My first street images

Brecksbirder

Brecksbirder

Messages
883
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm always a bit nervous pointing my camera at people, but this gentleman was so engrossed in his paper I couldn't resist a couple of quick shots.

1)
194

2)
193

C&C welcome
 
I like shot 1 as you see more of his face :)

Would have tried the 'rule of thirds' on these though if you could have got away with it as he seems a little sniper'ed in the middle.

How's it look in black and white also?

Your braver than me... I don't have the nerve to try this sort of stuff haha sometimes feel a little naughty when I catch people not looking at a wedding but they know I'm there for that I guess!
 
I know what you are saying, but I liked the texture of the wood on the shelter and as a result was conservative with the cropping.
 
Brecksbirder said:
I know what you are saying, but I liked the texture of the wood on the shelter and as a result was conservative with the cropping.
Click to expand...

Yeah without seeing where he was sat it might not have worked anyway :)

What lens did you shoot with?
 
I think these struggle, as does a lot of street photography with just being boring. Its a photo of a guy reading the paper, there is no interaction with his surroundings or anybody else. No story and really nothing of interest
 
boyfalldown said:
I think these struggle, as does a lot of street photography with just being boring. Its a photo of a guy reading the paper, there is no interaction with his surroundings or anybody else. No story and really nothing of interest
Click to expand...

I disagree, true it's more of a candid than a street shot but the photo does have interest, the wood, the graffiti, the intense concentration, choice of paper/religion etc.
It's Richards first attempt at doing anything like this and of course he can improve with 'street' in time but well done for having a go and it isn't really that bad, had I seen it I would have taken it as a street candid. :)
 
Thank you for your encouragement and advice, most welcome.

Jack the lens was a Nikon 70-300mm VR.
 
Last edited:
I agree with gramps. Although I would also consider these more street candids than street photography I quite like them all the same. Yes, they look a bit like sniper shots, but in that first one you've really captured how engrossed he is. Great start! Onwards and upwards!
 
boyfalldown said:
I think these struggle, as does a lot of street photography with just being boring. Its a photo of a guy reading the paper, there is no interaction with his surroundings or anybody else. No story and really nothing of interest
Click to expand...
I agree with this. Although, I do have a bit of a bee in my bonnet about a lot of popular "street photography". There's a "style without substance" problem with most street photography. We've forgotten about subject, which is, by miles, the #1 most important thing in photography.

"Street photography" needs to show us something interesting. Something unusual. Something that's surprising or unexpected about the way people are interacting with their environment. This is just a guy reading a paper. So many amateur street photographs seem to show people reading papers! Perhaps because it's easier to get the confidence to shoot someone who's engrossed in something else, I don't know. But the point is, just going out onto a street and shooting scenes every single one of us could see within a five minute walk is not good street photography. Just taking a picture of a stranger in public does not make good street photography. Don't go out and snap away at quotidian scenes. Be patient. Find a good subject.
 
For most people, their 1st foray into 'street' will see them more concerned with not drawing attention to themselves/upsetting someone than trying to find what someone else considers to be the ideal 'street' photo or squeezing their image into some predetermined mould set by so-called experts.
There will always be a place for street candid shots ... this for example is not just "a guy reading a paper", there is more going on in the image and for Richard it was his 1st attempt at doing anything like this.

Richard, do what pleases you - follow the dictates of others if you wish, (though please don't do random, meaningless, odd-angle, cut-off B&W just because that seems what passes as 'street!), but please do what you feel comfortable with and what brings you enjoyment :)
 
I think it's a bit too "telephoto safari" for my liking - note the exif says 300mm so this is effectively 450mm equivalent. Most of the "classic" style street shots I see are in the 28-50mm range (or 18-35 if shooting crop), so less "flattening" of the image.
 
gramps said:
For most people, their 1st foray into 'street' will see them more concerned with not drawing attention to themselves/upsetting someone than trying to find what someone else considers to be the ideal 'street' photo or squeezing their image into some predetermined mould set by so-called experts.
There will always be a place for street candid shots ... this for example is not just "a guy reading a paper", there is more going on in the image and for Richard it was his 1st attempt at doing anything like this.

Richard, do what pleases you - follow the dictates of others if you wish, (though please don't do random, meaningless, odd-angle, cut-off B&W just because that seems what passes as 'street!), but please do what you feel comfortable with and what brings you enjoyment :)
Click to expand...
That may be true, but we're supposed to provide constructive criticism. Nothing is learned from "it's good for your first foray into street photography". The fact is, to improve he needs better subjects.

Where would we get if the only feedback we ever received was a patronising slap on the back and a "do whatever makes you happy"?

