Opinion on different rules of street photography.

Shaggysk8 · Mar 10, 2010

You have to grow some I think you could buy some but I think they are only spunge and will not help much.

david James lee · Mar 10, 2010

i think the paparazzi style should be restricted to certain parts of J.Lo"s anatomy....

Jarter · Mar 10, 2010

I could be wrong, but paparazzi nowdays seem to be much bolder using short lenses and utilizing 'right up' your face shot at close distance.

At least thats how it looks to me in some magazine I browsed in K-mart or any supermarket.

bonagva · Mar 10, 2010

Jarter said:
I could be wrong, but paparazzi nowdays seem to be much bolder using short lenses and utilizing 'right up' your face shot at close distance.

At least thats how it looks to me in some magazine I browsed in K-mart or any supermarket.

Depends if the subject is in his property or in the police car once arrested ...

naugastyle · Mar 10, 2010

Thanks, Jarter.

I have a healthy appreciation for beautiful landscape photography, and it took me a while to realize I'm not really any good at it, particularly if there are no people to include somewhere in the frame. I needed some time to get used to the idea that just because I like seeing someone else's landscapes, doesn't mean I need to try to make them too. It's possible that street photography isn't for you, and there's nothing wrong with that .

marcmarc · Mar 11, 2010

Years ago I used to paint Cubism. I loved it but basically sucked at it when compared to the work of Picasso. Eventually, I accepted this and took pride in the fact that my works were original creations entirely my own and if Picasso were alive then, he would not be able to paint like me (nor would he want to lol!)

I bring this up because I see a lot of photographers compare their work to the work of others. I think this is a colossal waste of time. Everyone is different therefore everyone produces work that is different. It's OK to admire the work of others and be inspired by it, but more important is to trust ones own instincts and sensibilities when creating their own work. Having ones work accepted or validated by outside influences may be nice, but it's really not something the creators have any control over. What we do have control over is how we go about creating our own work and making it meaningful to us and making it our own. Everything else should just be left to unfold the way it will. To be concerned about it would be to mis-direct ones efforts into a non-creative direction.

Lars Daniel · Apr 15, 2010

Very well spoken Marcmarc!
One thing that always comes back to me is: Of every truth the opposite is equally true. There are rules in photography, but there are also no rules. I understand the people who frown at using a tele. But to categoricly dismiss using one in a street context is beyond me. You might not be "engaged" when using a tele, so no, it is not "that" particular street style. But there are other flavours in life too. This is shot with tele is the street:

So call me a spy with a surveillance camera, I don´t care. To me it is poetry. To me, if it feels good it is good.

But to be really high on my horse, I think that the Struelli photos are very boring at best.

lxdude · Apr 15, 2010

Jarter said:
Strangely, I have yet to find any prostatic balls available online

The prostate's even harder to find than the balls.

jp498 · May 17, 2010

Lars Daniel. I like that photo and your other street photos.

I checked out the Struelli photos too and wasn't that impressed. It' basically like he was people watching with tunnel vision. He's welcome to do whatever he wants, but here's my beef with them:

There seems to be no consideration of the background. It's like he uses shallow DOF to not have to deal with the background. To me, shooting with a camera is like shooting a real gun with regard to the rule that you should consciously understand what is behind what you are shooting at. It is possible to have some meaningful use of the blur space around the subjects by controlling DOF and thinking about what you want behind them in the photo as Lars has done and that adds a great deal. It's part of the composition. You can't ignore it or bluff it as intended "negative space" afterwards.

Some of the photos were hastily adjusted in terms of levels. Some had sooty whites and others had non-black blacks, such as when shooting into the sun.

benjiboy · May 17, 2010

JohnRB said:
Not street photography to me. Using a tele is is akin to snooping. 50mm and wider gets one involved.

Yours,

John

I agree, you have to get em where they live.

benjiboy · May 18, 2010

The main "Rule" of street photography is it isn't for the timid or shy, and not everyone is temperamentally suited to it and if it makes you uncomfortable go and do some other type of photography . P.S Beat Struelli's pictures IMO are very ordinary indeed.

Jeff Kubach · May 20, 2010

benjiboy said:
The main "Rule" of street photography is it isn't for the timid or shy, and not everyone is temperamentally suited to it and if it makes you uncomfortable go and do some other type of photography . P.S Beat Struelli's pictures IMO are very ordinary indeed.

I agree with you. Usually I'm not so good with street photography, but one day I got lucky. It was a St. Patrick Festival and the people there 'feeling pretty good' so I got a few good shots.

Jeff

AgentX · May 21, 2010

Rules? Ironically, "street photography" was born with many people doing work that broke what seemed to be rules. Now it seems to be a self-limiting pigeonhole for a lot of people. I recall an article years back by a former street photog who described a feeling of being a "visual athlete" limited to "making better and better catches" by being stuck in the genre...

