MIkhail
Well-known
Quite right.
why is street photography so hated?
- Thread starter back alley
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 165
- Views 16K
Quite right.
tbhv55
Well-known
I'll readily admit that good 'street' can have me absolutely spellbound, but I've got to say that you've nailed it with your assessment of the bulk of what is seen on the net.
I continue to try - and I continue to be bloody useless at it...🙁🙄
Sparrow
Veteran
... I did this earlier today, popped my designer hat on and did some prints in someone elses style ... a pastiche, if you like to see how it was received
Hsg
who dares wins
One tradition of street photography is that rangefinder cameras such as Leica M series are considered a prerequisite for street photography.
This tradition has led to a lot of gear enthusiasts using the genre of street photography simply to use their Leica stuff. A majority of these Leica M shooters are really interested in street photography, but a minority of them are just using street photography to 'test' their gear and these ones are sometimes the most vocal and aggressive of all street photographers because they're deeply insecure.
Unfortunately, this small minority has created a negative stereotype of the street photographer, so people have begun to associate street photography with these kind of people.
Some people hate street photography because they hate the Leica carrying gear-head who uses street photography simply as a means to show off his 'collection'.
And that along with the difficulty of the genre as I said earlier (difficulty in being good at it), means that its not for everybody. When something is not for everybody, there is resentment and hatred.
This tradition has led to a lot of gear enthusiasts using the genre of street photography simply to use their Leica stuff. A majority of these Leica M shooters are really interested in street photography, but a minority of them are just using street photography to 'test' their gear and these ones are sometimes the most vocal and aggressive of all street photographers because they're deeply insecure.
Unfortunately, this small minority has created a negative stereotype of the street photographer, so people have begun to associate street photography with these kind of people.
Some people hate street photography because they hate the Leica carrying gear-head who uses street photography simply as a means to show off his 'collection'.
And that along with the difficulty of the genre as I said earlier (difficulty in being good at it), means that its not for everybody. When something is not for everybody, there is resentment and hatred.
KM-25
Well-known
LOL….ah Joe…lets take a look at the very first post and the title of the thread:
“Why is street photography so hated?”
It’s not as can be seen on here and in the recent discovery of Vivian Maier. Some love it, some don’t love it, I doubt many hate it.
“i know we all can't be masters at it but i see pics of cats and flowers and kids that get positive comments...calendar pics at best…”
That has nothing to do with street photography and everything to do with if the work is getting a second glance and causing the viewer to feel enough to express an opinion.
Or….in the case of what you have followed up with, why is Joe’s work not getting any attention?
So in looking at the statement above, you seem conflicted. You like the way you shoot, don't care about being popular and yet want someone...anyone to tell you how your photos impact people. You want attention and you are not getting it, hence the cryptic opener, yes?
I posted a photo on the 1st page of the "Extraordinary" thread as a form of litmus test. It's an image that damn near got me shot, won 4 awards, ran in 30+ newspapers via AP, Newsweek and has what I feel to be some impact. As far as response, I got crickets my friend...and you know why?...I don't. Maybe because I have no friends on this Rangefinder Enthusiast website and likely I am on quite a number of blocked lists because I don't candy coat. Or, maybe because of what another member said, the thread got pounded by photos so the hang time on the image was nil. Either way, a photograph that gained critical acclaim by those who's opinions are still valid to this day got no comment whatsoever.
If I never got any recognition for my work in any form, I might be down on it all a bit, but honestly I am ok with it not happening here, because my mentors, the people who's opinion I actually place value on are not on the inter-webs, they are real people who I engage with in person first and all other modes afterwards.
I looked at your work and at first glance, I agree that a tighter edit will make for a more to the point presentation. I also agree about the mix of color with black and white, when mixed together like that it is too much of a visual speed bump.
One thing I did not see or see mentioned is something I will suggest. The photos show folks at the market, both seller and buyer be when everything is setup, not before or after. I think that some depiction of setup and breakdown could make for some good photo ops. It looks like you have the trust of those at the market, so hopefully someone here can mentor you in private and you will find other ways to feel more fulfilled with your work.
But at the end of the day, you can't make the girl fall in love with you because you want her to, you can only make her fall because it is who you are she is falling in love with...photographs work the same way.
Dante_Stella
Rex canum cattorumque
I don't know that the premise is correct - that there is so much "hate" for street photography. Hate implies that most people care enough to form an opinion, and the question may be a form of self-flattery. But there are some points that the street set (or self-identified) group need to keep in perspective to understand why there is indifference (or hostility) to what they believe to be brilliant work.
- It is hard to sell pictures of humans who are strangers to the viewer. Unless they are attractive nude women - and that is not seen often in street photography.
