I may never do street photography

[alanrockwood]

(Irony alert on)
Yeah - Vivian Maier's subjects were so much more elegant.

(Irony alert off)

At least they are wearing hats with 360 degree brims. (smile)

 

[Pieter12]

I dunno, HCB seems to have done well for most of his career as a street photographer.

 

[jtk]

Page 34, John Leongard's Age of Silver on Henri- Cartier-Bresson: "When I first met him in 1956, he'd tell us tyros hanging out at Magnum Photos in New York City, "I must stay anonymous. I am a street photographer."

HCB is dead. His work survives. The "street photographer" label has been beaten to death. Multitudes of incompetent idjits call themselves street photographers...how does that honor HCB?

 

[Pieter12]

"Street Photography" is one of those things that people see and say, hey, I can do that! And the overwhelming evidence is, they can't! A key element of any art is the ability to discriminate, edit and eliminate. Robert Frank shot nearly 800 rolls of film to end up with the 83 images in The Americans. One of the criteria I used in judging photographers' portfolios when I worked as an art director was how well they edited their work. If a photographer couldn't see what was good enough or not for their portfolio, how could I depend on them to deliver a good photo on assignment?

 

[jtk]

"Street Photography" is one of those things that people see and say, hey, I can do that! And the overwhelming evidence is, they can't! A key element of any art is the ability to discriminate, edit and eliminate. Robert Frank shot nearly 800 rolls of film to end up with the 83 images in The Americans. One of the criteria I used in judging photographers' portfolios when I worked as an art director was how well they edited their work. If a photographer couldn't see what was good enough or not for their portfolio, how could I depend on them to deliver a good photo on assignment?

That's my point in a nutshell, with the exception that in recent decades, calling one's work "street photography" has been a way of saying "inconsequential." That's a curse HCB left his fanboys.

 

[logan2z]

I found it interesting that Garry Winogrand, who many consider the quintessential 20th century 'street photographer', hated the label. He simply called himself a 'photographer'. Many of his most famous photographs ("European Brown Bear", for example) would probably not be considered 'street photography' by some of the definitions proposed in this thread.

 

[Sirius Glass]

HCB is dead. His work survives. The "street photographer" label has been beaten to death. Multitudes of incompetent idjits call themselves street photographers...how does that honor HCB?

We both agree that much of what people think is street photography is unworthy of one exposing their retinas to. OK I ended a sentence with a preposition, but at least I did not split an infinitive.

 

[AgX]

I dislike the term "street photography" preferring "candid photography. HCB called himself a street photographer, but I believe that was to distinguish himself from a landscape or studio photographer.

That is not "Street Photography" it is taking portraits of strangers on the street.
I wish i had a scanner, but there are Hundreds of examples on The Internet of what Street Photography is.
Garry Winogrand for example.

Different people embrace different breadths of definition of what is 'Street Photography', but the usefulness of the term begins to become diluted to the point of uselessness after it becomes overly broad.

Before mingling that much with US photographers (Apug) I was not even aware of the term "streetphotography" in this meaning. To me it meant commercial potrait photography on the street, typically aiming at tourists.

None of my in-depths photography encyclopediae lists that term at all. Only my German/Englisch dictionary of phptographic terms lists it, without explanation.

In Germany there hardly was/is such streetphotography anyway. Reason for that may be various. One is the respective legislation for more than 100 years making such difficult.

 

[blockend]

A key element of any art is the ability to discriminate, edit and eliminate.

Yes, agreed. I dislike mannerism in any photographic genre, the reliance on a particular style or technique imposed on the subject, regardless of relevance. There's a lot of it around today. It may be because the internet offers such a brief window in which to stake a visual claim. For non-commercial work, and with the exception of documenting a hobby (birds, steam trains, football, etc), I think the benefits of internet exposure are overrated. Most of it is trawling for likes. The problem with likes is there's no way of knowing how informed or sincere the liker is. Much of it seems reciprocal - I'll like yours so you can like mine.

In the days I used to do Flickr my stuff seemed to attract a disproportionate number of Explore inclusions. This meant one photograph might get 15000 hits, while the previous image would get 30. Also, Explore had no apparent objective or subjective criteria, guessing the algorithm was an exercise in futility. I need more control over how things are seen, even if the number of views are fewer. Street photography isn't the problem, the internet is the problem because it deals in memes and people are only too happy to fulfil them.

 

[jtk]

Yes, agreed. I dislike mannerism in any photographic genre, the reliance on a particular style or technique imposed on the subject, regardless of relevance. There's a lot of it around today. It may be because the internet offers such a brief window in which to stake a visual claim. For non-commercial work, and with the exception of documenting a hobby (birds, steam trains, football, etc), I think the benefits of internet exposure are overrated. Most of it is trawling for likes. The problem with likes is there's no way of knowing how informed or sincere the liker is. Much of it seems reciprocal - I'll like yours so you can like mine.

In the days I used to do Flickr my stuff seemed to attract a disproportionate number of Explore inclusions. This meant one photograph might get 15000 hits, while the previous image would get 30. Also, Explore had no apparent objective or subjective criteria, guessing the algorithm was an exercise in futility. I need more control over how things are seen, even if the number of views are fewer. Street photography isn't the problem, the internet is the problem because it deals in memes and people are only too happy to fulfil them.

