Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
f/8 and be there. A discussion of Street Photography.
- Thread starter soco
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Again, I definitely do not dismiss the man. For example, a field I do have the "right" to critique an artist in is guitar. I have been playing since the age of 4 and while, like any art, I haven't learned everything there is to know about it, I definitely know a lot more than I do photography.
Now, one of the most acclaimed guitarists in the world today is John Petrucci of Dream Theater. I personally can't stand his playing from a non-technical standpoint. Technically, he's inhuman on a guitar and can play like no one else. However, I think he lacks, and always will lack, that certain soul to music that an artist like Andy Timmons has.
The point is, my opinion on John Petrucci/Andy Timmons is just as valid as my opinion on HCB/Kai Wong.
You're totally spot on by saying that I'm a long ways off from having a style. And I love what you said about gear. Absolutely right. I read a facinating article on iPhone street photography the other day and it made me smile. I also enjoy this little series on DigitalRevTV in which the host gets a pro photographer to do a shoot with a crappy camera to prove the point that the gear does not make the photographer/photo.
I'm excited about the current stage of learning I'm in. So much information and whatnot to take in and consider. I'll check out those sites, and I love the shots you posted. Nicely done.
I appreciate the sentiment about photographers trying to be a certain type of photographer. I think you're right. Obviously just mimicking an artist's style won't make your shots great, they'll just make them copies made in a different place and time. Only capturing the soul and feeling in front of you makes the shot have such a thing at all.
Having poor street photography, what type of shooting do you enjoy doing?
Again, I definitely do not dismiss the man. For example, a field I do have the "right" to critique an artist in is guitar. I have been playing since the age of 4 and while, like any art, I haven't learned everything there is to know about it, I definitely know a lot more than I do photography.
Now, one of the most acclaimed guitarists in the world today is John Petrucci of Dream Theater. I personally can't stand his playing from a non-technical standpoint. Technically, he's inhuman on a guitar and can play like no one else. However, I think he lacks, and always will lack, that certain soul to music that an artist like Andy Timmons has.
The point is, my opinion on John Petrucci/Andy Timmons is just as valid as my opinion on HCB/Kai Wong.
You're totally spot on by saying that I'm a long ways off from having a style. And I love what you said about gear. Absolutely right. I read a facinating article on iPhone street photography the other day and it made me smile. I also enjoy this little series on DigitalRevTV in which the host gets a pro photographer to do a shoot with a crappy camera to prove the point that the gear does not make the photographer/photo.
I'm excited about the current stage of learning I'm in. So much information and whatnot to take in and consider. I'll check out those sites, and I love the shots you posted. Nicely done.
I appreciate the sentiment about photographers trying to be a certain type of photographer. I think you're right. Obviously just mimicking an artist's style won't make your shots great, they'll just make them copies made in a different place and time. Only capturing the soul and feeling in front of you makes the shot have such a thing at all.
Having poor street photography, what type of shooting do you enjoy doing?
Good to hear.
I decided a while back that I'll never take a photo like HCB, Winogrand, Meyerowitz, or even Turpin. Not that I wouldn't give my first born to take photos like them, but because I am me and they are them. It's like someone practicing to play like Tiger Woods, hitting the courses everyday, copying his style. At the end of it all, that someone will never play like Tiger Woods, because Tiger is Tiger. You will get better, sure, but you won't be Tiger Woods.
I've settled this fact and the idea that all I can do is simply get better by reading books, looking at photos and taking pictures as often as I can, simply because I enjoy the activity, not because I'm trying to become the next Winogrand.
Good luck in your journey.
I prefer action/sport photography. For a few reasons it appeals to me. I enjoy watching and because of my poor health (Self inflicted) I cant participate in just about any of it. But i dont like doing pro stuff, I like the amateur sports levels because the joy of handing someone a print of them doing the sport they love really lights their face up. And this is what I think speaks to my like of street photography. Getting people in a real moment of emotion.
I have tried landscapes but I feel that I just cant capture the image as I see it out of camera. At that put i feel like im a GWC and the shots end up being uninspiring to me. I do enjoy animal photography and have even tried some artsy stuff. But nothing ever really seems to stand out to me so while they are in my file, they really dont get looked at much more. Really I just use them as learning tools to help me capture the things I do like.
An example of capturing the moment that I had was this shot. Almost everyone I have shown it to has made suggestions on how I could have cleaned/planned the scene better. But to me this is exactly what I walked into on my buddies house after his ex took almost all the furniture when she left. I think the nearly poor quality of the shot speaks to it as well. I had just come off a local hill taking night photos so my settings were all rubix cubed up and I just pointed and clicked.
