What's the point?

ctrout · Sep 30, 2016

What's the point of street photography? I mean, most of the street shots I see are of some gnarly old Asian dude missing a couple teeth, or a guy in an apron standing behind a counter full of smelly fish. Don't get me wrong, I love seeing many of these images but I don't know what it is that draws me to them. Why do we like this genre and what is it about this genre that makes it a credible art form?

frank · Sep 30, 2016

Any genre is a credible art form. (within societal norms, and sometimes art pushes the envelope)

And taste is subjective.

jscott · Sep 30, 2016

I think that it's one of these things that "you either understand it, or else no explanation is necessary".
Sort of like how some people understand and appreciate irony, yet others don't.
I've also met people who saw no beauty or value in landscape photography, FWIW.
So is it art? Well, that's up to you.

Steve Smith · Sep 30, 2016

It's not my thing, but I wouldn't deny anyone the enjoyment they get from it.

I have personally never understood why anyone would want a photograph of someone they don't know, be it street, fashion, glamour, nude, etc. But that's just me.

Steve.

darkosaric · Sep 30, 2016

ctrout said:
What's the point of street photography? I mean, most of the street shots I see are of some gnarly old Asian dude missing a couple teeth, or a guy in an apron standing behind a counter full of smelly fish. Don't get me wrong, I love seeing many of these images but I don't know what it is that draws me to them. Why do we like this genre and what is it about this genre that makes it a credible art form?

You are talking about images from Josef Koudelka, Henri Cartier-Bresson , Alfred Stieglitz, Elliott Erwitt, Garry Winogrand, Joel Meyerowitz, Walker Evans? Of something that you looked on Flickr and/or Instagram?

pdeeh · Sep 30, 2016

ctrout said:
What's the point of street photography? I

What's the point of anything? We're all doomed anyway ...

hdeyong · Sep 30, 2016

I agree with darkosaric, there's street photography, and there's street photography.
A lot of what I see now is somebody taking what they think is a 'street' picture, because it's the cool thing to do. Many of them are just a picture of somebody walking a across a street, or the really super picture of somebody walking in front of a billboard ad. Most of them, not only would I not print them, I wouldn't even keep the negative.
There were masters like the ones mentioned, and also Vivian Maier, but they're few and far between. And, they were doing it because they loved it, not for the reason many are doing it today, because it's in style.

darkosaric · Sep 30, 2016

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_law

removed account4 · Sep 30, 2016

here is a quote one of the greats: no matter where you go, there you are .. that pretty much sums it up for me..
there is something to be said for photographing people
being themselves and usually when someone has no clue they are being stealthily photographed
they are supposedly being themselves. human condition and all of that ..
humans aren't really very different from each other, and maybe that is the point of street photography
to show how we are all the same even though we aren't/don't want to be ..
==

darkosaric said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_law

but the 10% is really good ...

not sure if it makes up for the other 90$ though ..

MartinCrabtree · Sep 30, 2016

It's the practice of catching a person displaying who they are in a split second. Doing it well is difficult.

Dali · Sep 30, 2016

ctrout said:
What's the point of street photography? I mean, most of the street shots I see are of some gnarly old Asian dude missing a couple teeth, or a guy in an apron standing behind a counter full of smelly fish. Don't get me wrong, I love seeing many of these images but I don't know what it is that draws me to them. Why do we like this genre and what is it about this genre that makes it a credible art form?

What is the point of your question? Street photography is no different than portrait or landscape: you have a lot of bad pictures and among them some jewels.

Don't worry, HCB, Koudelka or Winogrand certainly has their share of bad shots but this is not what hangs on the museums walls.

If you have the opportunity, please watch short videos named "Contacts". In 12-15 minutes per photographer are reviewed contract prints with comments from the photographer (or curator) about the circumstances shots were made. If I remember well, HCB, William Klein, Robert Doinsneau, Josef Koudelka and Marc Riboud or Leonard Freed contracts sheets are explained. You clearly see that they all shot A LOT to get 1 valid picture, certainly much more than any amateur photographer.