What else is going on other than a guy reading a paper? Please don't say "it's a muslim reading the express", because to be surprised by that you need to live in a world of borderline offensive stereotypes.
 
ghoti said:
Please don't say "it's a muslim reading the express", because to be surprised by that you need to live in a world of borderline offensive stereotypes.
Click to expand...

He's actually a Jew ... but I digress.

There is absolutely no problem with giving constructive criticism but encouragement also works well :)
 
gramps said:
He's actually a Jew ... but I digress.

There is absolutely no problem with giving constructive criticism but encouragement also works well :)
Click to expand...
How do you know he's a jew? He could be, yes. Although, muslims wear skullcaps too. But I'm not an expert on religious dress so there may be something else about him that gives it away.

Regardless, muslim or jew, my point still stands. His religion doesn't make it interesting that he's reading the express.
 
ghoti said:
How do you know he's a jew? He could be, yes. Although, muslims wear skullcaps too. But I'm not an expert on religious dress so there may be something else about him that gives it away.

Regardless, muslim or jew, my point still stands. His religion doesn't make it interesting that he's reading the express.
Click to expand...

Not to you maybe, but it interested Richard and it interests me ... anyway I'm not going to argue with you, just reiterate to Richard well done for giving it a go - keep at it :)
 
gramps said:
For most people, their 1st foray into 'street' will see them more concerned with not drawing attention to themselves/upsetting someone than trying to find what someone else considers to be the ideal 'street' photo or squeezing their image into some predetermined mould set by so-called experts.
There will always be a place for street candid shots ... this for example is not just "a guy reading a paper", there is more going on in the image and for Richard it was his 1st attempt at doing anything like this.
Click to expand...

He asked for constructive critique Roger. Not a slap on the back and a Facebook type like. I'm not sure any of us classes ourselves as so called experts. I certainly don't, infact I'd even go as far as to say that the term is often used as a reverse snobbery insult. Ny those who only wish to slap on the back. I actually think the definition you've created of a 'candid street shot' is entirely artificial and actually pretty meaningless. Just because its 'candid' doesn't mean that there should be no interest either. So in short, disagreeing is fine. Its a discussion after all, but why the thinly veiled digs?
 
boyfalldown said:
Its a discussion after all, but why the thinly veiled digs?
Click to expand...

No thinly veiled digs at all Hugh, I see a great deal of heavy criticism on the forum - for someone making a first attempt at a type of photography I think encouragement is appropriate ... don't you?
Constructive criticism is also appropriate and important but I do wish people would give a little thought to giving encouragement as well.
 
gramps said:
No thinly veiled digs at all Hugh,
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how else this can be read though?

gramps said:
.... than trying to find what someone else considers to be the ideal 'street' photo or squeezing their image into some predetermined mould set by so-called experts.
Click to expand...


gramps said:
I see a great deal of heavy criticism on the forum - for someone making a first attempt at a type of photography I think encouragement is appropriate ... don't you?
Constructive criticism is also appropriate and important but I do wish people would give a little thought to giving encouragement as well.
Click to expand...

I have to admit, I don't think there is enough constructive crit on the forum. People seem way to happy to say 'Nice shot.....................'

I agree with you to a point, but just giving encouragement is really not very helpful. A balance of both maybe.

Richard sorry thats got way ot
 
boyfalldown said:
I think these struggle, as does a lot of street photography with just being boring. Its a photo of a guy reading the paper, there is no interaction with his surroundings or anybody else. No story and really nothing of interest
Click to expand...
I am curious to know what you feel is constructive in your post?

I am pretty much in agreement with gramps, there is plenty of street photography out there that deals just with the character rather than any interaction with their environment, its as valid a form of the art as any other. The guy looks an interesting character there is some interest in his surroundings, the wood & graffiti. Ideally the crop could have been wider to give more context but like has been stated this is Richards first attempt at this genre and as such I personally feel its a decent first go.
 
jakeblu said:
I am curious to know what you feel is constructive in your post?
Click to expand...

I'm assuming its OK with you if I give constructive comments (and it is constructive) without having to justify that. I also assume rather then derail Richard's thread into yet another row you reported this to the mods and I've heaps of private messages telling me why I'm out of line. Bit like every other time someone has picked a row with proper critique. :rolleyes: Oh wait. Hasn't happened. Again. I'm surrpised
 
Last edited:
gramps said:
For most people, their 1st foray into 'street' will see them more concerned with not drawing attention to themselves/upsetting someone than trying to find what someone else considers to be the ideal 'street' photo or squeezing their image into some predetermined mould set by so-called experts.
There will always be a place for street candid shots ... this for example is not just "a guy reading a paper", there is more going on in the image and for Richard it was his 1st attempt at doing anything like this.