- Shooting pictures of strangers in public might be legal, but it also seems creepy.
- Street photographers seem to blow a disproportionate amount of mind-share on the idea of what might be "real" or "authentic" street photography versus not (it's like the Python-esque "we're the Judean People's Front... no, we're the People's Front of Judea"). It's probably likely that no one outside the club really cares. In fact, given the continued esteem by the general public of Capa, Smith, and Doisneau, all of whom nudged reality a little bit, the reality or fantasy part is an even more provincial discussion that looks a lot like a factional war within a splinter religion.*
- A lot of street photography is, indeed, under-edited, uninteresting, or dare we say bad? If a photo cannot capture the context of the human interaction it depicts, the viewer is left at best meh. Or to paraphrase: "tell us why we care."
- Some of it comes off as suffering-porn.
Dante
- It is hard to sell pictures of humans who are strangers to the viewer. Unless they are attractive nude women - and that is not seen often in street photography.
- Shooting pictures of strangers in public might be legal, but it also seems creepy.
- Street photographers seem to blow a disproportionate amount of mind-share on the idea of what might be "real" or "authentic" street photography versus not (it's like the Python-esque "we're the Judean People's Front... no, we're the People's Front of Judea"). It's probably likely that no one outside the club really cares. In fact, given the continued esteem by the general public of Capa, Smith, and Doisneau, all of whom nudged reality a little bit, the reality or fantasy part is an even more provincial discussion that looks a lot like a factional war within a splinter religion.*
*Also, what exactly is "street photography?" What's the accrediting body? If it's what Cartier-Bresson did, which was to observe and record without interference, then Eric Kim is not in that group. His work is good, but I would classify it more as "impromptu portraits" or Robert Frank revival. A lot of the material is unabashedly posed (see his blog for the details).
- A lot of street photography is, indeed, under-edited, uninteresting, or dare we say bad? If a photo cannot capture the context of the human interaction it depicts, the viewer is left at best meh. Or to paraphrase: "tell us why we care."
- Some of it comes off as suffering-porn.
Dante
airfrogusmc
Veteran
I think it all depends on how far along you are on the journey. Some have been doing it and a very comfortable with the way the see and work. I think you can learn a lot from looking at your work and seeing consistencies that seem to show up a lot. The way you put your images together. If you see some kind of consistency not forced but what come natural I say follow that. That can lead to a more personal way of seeing.
back alley
IMAGES
not much to argue with here...i thought i had friends here but according to your theory i don't or i would be inundated with comments.
again, my flickr account isn't set up for a presentation and i do agree i need a place to post my shots in a better manner. i do have more set up shots for the market, i used to ge there before it opened to catch that...need to find them. for the record, i do get recognition and attention locally for some of these images but no awards yet 😉...
back alley
IMAGES
as far as the title of this thread...i see a not so vailed view of some here on rff that tells me that street is hated by them...i could be wrong but i don't think so...
airfrogusmc
Veteran
I think you could be right Joe...
FrankS
Registered User
KM-25
Well-known
Oh for Pete's sake, that is not what I meant, goober, LOL!
Just setup a new gallery in Flickr and then slowly put images in it that are already in the big one. I do this all the time on my computer with sets called Rough Edit, Edit-2, Edit-3, Final Edit, etc...
Maybe opinions on photography are like vitamins, if you take one day, everything works a little better. But if you take the whole bottle at once, you'll curl up and die...😱
FrankS
Registered User
You have lots of friends here Joe, but it's hard to comment when photos are presented in the self-described dumping ground of Flickr. Even an edited selection, like in my web link, gets little comment. It seems that single or just a few photos presented in their own thread get more response here at RFF.
Michael Markey
Veteran
Yep ... lots of friends.
Why don`t we see some more of that concert stuff you shot in the early days.
The one I saw , I thought very good.
Why don`t we see some more of that concert stuff you shot in the early days.
The one I saw , I thought very good.
airfrogusmc
Veteran
I say again pull out the ones you really think are to stay and put them in the thread I mentioned that Frank started earlier.
And yes you have friends here.
back alley
IMAGES
i started talking about this with the pics that i post here in mind...and they are posted singly or in small groups of about 3 or so...i posted some pics recently from the eos m camera and got little response...this is the norm here.
back alley
IMAGES
i need to find another site...flickr is on my enemy list these days.
airfrogusmc
Veteran
Joe put them in as an entire body of work...
airfrogusmc
Veteran
Joe PM me...
back alley
IMAGES
this thread really went silly buggers...it was meant to focus on street shooting and not me as such...not that i mind the attention...😉
Similar threads
