Street with a tele

[Markok765]

I went to a gallery in Torontos distillery district today. I saw some street done with just a tele 200mm lens. I spoke to the photographer, and he said that a wide limits you in street photos. He also said that Canon zooms are as good quality as Leica primes. He also said that digi black and white is the same as film black and white.

I can't believe this.

 

[2F/2F]

Who cares?

 

[Mick Fagan]

I cannot believe this either, but if the other person believes that, fine!

Mick.

 

[david b]

If he has work in a gallery based on a system that works for him, great.

But I think he's full of sh*t.

 

[Markok765]

He says that I should change my photographic style to suit the market. Should I release his name here?

 

[david b]

sure what's his name.

I'd love to see this work.

And yes, you should change what you do to accommodate the public.

 

[naturephoto1]

He says that I should change my photographic style to suit the market. Should I release his name here?

No to releasing his name.

Rich

 

[Markok765]

David I wouldn't change my style. I DO have standards.

 

[david b]

Too late.

I was kidding with you Marko.

 

[Anupam Basu]

Just don't ask me to do it. Even 50 seems too long for me for street shooting. I don't thing I have taken the 25mm Biogon off for the last three months. Here's what I have been getting - fortunately, as a hobbyist, I am in a position to ignore the "market."

 

[david b]

Anupam, you should open a gallery in Toronto. Nice work.

 

[AutumnJazz]

Well...Full-frame digital pretty much offers the same resolution as 35mm film, because lenses are so limiting.

Digital has noise...Film has grain. Which looks better?

I only shoot 35mm film because of the way it looks. Not because it is better or worse than digital. (And full-frame bodies start at $2k.)

 

[mabman]

I'm a bit surprised "street" as we know it gets shown in Canada at all now. In Manitoba and Quebec (at least) you can *take* pictures of people in public places but showing them or selling prints requires the explicit consent of anyone identifiable in the picture (the Manitoba privacy legislation uses the slightly ambiguous phrase "for gain" as a determinant, which I'm assuming includes financial gain of any sort).

I would expect other provinces to follow suit in the not-too-distant future.

 

[AgX]

Thus no photos by Cartier Bresson will be shown in Canada any longer?

 

[mabman]

I should have specified "local street"

 

[pesphoto]

Any chance he has a website? Did you google him? If he has a website I'd like to see the photos.

 

[kristopher_lawrence]

I'm a bit surprised "street" as we know it gets shown in Canada at all now. In Manitoba and Quebec (at least) you can *take* pictures of people in public places but showing them or selling prints requires the explicit consent of anyone identifiable in the picture (the Manitoba privacy legislation uses the slightly ambiguous phrase "for gain" as a determinant, which I'm assuming includes financial gain of any sort).

I would expect other provinces to follow suit in the not-too-distant future.

Hi,

I live in Quebec, and from what I know, the law is more specific (remeber we are not on canadian common law). Actually, you don't have the right to sell or publish a picture of a person if the image can cause harm to his/her reputation. Otherwise, a person in a public place is not protected from photographers...

Here how this law become true: a couple years ago, a newspaper «La Presse» was doing a study about obesity. A photographer took a picture or a rather big woman eating a hamburger on the street. However, the women complaned because a lot of persons were making fun of her after seeing the pricture. She went in court and won.

I don't know about Manitoba, but, if I am not wrong, it is ok in Quebec to show or sell street photo if the pics cannot cause harm.

Kris

 

[mabman]

Hi,

I live in Quebec, and from what I know, the law is more specific (remeber we are not on canadian common law). Actually, you don't have the right to sell or publish a picture of a person if the image can cause harm to his/her reputation. Otherwise, a person in a public place is not protected from photographers...

Here how this law become true: a couple years ago, a newspaper «La Presse» was doing a study about obesity. A photographer took a picture or a rather big woman eating a hamburger on the street. However, the women complaned because a lot of persons were making fun of her after seeing the pricture. She went in court and won.

I don't know about Manitoba, but, if I am not wrong, it is ok in Quebec to show or sell street photo if the pics cannot cause harm.

Kris

I can't find a reference to anything by La Presse, but the case I'm thinking of was about photographer Gilles Duclos in the late 1990's. From the Supreme Court's ruling: "The right to one’s image is an element of the right to privacy under s. 5 of the Quebec Charter. If the purpose of the right to privacy is to protect a sphere of individual autonomy, it must include the ability to control the use made of one’s image. There is an infringement of a person’s right to his or her image and, therefore, fault as soon as the image is published without consent and enables the person to be identified."

So, it's the court's opinion (majority decision) that Quebec's law governing the right to privacy includes the right to "control the use made of one's image" in general, no indication of whether harm was done or not.

 

[Andy K]

The best zoom to use for street photography is your feet. I would say that guy uses a 200mm because he doesn't really have the 'nads for real street photography.

 

[erikg]

I'm with Andy on that. I think one of the things that mitigates the intrusiveness of street shooting when you are using something wide is the fact that you are right there and people can see what you are up to and can react as they see fit. You are part of the whole mix too. Standing across the street with a tele? That seems creepy. But whatever, shoot with any lens that gets you what you are after, there are no rules you have to follow in that regard. Oh, and Canon zooms do not equal Leica primes and digital b&w is not the same as film b&w. But who cares, it's totally irrelevant to making art.

 

[kristopher_lawrence]

I can't find a reference to anything by La Presse, but the case I'm thinking of was about photographer Gilles Duclos in the late 1990's. From the Supreme Court's ruling: "The right to one’s image is an element of the right to privacy under s. 5 of the Quebec Charter. If the purpose of the right to privacy is to protect a sphere of individual autonomy, it must include the ability to control the use made of one’s image. There is an infringement of a person’s right to his or her image and, therefore, fault as soon as the image is published without consent and enables the person to be identified."

So, it's the court's opinion (majority decision) that Quebec's law governing the right to privacy includes the right to "control the use made of one's image" in general, no indication of whether harm was done or not.

Humm I didn't knew about this ruling. However, the La Presse affair is much more recent 2001 or 2002 I can't remember. Well, I think that it is a tricky legislation, since it won't be necessarely applied in all cases. Remember the Robert Doisenau affair in the '90 in France. There was a suit, even if legislation was not clear about the fact. I think we should simply continue to take picture of whatever we want and deal with issues later, and I doubt there will be any in most cases. After all, any criminal or suspect having its picture taken in Quebec by photojournalist could sue... and I don't think its happen very often.

Well, thanks for the precision!

Kris

 

[Markok765]

The best zoom to use for street photography is your feet. I would say that guy uses a 200mm because he doesn't really have the 'nads for real street photography.

Yeah. I want a 17-40 F4 zoom for street. I was shooting street that day with my 35mm.

 

[2F/2F]

Well, personally a 135, 200, and 300 f/4 are some of my favorite street and candid photography lenses.

But the guy in the gallery was still full of $hit.

 

[JBrunner]

I went to a gallery in Torontos distillery district today.

Very cool.

I saw some street done with just a tele 200mm lens.

Very interesting.

I spoke to the photographer, and he said that a wide limits you in street photos.

Limits are set by the photographer, not equipment, but I understand what he meant.

He also said that Canon zooms are as good quality as Leica primes.

There is a bridge for sale here.

He also said that digi black and white is the same as film black and white.

I can't believe this.

That's a load of crap. (with frosting, and a cherry)

 

[Kevin Caulfield]

What Jay said.

You need to start having your own opinion about things, Marco, and not using other people's opinions.