zuiko85
Veteran
Debates over words. Seems like no matter what word is used to describe something, somebody will find issue with it.
Oh well.
Oh well.
Why? Street
- Thread starter B-9
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 69
- Views 5K
fireblade
Vincenzo.
Anyone tried bed photography with a street camera? With 4K video things would be crisp and clear.
ooops, wrong site.....now wheres the Kardashians phone number........😀
ooops, wrong site.....now wheres the Kardashians phone number........😀
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
I like "fad words". Mostly because I can identify them and notice their over-usage. I've seen "street" become one of those words among the greater popular photography realm.
I'm not a gun person, but I've noticed another word in that area...."tactical". Whether you like guns or not, pick up one of those magazines in the supermarket zine zone and thumb through an issue of "Guns n Ammo" or "Handgunner" or .... You'll see nearly every advertisement in that magazine expound on the "tactical" nature of their product. I saw "tactical" backpacks, "tactical" running shoes, "tactical" canned food, "tactical" condoms! Yes, its not just firearms that can be "tactical" any more.
I'm not a gun person, but I've noticed another word in that area...."tactical". Whether you like guns or not, pick up one of those magazines in the supermarket zine zone and thumb through an issue of "Guns n Ammo" or "Handgunner" or .... You'll see nearly every advertisement in that magazine expound on the "tactical" nature of their product. I saw "tactical" backpacks, "tactical" running shoes, "tactical" canned food, "tactical" condoms! Yes, its not just firearms that can be "tactical" any more.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Hmmmm.... Some condoms are strategic rather than tactical...
And my .44 magnum stainless frame Ruger could be strategic, too, in the right setting.
Cheers,
R.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
How about "humanist"?
Or are there too many people who are unable to admit that the French are actually very good at a lot of things, including e.g. cheeses, humanist photography, wine, veal, quality of life...
Cue rednecks talking about cheese-eating surrender monkeys, etc. Rednecks who'd either have been perfectly happy with Nazi occupation, or who lack the brain power to imagine being occupied by a murderous foreign power, cf. The Thousand Years War.
Cheers,
R.
Or are there too many people who are unable to admit that the French are actually very good at a lot of things, including e.g. cheeses, humanist photography, wine, veal, quality of life...
Cue rednecks talking about cheese-eating surrender monkeys, etc. Rednecks who'd either have been perfectly happy with Nazi occupation, or who lack the brain power to imagine being occupied by a murderous foreign power, cf. The Thousand Years War.
Cheers,
R.
Scrambler
Well-known
Personally I would consider other forms of contraception from a strategic perspective, though exactly what your goal is may change that.
While I agree that "street" is a kind of buzzword, it also is a kind of photography. Like a lot of handles it is small, tactile (tactical?) and bears little resemblance to the item it carries. "Candid photography of strangers in a public setting" doesn't quite have the same ring. But even if it WAS the popular term, hearing how the latest Sony/Nikon/Canon was good for it would not assist me a great deal.
P
PhotoGog
Guest
So much of street photography seems to me to confuse subject for content, including so-called "masters" like Meyerowitz. Artistically, he has nothing to say. Where Evans' great achievement was apprehending the distinctiveness of the American vernacular, both its zenith and swift decline, in the built environment -- which is to say, figuring the uniqueness of the confluence of a 'new world' frontier character, the verve of black culture as it evolved in America and, later, the ascendency of consumer capitalism upon daily lives -- well, Meyerowitz and his attendant fan boys then and now give us meaningless compositions of serendipitous emptiness, "moments", neither decisive nor determined, to reveal more than that which we can see. Which is fine, I suppose. After all, real artists are rare. For the rest of us, the street is where we belong. And as Seinfeld noted, "not that there's anything wrong with that!"
sjones
Established
I photograph urban areas for the most part, some of the shots have people, some don’t. Call it what you want, but if I say “street”, it’s not exactly going to be off the mark, given that many of my photos are literally taken from the street or adjacent sidewalk.
Don’t get me wrong, for years, I and others have harped on the ambiguous nature (and I reckon more recently, overuse) of the term street photography, but for conversation’s sake, it’s usually understood.
If folks want to introduce better categorial neologisms, I won’t object.
And yeah, just as super-teles happen to be good for taking photos of birds in flight, a rangefinder is good for street photogra…or whatever the hell you want to call it…there’s nothing wrong with something actually being appropriate. But of course, use what you want, what you need, whatever.
And I certainly don’t take issue with Meyerowitz, Winogrand, or others who do not operate chasing some grander artistic statement, which is quite the relief given the invariable redundancy, pretentiousness, or even potential sanctimony that often underpin artistic proselytizing. Not everyone can be a Robert Frank, and nor should they be.
Besides, compellingly grappling with aesthetics in ways influential and solid holds its own merit, particularly since photographs alone do not tell stories anyway.
Don’t get me wrong, for years, I and others have harped on the ambiguous nature (and I reckon more recently, overuse) of the term street photography, but for conversation’s sake, it’s usually understood.
