The term can be described as a "label" (derogatively) and "title" (boastfully?)
Getting either is not fun because you're expected to live up to it.
More so if it's a title, you're expected to defend it, such as against the "definition" debate-athletes that concentrate on every smallest slip of the tongue to proof you're wrong.
Thus, avoiding the term is the most convenient way. Just do things as you like, and you can always stray out of the way when you want to.
And no need to be compared to the famous street photographers.
I want to be street photographer, but I'd rather keep the definition to myself.
Had enough with reading debates about what made a "street photography" picture.
Poor photographers who actually literally shoot streets, as in the roads and stones of it. They must be having a touch time explaining what they do: "No! No candid shots!"
I like to take photos that tell a story or reminded me of a private story. This happens mainly in the streets. But when one speak of street photographer, one speak of HC Bresson and the alike. I am a hobbyist.
The problem with the term street is it seems to limit the genre to street but so called street can happen in doors on a farm or anywhere, Its about people interacting with each other and thier surroundings. There is also a leaning towards spontinaiety rather than posed fotos but even posed photos can be street.
The three photos below are to me street but no street in any of them
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.