Why not use a telephoto if it's what you want to do, so long as you know what you're going for and why you're doing it? Yeah, I had to talk many basic photo students out of buying longer lenses and forcing them to engage with a subject for years. But I'm sure there's very interesting work that could be done on the street by breaking out of the Bill Klein in-your-face treatment, specifically exploiting the aesthetics and characteristics of a long lens. Certainly seems to be a way to do it as a self-conscious exploration of surveillance/anonimity/immersion/identity in an urban environment. Kind of an inverse Friedlander thing, maybe...picking an individual out of the fabric of things rather than integrating him into a complex, layered environment. Dunno; it's not something I'd do, but I can't imagine there's no one out there who could make it work.

Using a long lens as a substitute when you'd really *prefer* to be closer up isn't the way to do it, though. Magnification is no substitute for proximity, if proximity (and intimacy, in the sense of integration/identification with the subject rather than intrusion on it from afar) is what you want.

Edit: And my opinion is that the photos referenced in the original post aren't particularly interesting to me...they do really seem like he wants to be closer, but just isn't.

clayne · May 22, 2010

The issue with street photography these days is that the "genre" is too self-aware. So begins/continues it's decay.

Dali · May 26, 2010

I browse the site and foung his pictures pretty boring.

IMO, what is interesting with street photogtaphy is to capture a link between a subject and his environment. There, subject are most of the time inexpressive and you can barely see what surround them.

Not (at all) the kind of picture I appreciate...

GregPhoto · Nov 11, 2010

I dedicated blog for this topic

I've found this forum by accident. Opinions expressed here are extremely interesting.
Ive just started blog (Candid Street Photo) that is almost solely dedicated to this topic.

Greg Yarmit
www.candidstreetphoto.com

benjiboy · Nov 19, 2010

To talk about "Rules" of street photography as like talking about the "Rules" for pickpockets, the only rule is don't get caught, because once your subject is aware of your presence and start posing you've blown it.

frotog · Nov 19, 2010

I quite like Streuli's photos. They lie somewhere between the typological (think bechers) and the iconic. To compare Streuli to a "street" photographer like Frank, Winogrand, Friedlander etc. could be an interesting exercise in understanding how differences in artistic strategies shape not only the individual's work but that aspect of "modernity" or timeliness intrinsic to it. But to judge Streuli's work solely on the tenets of a mode of photography whose period of relevance ended thirty years ago is an exercise in futility.

Taslim Abdani · Nov 23, 2010

Struelli's photos all look as if they were shot from far off, using a tele lens. Everything looks kind of flat.

bvy · Nov 25, 2010

On Streuli:
Dead Link Removed

Bateleur · Jan 4, 2011

As a matter of interest the work of Struelli is included in an exhibition "The Adventure of Reality" at the Kunsthall in Rotterdam (Netherlands)!

oneANT · Jan 11, 2011

These are not street photography just as shooting a cat off your back fence is not hunting and 2minute noodles is not cooking. What saddened me were the portraits, a terrific opportunity wasted, they conveyed nothing of the subject and even in terms of a style, none was evident. I can still love images that can be regarded as clinical but these were not even that. I searched the site for any reference to street and I'm pleased to report that the site made no such reference.

But its all OK, panic is over ...they are not street photographs. OP you said you don't do street photography I believe you ...

johnnywalker · Jan 11, 2011

Jarter said:
This 'ball' your talking about, can I purchase them online?

They are found in the drug and alcohol departments.

lensworker · Oct 9, 2011

Bill Harrison said:
This person puts as many things between himself and his subject, as she/he can.... Both distance and physical barriers. Needs to come out of closet. Probably too threatened and as a result, threatening to others stalking them... If possible, a warm smile and relaxed attitude will break the ice and open up a whole world of possibility, perhaps begin with a med. tele., then normal, yes, then even wide angle. Direct experience mixed with a compassionate attitude. The child in the "big truck" is cute. Bill

Early on, I would shy away from getting "too close" to people. Now if I have a main subject(s) in my frame, my goal is to get close enough to them so that they occupy 1/3 to 1/2 of the frame (with a 28mm lens).

The more you make yourself move out of your comfort zone and get closer to people when doing street photography, the sooner you will get past your nerves and become comfortable getting close to your subjects - and the sooner you will start to create rewarding images.

Anyone can make street photos from a "safe" distance - and they will end up with mundane images with no clear subject and no visual impact. Commit to getting close and overcoming your nerves - the rewards are well worth the effort.

Bateleur · Oct 11, 2011

lensworker said:
Early on, I would shy away from getting "too close" to people. Now if I have a main subject(s) in my frame, my goal is to get close enough to them so that they occupy 1/3 to 1/2 of the frame (with a 28mm lens).

The more you make yourself move out of your comfort zone and get closer to people when doing street photography, the sooner you will get past your nerves and become comfortable getting close to your subjects - and the sooner you will start to create rewarding images.

Anyone can make street photos from a "safe" distance - and they will end up with mundane images with no clear subject and no visual impact. Commit to getting close and overcoming your nerves - the rewards are well worth the effort.

I agree to getting up close and personal, generally people are open to interaction even in public spaces and barriers are often of our own making, though naturally there are boundaries and respect for "our subject".

Opinion on different rules of street photography.

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency