Street photography

[AndyH]

Actually, I think the appeal is that it's "easy" to do. Composition, precise focus, and precise exposure don't "matter" as much as they do in other forms. Even holding the camera level isn't required - think Dutch Angle and Garry Winogrand.

However easy it is to do BAD street photography, the learning curve to GOOD street photography is steep. Most amateur photographers are unwilling or unable to directly approach and even confront their subjects. You have to directly see into the person or persons to make a meaningful street photograph that actually shows insight. From HCB to Arbus to Maier, the photographers who see something others don't notice about their subjects are the special ones.

Easy to do bad street photography under the guise of "artsy", but difficult to do great photos without courage and insight. That's why there are so many street photographers and so few good ones. Just my opinion; others may differ.

Andy

 

[Pieter12]

I’m weird. Or too demanding. That book, to me, is not interesting at all.

Whether you like that book or not, or even like street photography, the point is one needs to be able to edit one's work. Back in art school, we would call it overcoming mother hen syndrome. Not all your creations

Actually, I think the appeal is that it's "easy" to do. Composition, precise focus, and precise exposure don't "matter" as much as they do in other forms. Even holding the camera level isn't required - think Dutch Angle and Garry Winogrand.

However easy it is to do BAD street photography, the learning curve to GOOD street photography is steep. Most amateur photographers are unwilling or unable to directly approach and even confront their subjects. You have to directly see into the person or persons to make a meaningful street photograph that actually shows insight. From HCB to Arbus to Maier, the photographers who see something others don't notice about their subjects are the special ones.

Easy to do bad street photography under the guise of "artsy", but difficult to do great photos without courage and insight. That's why there are so many street photographers and so few good ones. Just my opinion; others may differ.

Andy

First, I have to admit I don't like most of Winogrand's output.

Second, good street photography doesn't always engage the subject (example: HCB's high-angle photo of the cyclist passing the stairs, the man jumping the puddle; Frank's photo of the African-American nanny and the white child) or even have a human subject (example: Elliott Erwin's photo of Great Dane legs, woman's boots and Chihuahua dog). Good street photography is good, engaging (to the viewer), maybe implies a story. Lack of sharpness or tilted horizons can add to the mood and energy of a street photo.

 

[AndyH]

Whether you like that book or not, or even like street photography, the point is one needs to be able to edit one's work. Back in art school, we would call it overcoming mother hen syndrome. Not all your creations

First, I have to admit I don't like most of Winogrand's output.

Second, good street photography doesn't always engage the subject (example: HCB's high-angle photo of the cyclist passing the stairs, the man jumping the puddle; Frank's photo of the African-American nanny and the white child) or even have a human subject (example: Elliott Erwin's photo of Great Dane legs, woman's boots and Chihuahua dog). Good street photography is good, engaging (to the viewer), maybe implies a story. Lack of sharpness or tilted horizons can add to the mood and energy of a street photo.

I agree entirely. Two observations: First, that shots like the HCB and Erwin shots you mention, are not "street" in the sense most people think of street photography - I guess I'd call it "Abstract Urban Photography, for want of a better term. The "street" images I think of are almost always people-based, whether the focus is on the face, the body language, or even the surroundings. Second, I might be in a distinct minority (or not) but I am not a fan of Winogrand. Others seem to like his body of work a lot more than I do. I think he lowered the bar for what is considered a great street image and I've never really been able to understand why.

I think we get into a fix when we try to define any genre too specifically. But I stand by my original main point - that it's an easy genre to attempt if you don't attempt insight into human subjects and that the bar for traditionally good photography has been lowered considerably by shooters like Winogrand. In my opinion, that's the reason both for why so many try and so few succeed.

Andy

 

[NB23]

On the subject of editing one’s work; i’m presently contact printing 700 sheets. 350 done, 350 more to go.

700 films from 2018 to today. And then go through all my stuff from 1993 and printing the best.

I’m not sure how I’m going to pull this off.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Yes. Exactly....except that I think we're really talking about the vast majority of people here. That is to say, the vast majority of people, when they look at those 83 photos, cannot see what distinguishes them from their own ordinary, even crappy, snapshots. I certainly cannot.