I have tried landscapes but I feel that I just cant capture the image as I see it out of camera. At that put i feel like im a GWC and the shots end up being uninspiring to me. I do enjoy animal photography and have even tried some artsy stuff. But nothing ever really seems to stand out to me so while they are in my file, they really dont get looked at much more. Really I just use them as learning tools to help me capture the things I do like.
An example of capturing the moment that I had was this shot. Almost everyone I have shown it to has made suggestions on how I could have cleaned/planned the scene better. But to me this is exactly what I walked into on my buddies house after his ex took almost all the furniture when she left. I think the nearly poor quality of the shot speaks to it as well. I had just come off a local hill taking night photos so my settings were all rubix cubed up and I just pointed and clicked.
Attachments
I have found that anything that is uninspiring to you will be uninspiring to others. Do what you like and worry about everyone else afterwards.
I would suggest all photography is about the subject. Yes, something like landscape photography requires a greater depth of technical knowledge for timed exposures etc, but surely the result is what is important, not the method in any photography (exceptions of course for artists who are making a specific point by using specific methods).
Also, historically artists have copied the masters that came before them. Was it not the case that the European painters used to train by copying past masters works? Is this not just part of the learning process? The part that separates the masters from the rest is that the masters are able to develop their own look or style or take the art into a new direction.
The more you practice street photography, the more you learn how to handle yourself, to not influence things, or even to influence things if you want. You learn where to place yourself, how to move so as to not be conspicuous, as well as having your camera prepared to quickly take the shot without having to change any settings of fiddle with anything. If you had tried to take the cafe shot above, and the woman noticed you, it would just have been a different shot, maybe a better shot, maybe even a million dollar shot. Something small, some expression, a slightly different posture or angle can drastically change a shot, sometimes for the better, sometimes for worse.
Sorry to keep veering this off topic, but to the one(s) thinking that the opinion of an 'expert' is more valuable than that of just anybody is just the kind of thing that is and has been causing the inbred, ass-kissing, small clique party the art world is today. If you're not in the 'party', your work is worthless crap and your opinions are meaningless wastes of air as you have no idea what you are talking about.
The whole point of art is that there is no right or wrong. You either like something or not. It invokes discussion and at times controversy. But rarely universal praise. It is not an acquired taste. And while you're likely to like something you like even more when you know more about it, you're not going to like something you hate just because you learn more about it.
Personally, I don't like HCB much at all. I much prefer his lesser known contemporary Willy Ronis, also from France, who's work *I* feel is superior to HCB, both in compositions and technical execution.
All just my personal opinion of course.
The whole point of art is that there is no right or wrong. You either like something or not. It invokes discussion and at times controversy. But rarely universal praise. It is not an acquired taste. And while you're likely to like something you like even more when you know more about it, you're not going to like something you hate just because you learn more about it.
Personally, I don't like HCB much at all. I much prefer his lesser known contemporary Willy Ronis, also from France, who's work *I* feel is superior to HCB, both in compositions and technical execution.
All just my personal opinion of course.
What I was trying to get at is that street photography takes almost no technical knowledge to be able to pull off a good photo. As is exampled in the previous post of a iphone photo vs real camera shot. Both are good and the equipment didnt matter. Now the artistic ability is MUCH higher than in other forms.
Where as in motorsports, a racecar going into a turn is pretty boring at a high shutter speed. But add some pan and a slower shutter speed or a shallow depth of field and now you got a good picture, even if the subject (specifically the car) is rather boring. Panning and being able to adjust the camera is technical and needed to make that shot better.
----------
I think this speaks true to the whole art world. Art seems to be no longer for the artist and damn the rest, but more of the "will others like it?" crowd.
In general I agree with this sentiment. I do, however, think that this type of shot can be a useful exercise, especially in todays world of digital cameras. I think taking this kind of shot can be useful practice for learning your focal length, framing, composition. Just something to do, an exercise, not something to be shown. Unless you hit a real winner, of course!
I think this sentiment also steers the conversation into the direction of what is a good photograph? what makes a good photograph? Too many people think that street photography is "taking a photo of a person in the street". Too many people do not take the time to research and understand photos and photography in the sense of the actual images. I find this strange. If you are into music, play in a band or orchestra you listen to and know a lot about music, writers tend to read a lot and know a lot about writing and literature, sports players know about sports, particularly their sport. Yet with photography there is an army of people who profess to be "into" photography yet spend very little time actually looking at photos and learning anything about the history of the subject or can even say why they think a photo is good.