And I fully agree with MartinCrabtree: Street photography is a very demanding exercise.

ctrout · Sep 30, 2016

I'm not trying to question the credibility of it as an art form. I'm just wondering what exactly it is that it tries to capture or convey. Other genres of photography are easy to answer the same question for. What's the point of sports photography? To capture the excitement, struggle, or peak of the action. What's the point of landscape photography? To capture the beauty/grandeur of a particular scene. I just can't seem to figure out the answer for street photography quite as easily. Several of the responses given here do make sense to me though. Thanks.

Dali · Sep 30, 2016

Simple... To try to capture humanity in its diversity and the way we sometimes don't want to see it.

Let's take a quick example: Leonard Freed took some Martin Luther King's pictures. OK, you can picture MLK making his portrait (like it would be the case with a painting) or you can show him (like Leonard did) meeting supporters (with cops in the background) to show what he really meant to people. What is the best way to represent him?

Cholentpot · Sep 30, 2016

I agree,

Street is one of those things that I understand from the masters but not from its modern standpoint. Now you MUST shoot with A, B, C, D, and you must NOT do 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. I've done street with color, digital and a long lens. I was called a heretic and blasphemer who's preying on the public, oh and you're subject is too isolated/not standing out enough.

In the end I feel for most of the streetist is more about the hunt and getting lucky than the skill of taking a great photograph.

Dali · Sep 30, 2016

The modus operandi is yours, only the result counts and leave those-who-know-it-all talk...

I have a trick to know if a street picture is IMO good or not: Do I want to know what happened before the picture was taken and what happened after, can I even imagine it and is it that interesting?

Old-N-Feeble · Sep 30, 2016

I never cared for street photography because I always felt like it's an invasion of others' personal space and/or privacy. That stated, I do like some of this type of imagery so I admit it does have merit. IMO, if well done the 'merit' is that it records the human condition. Some images make us happy or sad... others glad or angry... others compassionate or disgusted... some are just funny. The best ones make us feel something intently. Dorothea Lange's 'Migrant Mother' comes to mind though that's not really street photography.

Rick A · Sep 30, 2016

Kirks518 · Sep 30, 2016

I think we like them (most of us) because they are of real people doing real things in real time. Keeping it real.

timmct · Oct 1, 2016

Ask Logan...

http://squaregos.com/daffyduck/

dpurdy · Oct 1, 2016

I think some of it is a sort of species vanity. It seems most photography is people taking pictures of other people. People seem to be the most important and interesting thing in life to most people. I know a lot of street photographers. It seems to me that they all consider themselves unusual to be street photographers. Some of it might be laziness. The street is right outside your door.
Dennis

RalphLambrecht · Oct 2, 2016

jscott said:
I think that it's one of these things that "you either understand it, or else no explanation is necessary".
Sort of like how some people understand and appreciate irony, yet others don't.
I've also met people who saw no beauty or value in landscape photography, FWIW.
So is it art? Well, that's up to you.

beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.

Dali · Oct 2, 2016

dpurdy said:
I think some of it is a sort of species vanity. It seems most photography is people taking pictures of other people. People seem to be the most important and interesting thing in life to most people.

Nothing wrong with that as we are a social species. The opposite would be strange...

Ko.Fe. · Oct 12, 2016

"What's the point of street photography?"

If you are asking this question it is not your thing. To me street photography is taking pictures for my own memory. I'm always looking at the people while I'm walking. I'm doing it since I was kid. Now if I see something or someone interesting I'm taking it with me.

Personally, I'm finding this much more interesting comparing to BiF, cars and cheesy landscapes, naked bimbos pictures:

Harry Stevens · Oct 28, 2016

Without street photography history would have a big hole in it.

frank · Oct 28, 2016

I could understand the OP's question if it were directed at yet more sunrise/sunset, fall foliage, and flower pictures. But not street.

What's the point?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency