Worries that aren't unique to me?

[xxloverxx]

Tiny bit personal, but I can't be the only one to think about this…

Basically, I'm going to uni in 2 years. I want to study in France (because I think I'll be happier with my camera there than England) but chances are that I'll end up somewhere in England.

(It's 2:30am and I need to be up for school in 3 hours…)

A thought that keeps popping up in my head is: for a real street photog, does it matter where you are? Isn't it all about recording the interesting things, capturing the moments (whatever moments they may be)? Or are there first-world places that are genuinely "crap" for street photos? Henri Cartier-Bresson comes to mind, travelling the world and making great photos everywhere.

It's strange…I don't think I'll ever take up photography professionally, yet I think about how happy I'll be with my camera in a place almost more than what the university's like when I look at unis. I keep thinking "If I can't be happy in a place I'll be stuck in for 3-4 years, what's the point?"

Thoughts? The last thought I'll put is this: I've never been on vacation to a place where I haven't had at least a few "good" photos.

Also, it's strange that there aren't more unis in France that are primarily for teaching French in English, but I guess that's what the year-abroad programmes are about…

 

[FrankS]

A street photographers desert would be suburbia, IMO.

 

[jippiejee]

Some places just have more things happening in the streets than others. My own hometown is quite boring in this respect. Being a street photographer in Delhi, Beijing or Paris will certainly be more interesting than in sleepy Pimphausen or Farttown. Creating something interesting in that sleepy suburb will be all the more rewarding though, since we all can come home with vivid street scenes from Delhi, while showing the nihilism of Snoretown could be the true photographic masterpiece. You decide.

 

[Ducky]

A street photographers desert would be suburbia, IMO.

+1, or retiring to a beach community. I think I'll take the beach and just miss streets. There are people on beaches aren't there?

 

[agour]

I wouldnt really look at a city/town/whatever from a photographic view, but from a requirements view. Is the course actually worthwhile, is it accredited by any professional bodies etc? There is no point in going to university and racking up a huge debt if the course won't get you a job.

Now in england you can easily spend 45k+ on a three year course.. That course could be complete rubbish too. People complain that they have a degree but cant get a job. Having a degree isnt a benchmark anymore, anyone can get one.

Make sure you do a degree thats worthwhile! Dont just look at the place that you are going to. Sure if you go to a city (and your a country person at heat), you will probably get frustrated and drop out.

Finding the right balance is key. Visit the potential universities. Try to see the city/town/whatever, and spend a night there. You might find the place is completely different at night (and hey, your a student, night life will be important 😉 ).

Speak to people that went to that university, if possible people that did that course too. If your really keen it wouldnt be hard to track down people who have just graduated (most unis publish lists of graduees), drop them an email or something and ask for some feedback on the place.

 

[daninjc]

Don't worry too much. 2 years is plenty of time to change your mind many times. Uni is a great time in life, so yeah, you should make the best out of it, and go to a place where you can truly be happy - not just photographically but as a person - learning the most and making good friends.

I would suggest you pick a uni with a good curriculum that makes you feel passionate about it - no point in spending 4 years studying something that bores you, even if you're in photographic heaven. Many things change in life, but your education stays with you.

Also, years abroad and fellowships (e.g. erasmus, overseas, ...) allow you to experience other countries in the best possible way - by living there.

 

[n5jrn]

A street photographers desert would be suburbia, IMO.

+1. Precisely the point I was going to post, if you hadn't beat me to it. It's hard to find interesting people scenes on streets that are generally devoid of people.

 

[emraphoto]

Personally I would find Suburbia interesting. I have never really lived in a city less than a million until the last 6 years. The city now is half a million but essentially a big Suburbia. Pretty strange world to me, like a big collection of people's hang ups

 

[emraphoto]

Off to North Winnipeg (Canada) soon and it will certainly be 'interesting'.

It's been recommended I bring body armour?!?