Maybe I am one of those people. I dont know anything about the photographers you guys are talking about. but for me photography is about evoking an emotion. If it doesnt bring out any emotion in me it is worthless to me. Not to say its a bad picture, but to me it has no connection so I have no interest. its why i try to not classify photography too much because to me a good picture is a good picture and not is not. I like motorsports so I find motorsport photography appealing. It evokes a memory, a sense of being there and remembering the moment. I dont try to emulate anyones style and if I end up doing that its purely by accident.
I am not a photo appreciator, I am a photographer and if people dont like my photos oh well. But if I dont like my photos its a big thing to me. I am not trying to be famous, I am trying to create my memories. I love to just sit there and watch whats going on around me most of the time. I like to observe, so street photography lets me capture that moment and remember some things. Will any of my photos sell, I am most certain they will not. Will I go down in history as a known photographey, in now way. But thats ok, but for me I can look back and see my memories and if others enjoyed them then that is a bonus. And to extend that, sometimes not even the photo is the memory, but the after part is. I remember one time where I snapped a kid at a skate park landing off a rail. I printed it out and gave the kid a 4x6. No big deal really as it was a basic shot, but it happened to be the first time he ever landed it. So I remember his enjoyment of receiving the photo better than the photo itself.
I am not a photo appreciator, I am a photographer and if people dont like my photos oh well. But if I dont like my photos its a big thing to me. I am not trying to be famous, I am trying to create my memories. I love to just sit there and watch whats going on around me most of the time. I like to observe, so street photography lets me capture that moment and remember some things. Will any of my photos sell, I am most certain they will not. Will I go down in history as a known photographey, in now way. But thats ok, but for me I can look back and see my memories and if others enjoyed them then that is a bonus. And to extend that, sometimes not even the photo is the memory, but the after part is. I remember one time where I snapped a kid at a skate park landing off a rail. I printed it out and gave the kid a 4x6. No big deal really as it was a basic shot, but it happened to be the first time he ever landed it. So I remember his enjoyment of receiving the photo better than the photo itself.
I so relate to this. I do look at a lot of photos from others, both to enjoy and to learn, but my photos are to document my memories and things that are important to me. There seems to be a sentiment amongst photographers today that if you shoot a dlsr, especially a pro one, you aspire to be a pro. While I'd like to think I am better than average, I am no where near what I would consider pro level. I'm just an engineer who happens to like cool toys and love playing with my D800 to capture my memories (mostly my motorcycle trips through foreign countries). If others like them too, great, if not, whatever.
It doesn't matter what you shoot, how you shoot, or what you should with, as long as you enjoy yourself and like the results you are getting. Whatever anyone else thinks is irrelevant.
Read the five parts to Surrealist Manifesto by Adam Marelli to understand what HCB was up to a little better.
Everybody that does "street photography" want to be an individual. Problem is most end up being poorly framed, poorly lit and poorly timed random shots with no real story or interest to them. Be mindful of what you are shooting and why before you push the shutter button, then your pictures will instantly be lifted. I wish you all the best with your quest, it's a tough one to pull off well.
The surrealist Manifesto articles are very very interesting. I encourage all to at least glance over them. The articles really highlight the fact that there is a lot more to street photography than just catching people on the street. It also deals with how to read a picture and how an artists background and history can shape the images he takes.
It is important to note that many of the concepts discussed in the articles are things that HCB may not have been consciously thinking about when he took the images. There are certain natural phenomena that we subconsciously use. Shadows on the ground can naturally draw the eye, lines in buildings and groups of people likewise. Because HCB had some training in drawing and painting he may have been more aware or more susceptible to some visual cues than a layman.
Nice articles.
It is important to note that many of the concepts discussed in the articles are things that HCB may not have been consciously thinking about when he took the images. There are certain natural phenomena that we subconsciously use. Shadows on the ground can naturally draw the eye, lines in buildings and groups of people likewise. Because HCB had some training in drawing and painting he may have been more aware or more susceptible to some visual cues than a layman.
Nice articles.
First, and I hate feeding trolls, but jessica., a lot of what you said was completely unnecessary, regardless of any flair in your vocabulary. I'm not saying if you have nothing nice to say, don't say anything at all, but I am saying your tact wasn't appreciated.
More to the point, it seems I've kicked off such an uproarious debate. Let's explore two questions:
1) If I had put a cute little winkie
...would this be such an issue?
2) When I referenced Yanidel's article about Winogrand's style, and agreed that it wasn't intriguing, if I had instead said...
...would this be such an issue?
In the end, let's not misinterpret my displeasure with the over-focus (opinion) I've seen on HCB with a lack of respect for his body of work and/or skill as a photographer. I merely meant to suggest that the styles don't carry such an impact today and a new perspective, in my opinion, would be refreshing. Nor should anyone's opinion, even if I did think he sucked and was no better than the kid down the street, be lambasted to such a degree. I agree with MCH-1138 that we are all not only entitled to our opinions, but hold said opinions all in a very unique way.
After all, don't forget that the work many artists create is meant to be appreciated, understood, and cherished by the every-man, the Joe Schmo's of the world, not just his fellow artist.
Please, let's carry on.
The debate started before me. Just because you have some weird obsessive issue with me, doesn't make me the culprit. Read your thread again, slower. What I said was hardly unnecessary. I find it laughable that you condemn someone for being popular in what he does. I'm sure it's hard understand talent.
If I'm a troll because I called you out after others did, then so be it. Whatever gets you through the day. You lack qualifications to understand a true debate.
BTW, you not only dismissed certain artists, you seem to hold them in contempt. I stand by what I say. Again, that doesn't make me a troll and your use of the word suggests you're unsure what I mean. It's okay, really.
Last edited:
No one is saying any of this (certainly not me).
I am merely saying that an educated opinion is better than an uneducated one. If you're going to dislike something, then at least do it from a position of understanding that which you do not like. That's not to infringe upon your right as a human being to have an opinion. It's merely to say that some opinions matter more than others. Sorry, but that's true. My opinion of a bird photograph or a sculpture is close to worthless, because I have no knowledge of those arts. I can say "I like this" or "I don't like this", but that's where it begins and ends. I can add nothing of substance to a discussion on sculpture.
Similarly, I would put it to you that a person who has photographed for one month cannot meaningfully add anything of importance to a proper discussion on the history of street photography.
FWIW, I love Willy Ronis.
So much of what you just said doesn't even make sense. You just sound so bitter and angsty. Enough already.
I certainly dont consider myself a street photographer however heres my 2 cents on your plans . Nothing wrong with them , theres been enough gasoline poured on the fire already , just some observations .
As youve admitted to just having gotten serious about your photography , have you taken the time to explore the relationships between aperture and shutter speed as regards depth of field ? If youre stuck using the green square setting maybe an investigation of these 2 factors would be helpful . If your planning on manually focusing , learning about hyperfocal distance can be a big timesaver . What about knowledge of the basics of composition? Not hard to learn and really useful .
From what youve posted so far , it seems you have chosen to concentrate on black and white . Check out the works of the folks who were working back in the film days , (even HCB ) try to figure out what they were doing to get the image that they did .How were they able to use existing light to get their image? Back then there was no Photoshop . Choose carefully among contemporary artists , remember anyone can have a website .
Take lots of pix , experiment , see what works and what doesnt . Got something you like , put it on POTD . Eventually youll find a niche . Maybe it wont be what youre aiming for now .
Finally , dont forget WeeGee , f8 and be there worked for him. Good Luck!
As youve admitted to just having gotten serious about your photography , have you taken the time to explore the relationships between aperture and shutter speed as regards depth of field ? If youre stuck using the green square setting maybe an investigation of these 2 factors would be helpful . If your planning on manually focusing , learning about hyperfocal distance can be a big timesaver . What about knowledge of the basics of composition? Not hard to learn and really useful .
From what youve posted so far , it seems you have chosen to concentrate on black and white . Check out the works of the folks who were working back in the film days , (even HCB ) try to figure out what they were doing to get the image that they did .How were they able to use existing light to get their image? Back then there was no Photoshop . Choose carefully among contemporary artists , remember anyone can have a website .
Take lots of pix , experiment , see what works and what doesnt . Got something you like , put it on POTD . Eventually youll find a niche . Maybe it wont be what youre aiming for now .
Finally , dont forget WeeGee , f8 and be there worked for him. Good Luck!
I am trying very hard, but am finding it extremely difficult to understand this position. How long does one need to be a photographer in order to contribute to the discussion? Is two months enough? Six months? A year?
How many classes do they have to take? How many books must they read? Is an art history degree required? If so, does it matter that they have never picked up a camera in their life?
Why are you not perfectly qualified to open the POTD thread and comment on the majesty and grandeur captured in some of the landscapes or the grace and physical motion captured in some of the bird-in-flight photos?
I respect your right to value some opinions more than others -- I think we all apply that filter somehow, although we may all apply it differently. But I have to agree with those who have suggested that art (photography or otherwise) should evoke an emotion or tell a story. And I would like to think that we are all capable of trying to appreciate a piece of art (photography or otherwise) and trying to articulate why we do or do not like it.
100% agreed.
'Person on the street' =/= 'street photography'
----------
More than one month, that's for sure.
Because I don't know ****** about bird photography. I would NEVER dare to go onto a bird photography site and say "I just picked up a camera last month, but I think Joe Shmoe/insert-famous-and-world-renowned-bird-photographer-here gets way too much praise and I find most of modern bird photography to be boring". If I did that, I would expect to get absolutely flamed by experienced bird photographers who know what they're talking about.
I don't disagree at all. I'm merely saying that one can get a lot more out of a piece of art by understanding it (and the genre in which it exists), than by merely saying this or that doesn't not appeal to me. That initial opinion is fine, and of course you're welcome to it. But it's arrogant to claim that this opinion is nuanced and should hold as much weight as those given by people who are well-versed in the genre.
Well, I will agree to disagree. I affirm the validity of your opinion, and I understand if you choose to discount mine.
Nonetheless, if I ever post a bird photo or take up sculpture, I would welcome your comments.
To the OP, I think I adequately disclosed my lack of experience with street photography when offering comments on your photos in the other thread, but you should feel free to disregard them as uninformed.
And to JoeFkling, I might not be qualified to offer an opinion, but I think the photo you posted was very powerful and a wonderful example of capturing the emotion of a moment. Definitely a photo that draws me in and makes me ask, "what is happening here?" And I think the darkness and graininess contribute to the mood of the photo. But what do I know?
Nonetheless, if I ever post a bird photo or take up sculpture, I would welcome your comments.
To the OP, I think I adequately disclosed my lack of experience with street photography when offering comments on your photos in the other thread, but you should feel free to disregard them as uninformed.
And to JoeFkling, I might not be qualified to offer an opinion, but I think the photo you posted was very powerful and a wonderful example of capturing the emotion of a moment. Definitely a photo that draws me in and makes me ask, "what is happening here?" And I think the darkness and graininess contribute to the mood of the photo. But what do I know?
Well, to give my final thoughts on this, since the derailing is complete, I sincerely appreciate and understand the opinions of those who are like Edge100. While you may think I don't really get what you're saying, please understand that this, photography I mean, isn't the first art form I have come to take seriously. Please also understand that over the years, I have made a point to know, enjoy, and love art in so many forms, and I just happen to hold a slightly differing opinion than yours in that I think that without knowing the deepest technical and emotional depths of HCB's works, I very well can choose to not dismiss them, but maybe not enjoy them as much as others.
Having said that, because I really don't think you understand this part, I want to be crystal clear that I actually love looking at his work, and I'm facinated by it. What I meant to convey was simply that in my early stages of study of street photography history, I'm growing tired of the repetitive reference to the man and his work. I know fully well that he is the Picaso of street photography, but even when I studied painting in my youth, I was taught that while Picaso may have been a genius in his own right, there were beautiful pieces of art still from his time, from artists we will never know of.
I will never, ever, just dismiss an artist or their work. It's ignorant, and I haven't done that here. I merely claimed fatigue by fault of the industry and its tendency to harp on HCB as if he were the only street photographer to have ever lived.
If that doesn't make sense, I'm sorry.
Nothing. Go back to Flickr, noob.
Seriously though, well said. Can't win 'em all.
Having said that, because I really don't think you understand this part, I want to be crystal clear that I actually love looking at his work, and I'm facinated by it. What I meant to convey was simply that in my early stages of study of street photography history, I'm growing tired of the repetitive reference to the man and his work. I know fully well that he is the Picaso of street photography, but even when I studied painting in my youth, I was taught that while Picaso may have been a genius in his own right, there were beautiful pieces of art still from his time, from artists we will never know of.
I will never, ever, just dismiss an artist or their work. It's ignorant, and I haven't done that here. I merely claimed fatigue by fault of the industry and its tendency to harp on HCB as if he were the only street photographer to have ever lived.
If that doesn't make sense, I'm sorry.
Nothing. Go back to Flickr, noob.
Seriously though, well said. Can't win 'em all.
Last edited:
http://www.nowness.com/day/2013/5/5/3013/everybody-street
Street Photography documentary out soon. Looks like it could be good!
Street Photography documentary out soon. Looks like it could be good!
Last edited: