• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Street Photography

Technically Aubrey is a court "judgment", not a court "judgement" - Wikipedia has it wrong.
And it is founded on the privacy provisions in the Quebec Civil Code. The Quebec Civil Code is quasi-supreme on certain matters in the province of Quebec, and does not apply elsewhere.
But I would suggest caution about interpreting the exceptions in the decision.
If someone is at a public demonstration and are clearly integral to the subject of the photo, I would warn against publishing without consent.
If someone is off in a corner of an image, and not integral to the subject of the photo, it is probably safer.
And if the photograph is journalistic in nature, it is probably safer again.
 

Yep, there are lots of kinds of street photography, some that take nerve and some that take heart. I like many of them (well not Gilden) but I most prefer the Saul Leiter observational approach. It's just as valid as the look at my balls method. There is no one way, which is why saying you have to have balls is ridiculous.
 
logan2z said:
The judgement does include this exception:


So it seems like there are many cases - like photographing at a public rally/demonstration, etc. - that would not require permission to publish.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's limited to what is of public interest, as to protect journalism. Now one could argue in court what constitutes "public interest" in the case of "street photography," but I don't have that will or patience.

Beyond that judgment (of which many people are unaware), culturally, there is an expectation of privacy, here, as opposed to places such as New York or Paris, and I I do think that's what could make people more agressive towards photographers taking picks of them without their consent. And, honestly, I find this attitude quite healthy.
 
Last edited:
MattKing said:
Technically Aubrey is a court "judgment", not a court "judgement" - Wikipedia has it wrong.
Click to expand...

As a French Canadian, writing the world "judgment" without that "e" somewhere just doesn't come naturally, because of, well, "jugement"... . At least I don't forget the "d" any more...
 
The other thing to always consider, if you have the ability to do so, is to read the Supreme Court of Canada decisions coming out of Quebec (and in some cases New Brunswick) in their French version.
There is a good chance that they were actually written in French in their original form, before they were translated.
I have a couple of friends who are truly bilingual, who were very helpful when encountering some of the less clear Supreme Court of Canada decisions (of which there are a few). When they explained/translated the French versions, that sometimes made things much more clear.
 

What is the specific reason to not include the four dozens of squatters that are litterally bathing in their own poopoo, always looking for a fight, right at that spot, in your careful sociological analysis?
 

I will often just zone focus and take street photos without lifting the camera to my eye, just at chest or even hip level. With a wide angle lens, you can intuit what the camera is getting without using the viewfinder.
 
NB23 said:
What is the specific reason to not include the four dozens of squatters that are litterally bathing in their own poopoo, always looking for a fight, right at that spot, in your careful sociological analysis?
Click to expand...

I was teasing, not offering much of a sociological analysis. As for the squatters, since they probably carry a good amount of anger towards the society who has let them down and is not doing much to help them get back on their feet, I can easily understand why that anger can get redirected towards someone who, they feel, is treating them as curiosity objects rather than human beings. I'm not saying I agree with this or this is how you are treating it (you might be a social working in your day job, for all I know), just that I do understand why they might see it that way. But this is just to state the obvious, that we need a more compassionate and just society more than we need street photographers.

Now, if you were talking about certain parts of St-Michel, Hochelaga or Montréal-Nord at eleven-ish at night, then yes, balls of steel it is.

Still, we ain't talkin' the South Bronx in the 70s.
 
Pieter12 said:
I will often just zone focus and take street photos without lifting the camera to my eye, just at chest or even hip level. With a wide angle lens, you can intuit what the camera is getting without using the viewfinder.
Click to expand...

This is my preferred method, 15mm and a nice quiet Leica. 15mm is approximately the same view as both eyes wide open. Main issue is that you need to get up really close before you press the button.
I do other method as well.
 
awty said:
This is my preferred method, 15mm and a nice quiet Leica. 15mm is approximately the same view as both eyes wide open. Main issue is that you need to get up really close before you press the button.
I do other method as well.
Click to expand...

I prefer to work with a 28mm, you don't need to be as close and less cropping is necessary.
 
Pieter12 said:
I prefer to work with a 28mm, you don't need to be as close and less cropping is necessary.
Click to expand...

That's my second choice and I usually take a 50 as a third choice just incase. I'm more likely to crop heads and feet when using 25/28 with out the view finder. 15mm is much more forgiving. I think I need to try a 20mm.
 
awty said:
That's my second choice and I usually take a 50 as a third choice just incase. I'm more likely to crop heads and feet when using 25/28 with out the view finder. 15mm is much more forgiving. I think I need to try a 20mm.
Click to expand...
An so it goes. But you can get some winners, too. Lately, I have been shooting from the hip, at 1/8th and panning as I pass a subject. When it turns out, it's lovely, full of energy. But it doesn't always.
 
Pieter12 said:
An so it goes. But you can get some winners, too. Lately, I have been shooting from the hip, at 1/8th and panning as I pass a subject. When it turns out, it's lovely, full of energy. But it doesn't always.
Click to expand...

Its a good angle of view for people sitting down, chest height on me is about eye height or slightly below on most people. If I take pictures at my eye level Im usually looking down at the subject and I dont like that.....could bend my knees, but that is getting harder.
 
Interesting sentence, but I do not understand it...

Could you please explain?
 
I was hanging around in the city today and there was some street photographer trying to find subjects. He was trying to be really undercover but I noticed his strange behavior right away. I'm pretty sure everyone else at the market noticed him too. He was not acting strange but I believe we humans are just very very very sensitive to others abnormal behavior.