If folks want to introduce better categorial neologisms, I won’t object.
And yeah, just as super-teles happen to be good for taking photos of birds in flight, a rangefinder is good for street photogra…or whatever the hell you want to call it…there’s nothing wrong with something actually being appropriate. But of course, use what you want, what you need, whatever.
And I certainly don’t take issue with Meyerowitz, Winogrand, or others who do not operate chasing some grander artistic statement, which is quite the relief given the invariable redundancy, pretentiousness, or even potential sanctimony that often underpin artistic proselytizing. Not everyone can be a Robert Frank, and nor should they be.
Besides, compellingly grappling with aesthetics in ways influential and solid holds its own merit, particularly since photographs alone do not tell stories anyway.
Richard G
Veteran
'Street' is a subversive word, and a buzz word. Advertisers love such a word. "You mean you don't do street? But you understand it, yeah?" Consumers don't want to be on the outer. How many kids in the central city with a camera are after architectural shots? Not many.
Dislike of the term is not only misunderstanding. It is conservatism. The word street is a noun not an adjective for goodness sake. Maybe a lot of RFFers who dislike the term are synaesthetes: do the words luscious and gorgeous or even just moreish (of food) repel you?
Dislike of the term is not only misunderstanding. It is conservatism. The word street is a noun not an adjective for goodness sake. Maybe a lot of RFFers who dislike the term are synaesthetes: do the words luscious and gorgeous or even just moreish (of food) repel you?
Richard G
Veteran
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
No ... a deep seated distrust and dislike of tribalism and fetishism. For me at least ... and that's not to say I don't appreciate good examples of the genre. I just don't like what happens when populism overtakes art.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Artist, smartist...
Meyerowitz, Winogrand and others were only mentioned here in return of OP assumptions what street photography is something which is hot now.
RFF 2010:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=89622
RFF 2006:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16777
B-9
Devin Bro
I make no such assumptions, please refer to my OP and my previous comments.
I am merely commenting on the use of the term "street" in recent times. Which relates much more to the comment about the use of "tactical" in gun themed magazines.
Obviously these are well known photographers who developed a style long before my post. Mention of these people has no relation to my point. Maybe I have not made that clear enough.
I am merely commenting on the use of the term "street" in recent times. Which relates much more to the comment about the use of "tactical" in gun themed magazines.
Obviously these are well known photographers who developed a style long before my post. Mention of these people has no relation to my point. Maybe I have not made that clear enough.
back alley
IMAGES
i think this thread is a no-win situation...as usual here at rff we have separated into the art vs. gear camps.
i have shot all types of cameras both off and off the street...so, while i love gear it does not set my artistic preference.
the little hairs on the back of my neck (no bald jokes, please...) get all prickly when street is talked about as populist or some new form of shooting that has just recently emerged...because this is not the case.
i have shot all types of cameras both off and off the street...so, while i love gear it does not set my artistic preference.
the little hairs on the back of my neck (no bald jokes, please...) get all prickly when street is talked about as populist or some new form of shooting that has just recently emerged...because this is not the case.
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
A while back there was a thread asking about when "Street Photography" as we know it today became a thing. I found a magazine article from 1902 that suggests the term was already in use then in reference to candid shots (as opposed to portraits, tintypes, etc. taken by "street photographers") taken on the street.
That said, I think the term's use has exploded with the popularity of the internet, whereas it was rather a niche thing previously.
P
PhotoGog
Guest
joe bosak
Well-known
There are the few who are genuinely documenting something to tell a story; and the many who are just taking snaps to document their surroundings on a day out. And I guess there are those who photograph in the street as practice for their journalism, or to gather ideas or practice composition for product/advert photography.
But other than that "street photography" often seems to be practised by people with gear they want to use without any real reason to do so, and no real aim in mind other than - possibly - meeting compositional and exposure criteria. Which sounds like practising for when there will be a reason to take a picture.
But other than that "street photography" often seems to be practised by people with gear they want to use without any real reason to do so, and no real aim in mind other than - possibly - meeting compositional and exposure criteria. Which sounds like practising for when there will be a reason to take a picture.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Michael Markey
Veteran
I photograph whatever I find interesting ...to me.
Sometimes in a street and sometimes not.
The location is unimportant.
I took my very first photograph aged 12 ... that was in a street in Belgium but was it street photography .
Sometimes in a street and sometimes not.
The location is unimportant.
I took my very first photograph aged 12 ... that was in a street in Belgium but was it street photography .
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
I just saw your original post, which was both funny and subtly perceptive. Too subtle, perhaps, like any good joke that no one gets. Yes, I am suggesting that if you are a "street photographer" who managed to take offense or bristle in any way at the OP, you did not get it, because there was nothing there to offend anyone.
I see that Roger has even managed to inject "rednecks" into yet another thread.
Anyway, Devin, thanks for posting, even if it wasn't clear enough.
Similar threads
