winogrand's "deteriorating quality," that comes from well-meaning curators who, wanting more of Winogrand's work in the world, have taken over the most essential part of Winogrand's work- they're doing the editing, not Winogrand. It's like taking a bunch of raw footage that Kubrick shot, taking it away from him, and cutting the picture. It's not going to be as good, because all Kubrick did was shoot the picture. His process, and the most important part of the process, was denied to him. That's what's happened to Winogrand.

And that's why so much street photography is crap. Lots of people can go out and shotgun their way to the occasional bit of brilliance in the viewfinder, but most photographers are only shooters and have little to no editing skills. They just throw everything up on the wall (or the web) and their best shots are the peas in the dog's breakfast.

 

[BLKRCAT]

I think the OP gets street photography. I think the OP doesn't get the adulation given to mediocre street photography. I agree with him / her...

x2

10char

 

[airfrogusmc]

I don't get the adulation for mediocre food
I don't get the adulation for mediocre movies
I don't get the adulation for mediocre music
I don't get the adulation for mediocre products
I don't get the adulation for mediocre books
etc

I don't post about it though... I just ignore the stuff I don't care for.

There ya go...

It's like folks that wander into a tread about _________ cameras only to try and convince the people that have a_________ camera that they are so wrong for being a _________ owner. Leaving out the fact they have never shot with a ________ or will never shot with a_______. Life is big and full of all kinds of things. I say find subjects and cameras that fit what each individual prefers and don't worry so much about what others are producing. Your crap might be someone else treasures or as the great dancer Martha Graham one said "No artist is ahead of his time. He is the time. It is just that others are behind the time.” Some just might not get it....

 

[mep]

I don't get the adulation for mediocre food
I don't get the adulation for mediocre movies
I don't get the adulation for mediocre music
I don't get the adulation for mediocre products
I don't get the adulation for mediocre books
etc

I don't post about it though... I just ignore the stuff I don't care for.

but you did.

 

[airfrogusmc]

If it's mediocre why care? It will all work out in the end. Time will show it to be just what it is. In my opinion worry about whether you are creating work that first reflects how you feel about life and the world and if others might be able to see you in your work and worry less about the masses. Clean up your own street before you take on the streets of others and I think it will all work out.

 

[jsrockit]

but you did.

I've never gone to a food, movie, book, etc forum to complain is the point.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

x2

10char

What is mediocre and what isn't. Isn't it too personal and complicated to generalize about it?

OP was asked to provide examples by several comments, but provided nothing real with some distant bashing of unnamed Magnum photographer.
I'm ain't Petite Chicken, here are two of yours which you choose to be on your site.
http://blkrcatphoto.tumblr.com/image/132059708844
http://blkrcatphoto.tumblr.com/image/116510167559

If I take yours, OP and mep side, this is how I would sound:
"It is mediocre to me. One I would not even bother to take, another is failed to the computer trash bin artistic approach."

But the thing is what many others at the same site of yours are decent. And I liked others you have posted at RFF as well. So, to me as the person who has grown up to respect choice and vision of others the reaction is - this photographer knows it better, but I don't understand it, yet.

 

[airfrogusmc]

I agree Ko.

 

[mep]

If it's mediocre why care? It will all work out in the end. Time will show it to be just what it is. In my opinion worry about whether you are creating work that first reflects how you feel about life and the world and if others might be able to see you in your work and worry less about the masses. Clean up your own street before you take on the streets of others and I think it will all work out.

nothing is personal. I don't care...

 

[Tompas]

(...) So, to me as the person who has grown up to respect choice and vision of others the reaction is - this photographer knows it better, but I don't understand it, yet.

I'm beginning to like you. 😉

 

[Tompas]

(...) a poor editing process, or lack of it, when combined with mass postings of crap photography has given the photo world more bad pictures than ever before. Or, maybe they were always there but we just didn't see them?

Yes, I think so.


PS: Somebody should buy me a beer -- this is my 500th modest contribution to this excellent site! 🙂