 

[j j]

A street photographers desert would be suburbia, IMO.

I expect that a lot of photographers would agree with you. Hence, the suburbs are under-documented. For me, that's a shame but I'm guilty of it, too.

 

[KenR]

Cities are full of people, suburbs are devoid of people other than dog walkers. Bill Owens documented suburbia in the era before the internet and other personal electronics - people actually went outside to interact with one another. Kind of sterile.

 

[Godfrey]

A street photographers desert would be suburbia, IMO.

I do much of my street photography in the suburbs. Few others out shooting street work here so it presents a somewhat unusual subject niche.

Finding subject matter sometimes takes an effort, of course, as there are fewer people about in todays suburbs. But they're there.

Runaway - Sunnyvale 2007​

 

[Jobin]

It takes more creativity to make great photos of the mundane. I particularly enjoy bustling streets, not only because there are more subjects, but because I can snap a photo and blend back into the crowd.

 

[Moriturii]

You are correct, a real photographer, not just a wanna-be who surfs the internet forums all day will and can find interesting pictures everywhere, some places might take longer then others though, but there IS pictures to be taken any where and every where. Pictures are happening around you in the droves, dozens of them as we speak, just that thing of "seeing them" and taking their pictures.

In the end of the day there isn't much else to do but to just get out there, take your finger out, start shooting, everyday (or as much as possible... literary)

 

[zauhar]

A street photographers desert would be suburbia, IMO.

There really is no "there" there, as someone said. No streets, no people, not even much nature to see. (Curious that people who want to get away from the city seem as afraid of nature as their fellow man.)

That said, I have been shooting most every Friday evening in Ardmore, PA, while my kid has orchestra rehearsal. This is an "inner" suburb of Philadelphia, more like a small town than a modern suburb. There is quite a bit to see and capture.

To the OP, you want to be in a city if you want to shoot. You have no shortage of interesting subjects, animate and inanimate, and surprisingly, a lot of nature close at hand. Besides, you're young, you don't want to be in a boring place.

(Maybe you should NEVER want to be in a boring place!)

Randy

 

[Keith]

I think suburbia has it's own attractions for a photographer and can often offer photographs that portray the stark realities of life 'around' rather than 'in' cities.

I personaly find country towns fascinating ... though at first appearance they can appear to hold little for the eye.

 

[ChrisPlatt]

I grew up in New York City but first went to college in semi-rural Upstate New York.
I felt quite isolated, but soon learned to enjoy many opportunities for nature and landscape photography.

In addition I volunteered my services at the school newspaper, mostly to gain access to their darkroom.
I also learned some rudimentary photojournalism skills there.

Chris

 

[Cutly]

If you find a place boring, you'll end up taking boring pictures, or pictures of boring things at most. But you can take brilliant pictures of boring things, if you enjoy it! Go to some place where you enjoy taking pictures, and where you will find the sort of things you want to photographs. For me, that is definitly Paris.
The key is to enjoy yourself, not to make comment of "what a real photographer would find to do" here or there. Find a place where you'd be happy to grab your camera and go out everyday. Could be anywhere, but it's up to you and no one will be able to tell you where it is.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Have you considered Central/Eastern Europe? MUCH less uptight than Paris, which is itself a lot less uptight than the UK.

And of course in India, English is one of the most useful languages (the other is Hindi).

Be wary of the advice of old men. I found Birmingham great, but that was in the late 60s/early 70s. Would I want to be there now? Hard to tell: I'm not student age any more. But last year I was in Magdeburg (my daughter spent a year there, and on June 15 I was 61 and she was 21), shooting in the city and at the university. I remembered very clearly what it was like to be a student: the good more than the bad.

Cheers,

R.

 

[dee]

Frankly , just sitting on a bench in some boring place like mine , there will be opportunities . It's a question of looking - for the different , patterns , shapes etc .. maybe just a group at a bus stop .
Dont choose a place of study just 'cos the photo opportunities seem better.