EDIT: And I'm not limiting this to just Robert Frank's "The Americans". I think the same is true for any of the recognized street photographer...HCB, Winogrand, take your pick, even Walker Evans...so much of it looks like some random crappy snapshots.

Worldwide most people do not know the difference between a snapshot and a photograph.

 

[mohmad khatab]

The problem is that the hypothetical photographer you describe can't tell the difference between a good (street and maybe other genres) photo and an ordinary or even a bad one. Many--probably most--of the well-known street photographers shoot or have shot a ton of crappy pictures. But they can tell the difference and don't show or post those. For The Americans, Robert Frank shot 27,000 frames, printed maybe a thousand, and ended up putting 83 in the book.

This makes me confused ,,
What kind of readers pay cash for 83 pictures of people walking on the street, a traffic light, a fire hydrant, or the like?
This makes me very confused and amazed.

 

[Sirius Glass]

This makes me confused ,,
What kind of readers pay cash for 83 pictures of people walking on the street, a traffic light, a fire hydrant, or the like?
This makes me very confused and amazed.

I cannot say that I disagree with you. [An artful proper use of a double negative in English, for non native English speakers]

 

[logan2z]

I guess you have to look in the mirror.
Why do you think you're good at it?

+1

The OP's first post in this thread reeks of arrogance.

 

[NB23]

+1

The OP's first post in this thread reeks of arrogance.

Yes, it could be translated that way.

But I am not arrogant. I am naive.

 

[mohmad khatab]

I cannot say that I disagree with you. [An artful proper use of a double negative in English, for non native English speakers]

What is the double negative you are talking about?
Do you mean x-ray film?
Or do you mean another meaning?
Yes, maybe you speak English.
But I don't think you know much about that language.

 

[Sirius Glass]

What is the double negative you are talking about?
Do you mean x-ray film?
Or do you mean another meaning?
Yes, maybe you speak English.
But I don't think you know much about that language.

I cannot say that I disagree with you. [An artful proper use of a double negative in English, for non native English speakers]
===> I agree with you.
In English for multiple negatives: Even number of negatives change the sentence to positive; odd number of negatives makes a negative sentence.
In Russian for multiple negatives: Intensify the negativity.
The first translation of Anna Karenina was done under English grammar rules which not only made the translation very wrong, it was very confusing. When using a non native language, one must understand, among other things, the grammar rules relating to multiple negative in a sentence.

Stick around Photrio a few years and you will learn all sorts of things about the English language that they rarely teach in school. Such as we are separated by a common language.

 

[AndyH]

What is the double negative you are talking about?
Do you mean x-ray film?
Or do you mean another meaning?
Yes, maybe you speak English.
But I don't think you know much about that language.

I think he meant this...

"I cannot say that I disagree with you. "

In other words, I "can say that I agree with you".

And if the poster who said this was going by the dictionary or symbolic definition, he did not mean "Palestinians", he meant this:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Philistine

I don't think there was any offense intended by either comment.

Andy

 

[BradS]

I think he meant this...

"I cannot say that I disagree with you. "

In other words, I "can say that I agree with you".

...
Andy

Its actually more subtle than that. Note that "I do not disagree" does not necessarily imply that I agree....and, "I cannot say that I disagree" is even more subtle...it does not, for example, rule out the possibility that the speaker is very diplomatically saying, "I think you're full of shit but, I either do not know enough or don't really think its important enough to upset you about it."

 

[Sirius Glass]

Its actually more subtle than that. Note that "I do not disagree" does not necessarily imply that I agree....and, "I cannot say that I disagree" is even more subtle...it does not rule out the possibility that the speaker is very diplomatically saying, "I think you're full of shit but, I either do know enough or don't really think its important enough to upset you about it."

Ah, but I did and do.

 

[BradS]

Ah, but I did and do.

Which is, of course, not ruled out.

 

[mohmad khatab]

I cannot say that I disagree with you. [An artful proper use of a double negative in English, for non native English speakers]
===> I agree with you.
In English for multiple negatives: Even number of negatives change the sentence to positive; odd number of negatives makes a negative sentence.
In Russian for multiple negatives: Intensify the negativity.
The first translation of Anna Karenina was done under English grammar rules which not only made the translation very wrong, it was very confusing. When using a non native language, one must understand, among other things, the grammar rules relating to multiple negative in a sentence.

Stick around Photrio a few years and you will learn all sorts of things about the English language that they rarely teach in school. Such as we are separated by a common language.

Well, Mr. Glass,
Don't get excited so you won't get cracks. It might shatter.
- (Anna Karenina) I listened to it at the Egyptian Opera House in German for 30 years, no one ever dared translate it, even though its meanings are very similar to those found in Islamic heritage and the vocabulary is very similar.
- I don't know what your story is?
- You left the main topic and kept interested in my bad language!
Well, sir / glass ,,, I apologize and withdraw from this dialogue so as not to cause any problems.

 

[mohmad khatab]

I think he meant this...

"I cannot say that I disagree with you. "

In other words, I "can say that I agree with you".

And if the poster who said this was going by the dictionary or symbolic definition, he did not mean "Palestinians", he meant this:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Philistine

I don't think there was any offense intended by either comment.

Andy

God bless you master / AndyH
You are a respectable person and your style is accurate and clear,
Greetings to you from Egypt.

 

[AndyH]

God bless you master / AndyH
You are a respectable person and your style is accurate and clear,
Greetings to you from Egypt.

Thank you. Even when you misread something in English, it seems quite clear that your intent is sincere.

Andy

 

[Ste_S]

Snapshots are snapshots and while they financed growth and research forAgfa, Kodak, Ansco and Lumine, snapshots are not serious photography. I stopped taking snapshots by my fourth roll of film. Snapshots are not what APUG, Photrio or street photography are about. That said, a lot of what is posted as so called street photography is really snapshots by newbees and wannabees. Some of thoes newbees and wannabees may become good street photographers some day, but what they are posting on the internet are for the most part not very good.

I think it may have something to do with the fact that most of the photos that are published by the renowned masters of street photography are for the most part indistinguishable from crappy, haphazard snapshots. So naturally one thinks, "Oh, look! Here's a photo of a lady walking a poodle past an open doorway, taken by (fill in name of famous street photographer) with a Leica on Tri-X . I can do that and be famous too!"...and so you find a whole bunch of folks who need recognition walking around taking pictures and posting their shit on instagram or where ever. All you have to do is say it is street photography and you can be famous too....right?

Which again completely misses the point I was making. Bad photos are bad photos, why does street get singled out in this way ?

I suspect street still confuses a lot of the old timers on here.

 

[Dali]

Anna Karenina in german...

 

[Arthurwg]

Tell me again, what is this post about?

 

[NB23]

Tell me again, what is this post about?

About palestinians lol

 

[mohmad khatab]

Thank you. Even when you misread something in English, it seems quite clear that your intent is sincere.

Andy

Okay ,,
I wish you success ,,
God bless you
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agfacontour_Professional

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I don't know. You tell me.
As I said in my original post in this thread, I don't know and I do not care.
All that matters to me is that it is authentic and true.
but let's get to the real point of the matter....
Does categorizing a photo (or a photographer) somehow change its intrinsic value? Can it magically turn shit into gold?
I say no, it cannot. Viewers and critics may label or categorize a photo, or a body of work, or a person but a label cannot change the essential essence of the thing or the person.
I think many photographers and viewers mistakenly think otherwise.

I see nothing wrong with pictures taken on the street been categorized as street photography.

I get you are after shit on your pictures. Tastes are different and it is available on the streets.
But then you dump dead animals old corps pictures, the question within this thread is where it is photographed comes from street perspective. Why it is for so long on the street? Is it abandoned streets of Chernobyl?
What wildlife park has to do with street photography thread then?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Las_Trampas_Regional_Wilderness

The fact what you are walking and taking pictures doesn't make it all as street photography.

 

[BradS]

I see nothing wrong with pictures taken on the street been categorized as street photography.
--- snip ---
The fact what you are walking and taking pictures doesn't make it all as street photography.

It doesn't ? Lots of people seem to think that is exactly the definition of street photography.

But if that's not it then what is? What makes something street photography?

Does this qualify?

or this?

How about this one?

or are these just more crappy snapshots made while walking around with a camera?