There is no "problem"!

 

[blockend]

There is no "problem"!

Your previous posts on the subject insist there is.

 

[jtk]

Your previous posts on the subject insist there is.

What "problem" accounts for your anxiety Flickr? I've never liked it.

 

[blockend]

What "problem" accounts for your anxiety Flickr? I've never liked it.

"Multitudes of incompetent idjits call themselves street photographers"
"street" is a subset of "wanking".
"calling one's work "street photography" has been a way of saying "inconsequential." That's a curse HCB left his fanboys."
Your words.

I don't have a problem with street photography, you do. My issue is with derivative work. In any genre.

 

[Colin Corneau]

Some of their photographs were "excellent" (as are some in Photrio Media...but they shot massive amounts of fillum to get there and were edited astoundingly aggressively. fwiw

Gee, like almost every other genre of photography, then.

 

[jtk]

Gee, like almost every other genre of photography, then.

Colin, I suspect you're a good exception to that rule.

I'm not into the notion of photo "genre." However, there is good photography and not-so-good etc.

My prejudice is that better (gooder photographers waste fewer clicks, digital or fillum.

 

[blockend]

My prejudice is that better (gooder photographers waste fewer clicks, digital or fillum.

That doesn't make any sense. A still life photographer with a large format camera, tilts, shifts and studio lighting can nail every shot. A landscape photographer runs him/her close for economy. A street photographer dealing with fast moving subjects in a 3-dimensional foreground, mid and distant volatile situation will be lucky to get an exemplary shot in a month, digital or film. One classic hard to see, hard to take and hard to look at shot a year, would put him among the street photography greats.

 

[DonJ]

I don't know any photographers who waste clicks. I also don't know any photographer who doesn't have some % of unsuccessful clicks.

 

[logan2z]

I also don't know any photographer who doesn't have some % of unsuccessful clicks.

I recently saw a humorous quote on the wall of the "Don't! Photography and the Art of Mistakes' exhibit at the SF MoMA that seems relevant here:

In photography the biggest difference between an amateur and a professional is the size of the wastebasket

 

[Pieter12]

That doesn't make any sense. A still life photographer with a large format camera, tilts, shifts and studio lighting can nail every shot. A landscape photographer runs him/her close for economy. A street photographer dealing with fast moving subjects in a 3-dimensional foreground, mid and distant volatile situation will be lucky to get an exemplary shot in a month, digital or film. One classic hard to see, hard to take and hard to look at shot a year, would put him among the street photography greats.

A food photographer can make many exposures trying for the perfect wisp of steam. Or that perfect pour. Landscape photographers can be bedeviled by wind, moving clouds and people (if not wanted). Sports photographers can leave a match/race/game with few shots that are worthwhile. Portrait photographers don't always nail it with a single exposure. I agree, street shooting has a high ratio of misses to hits, but other genres don't necessarily bat 1000.

 

[jtk]

Yes..you're right...sorry I got cranky....

 

[Luckless]

How many frames I take depends on the day, my mood, and which camera I'm holding. I'll be far freer on the shutter button using my old 7D than I will be using a 4x5, but even when I do break out the large format [and break open the wallet to feed it] I'll still try to avoid being overly tight-fisted about clicking the shutter.

I don't aim to waste film, but at the same time I can always pick a favourite between two photos, but I can't pick between a photo I took and one I didn't bother with...

I figure that if I only ever press the shutter when I can convince myself that I somehow know that it will be a 'perfect picture', then that means I walk away with less to study and learn from. The only thing that not taking a photo can really teach you for sure is that taking fewer photos costs less money. And as someone who does sports and wildlife photography I don't have all day to stand there quibbling over every last minor detail and element in the image, and photographing urban life isn't any different.

I can quibble about things with confidence sitting at home while looking over a negative or print, and I don't consider coming back with a dozen negatives that I'll decide to not bother printing from to be all that great of a loss if I can study and learn something from them. But a not taking a shot I suspect might work for me often doesn't offer much chance of doing it again later...

 

[jtk]

Me, I don't need to photograph every potential. I'm more or less alert for opportunities much of the time
... but I do have other priorities such as making music, archery, and intellectual curiosity. If I see a photo opportunity and don't take it, no loss. Many of my photos were dreamed up before I found and made them (pre-visualized in a different way). We all know what many aspiring "street photographers" identify with.

 

[blockend]

We all know what many aspiring "street photographers" identify with.

I don't. Please enlighten me.

 

[pocketshaver]

well going against the common vein here, I don't do street photography because well,,, you never know when you might take a photo of criminals who don't want to be photographed.

They don't mind killing a person for "disrespecting them" by say, not saying hello or giving them a ride somewhere. What will they do when they see someone take a photo when they are up to no good?

 

[CMoore]

well going against the common vein here, I don't do street photography because well,,, you never know when you might take a photo of criminals who don't want to be photographed.

They don't mind killing a person for "disrespecting them" by say, not saying hello or giving them a ride somewhere. What will they do when they see someone take a photo when they are up to no good?

How do you get from place to place....... don't you worry about a car hitting you head on, or a plane falling from the sky and crashing into your work-place.?
All of those things Have and Might happen.