I was trying to figure out his camera and noticed he took a hipshot of me or woman next to me (probably latter). I started to feel just sad about the hipshot. I'm quite sure it will end up just crappy photo and all the anxiouness and desperation by him just made me feel sad. I didn't feel bad of him sneaking shot of (maybe) me - it felt like I should go telling him that please do it properly and take as many shots of me as you need, just relax and let him make the best out of the situation.

If he had apporached me to ask for shot or openly approaching me with camera with a bit of smile on his face, I would gladly accepted him taking photograph of me.

Please don't do hipshots. If you feel anxious or not good about shooting street photography, then just shoot something else. Shooting from hip while being nervous looks just sad.
 



Sure looks sad, and it is sad.

It’s also worth a good beating if anyone paranoid enough notices it.

The weird behavior always shows.

I’m telling you, my experience on the subject is clear: a cap written TOURIST on it will forgive a lot of situations. A lot.
 
I've done many "street" photographs with 2 1/4 and lenses from 50mm to 150mm with no problems. An interesting story : once in Cairo my wife and I met a couple from Peru with a similar background as hers. Walking around he dashed across the street and wanted to have his wife take his picture in front of a building that was protected by soldiers with machine guns. It was prohibited so he yelled across the street to me to take one. Bravely I looked the other way and pointed my camera toward him using the waist level finder to compose and focus. Almost a year later we were introduced to a couple living near us (Miami) who wanted to see my photos from Egypt. It turned out the person I photographed was his first cousin. Small world!


 

Whatever nervousness or paranoia you observed in your example is that individual. Don't paint shooting from the hip with such a broad brush.

Hipshots can produce dynamic, candid moments that would not be possible with the camera in your face. And telling folks you're going to take their picture really ruins any semblance of spontaneity, unless you hang with them enough that they start to forget or ignore you. The beauty of street photography for me is, as the original French title of HCB's book, "photography on the run." It is the fleeting instant that cannot be reproduced or staged.
 
Pieter12 said:
Whatever nervousness or paranoia you observed in your example is that individual. Don't paint shooting from the hip with such a broad brush.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's where he was going.

I agree that shots with the camera not to your face often do great things. In fact, my earlier comment about talking a guy's ear off regarding dogs is an example. Dogs look away when you cover your face, so you compose then look at them with the camera down, they perk up, you snap the shot never covering your face.

The same is true of babies, toddlers, people uncomfortable with cameras, etc. Look at them and smile and they'll smile back. Or if you are ignoring them they'll be more candid. But putting the camera to your face seriously changes the whole dynamic.

However, I get where radiant was going. I'm creepy. More to the point, I'm uncomfortable, almost everywhere, so if I'm sneaking around people will notice me. It amplifies the body language. They notice me trying not to be noticeable. Trying to take a shot so people don't think you're shooting, when you're already being weird like that, just makes you look like a creep. If I've got a camera, and I'm just... sitting there. Or walking around like it's normal, I don't get the same "what's up with that dude" stares from people. They ignore me, sometimes they talk to me -- I sometimes don't carry the Leica because too many people want to chat about the damned thing -- but the scene itself stays the scene.

Hip shots of people giving you uncomfortable sidelong glances are no better than if you took the same shot with the camera held normally. And it isn't because it was from the hip.
 

I’m not sure what your point is in name dropping “Ukraine” or “South Bronx in the 70’s” for the sake of downtuning and discrediting. Like what, were you there?LOL

Take the OP, for example, well me: I’ve shot in war devastated villages, Rio de janeiro right in the middle of a hold-up amongst other things, various bad Mahalas around eastern europe... the kind where people disappear. They welcome you with a huge machete, they skin a goat in front of you and you’re surrounded, they offer you a drink that you can’t refuse. Miami... geez, that time when I ended up in the middle of a huge party of drugged and drunk Rappers, more than 1000 of them and girls all over showing their bodies, I was the only white dude and I was shooting the moment, then this guy seriously wanting to harm me abd then his friends atartef to get hot... that was a close shot. The heart of Harlem... in Las Vegas during another robbery and what seemed like a spark would start a gunfight. Too many to list, and I forget a lot.
And I can’t be sure if I felt more endangered just last week in this BORING CITY or when I got surrounded by a a gang of islamic extremists in Barbès. That’s the only time I had to rip a film out of my camera. Actually no, the second time. The first time I was 18 and threatened with a gun. Oh no, wait, theres that time on St-Laurent boulevard when a guy pointed a gun on me as well and asked me to follow him but I wasn’t with a camera so this won’t count in this discussion.

But this begs the question: how do YOU know what requires Balls? Mentioning “South Bronx” is colorful and cute, but nothing more. You was there? Any photos?

I can tell you my simple and friendly conclusion after having been around, like a lot of serious shooters in this forum and else: shooting people on the street requires balls, and luck, and that involves ANY street in the world, anywhere, any time.

Edited for typos
 
Last edited:

What gives you proprietary over what is and isnt. I take my photos the way I want to, not how some else tells me. I never been into posed photos (unless I have full control), but dont have a problem with those that do. Do as you please, try not to upset anyone too much and dont break the law......and if Ned wants to walk around with a silly hat and clanking balls, all power to him.
 
Last edited:
NB23 said:
a cap written TOURIST
Click to expand...

Not only that but act like a tourist too; be a bit uplift, amazed by everything around, be careless, maybe enjoy few martinis and snap around, smile.
 
MattKing said:
Wikipedia has it wrong.
Click to expand...

The internet is wrong? That will upend a lot of people's lives, we often assume it's the gospel. Funny thing about the internet. Things get "scrubbed" after a while (deleted) w/ no trace, but the books still have the facts. Every year is 1984 nowadays.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register