Richard, do what pleases you - follow the dictates of others if you wish, (though please don't do random, meaningless, odd-angle, cut-off B&W just because that seems what passes as 'street!), but please do what you feel comfortable with and what brings you enjoyment :)
Click to expand...

Thank you Gramps, for your encouragement and sound advice. As I've never done this I didn't realise there was a difference between Street candid/photography.
 
Last edited:
Hugh, you are quite entitled to your opinion, you have not upset me and I haven't contacted the mods.
 
When I am shooting street I spend a lot of time just observing my surroundings, the people around me, shop signs or items which could be used as props or to help give meaning to why I have taken the shot. I may see a potential scene and then wait for a subject to 'enter' so I can compose and shoot. I try and shoot at 18-50mm because I like the interaction between me and the subject. It takes a bit of getting used to but there are things you can do to help make out you're not just taking a photo of someone in particular. For example take your shot then move slightly and keep shooting, shoot anything, you can then delete them, keep looking around as though you are looking at buildings instead of the person who has just seen you snap them. Sometimes I just see an image as it happens and shoot it regardless. I like to include three elements to my images if possible to help illustrate the 'story', juxtaposition of subjects and objects etc. If you research some of the great street photographers it will help give an idea of what helps create a good street image. If you enjoy it then crack on, the only way to get better is to get out there look for shots, take shots then delete shots and repeat :) Good luck
 
Jimi said:
When I am shooting street I spend a lot of time just observing my surroundings, the people around me, shop signs or items which could be used as props or to help give meaning to why I have taken the shot. I may see a potential scene and then wait for a subject to 'enter' so I can compose and shoot. {snip}
{/snip}I like to include three elements to my images if possible to help illustrate the 'story', juxtaposition of subjects and objects etc. If you research some of the great street photographers it will help give an idea of what helps create a good street image. If you enjoy it then crack on, the only way to get better is to get out there look for shots, take shots then delete shots and repeat :) Good luck
Click to expand...

Very good advice - I often find that this is more difficult to accomplish than it appears.

Also, from the opportunities I get to go out, I simply just don't want to go home without taking any shots, so I will take street candids as well in case I don't get any like the above (which often happens). For me it's a hobby and as such I want photos to process and consider, I know some will spend hours/days/weeks/months trying to get the perfect picture ... I haven't got the time left for that :D
 
Without getting into all the highly verbose and abstract arguments above, thought I'll give my two cents on the image:

The good: the gentleman. There are not many people in traditional and religious dress where I live, so looking at photographs of people in their religious attire in the everyday life is still novel to me and I find that interesting. The graffitti.. The word scratched into the wood just by his face is actually is a deragatory term for male genitalia in Russian. Many would discount that graffitti but those who recognise the word will smile or be slightly irritated, either way the photo holds at least one quirk that not everybody will see. The paper. Look at the headline and then look at the man's expression on his face. He almost looks in pain. Again, that's kind of funny in a way.


The bad: depth of field and choice of lens. Shooting street on a 300mm focal range is predatory and a bit creepy even. Never mind the fact that depth of field will suck as it does here. You cropped the image to make it look as if you were right there near him but this is not how the human eye sees. You see your subjects in focus, the background in a soft blur. DoF is a good way to highlight the subject in your snaps too. My advice would be to grab a 35mm or a 50mm lens and embrace the life of almost getting into the shot to get a good image. You're a photographer, not a paparazzi.
Another benefit is that prime lenses like 50mm give you better apertures to work with, such as 1.8 and so on. Which is good not only for the depth of field but also for shooting in low light.
 
S4TW said:
Without getting into all the highly verbose and abstract arguments above, thought I'll give my two cents on the image:

The good: the gentleman. There are not many people in traditional and religious dress where I live, so looking at photographs of people in their religious attire in the everyday life is still novel to me and I find that interesting. The graffitti.. The word scratched into the wood just by his face is actually is a deragatory term for male genitalia in Russian. Many would discount that graffitti but those who recognise the word will smile or be slightly irritated, either way the photo holds at least one quirk that not everybody will see. The paper. Look at the headline and then look at the man's expression on his face. He almost looks in pain. Again, that's kind of funny in a way.


The bad: depth of field and choice of lens. Shooting street on a 300mm focal range is predatory and a bit creepy even. Never mind the fact that depth of field will suck as it does here. You cropped the image to make it look as if you were right there near him but this is not how the human eye sees. You see your subjects in focus, the background in a soft blur. DoF is a good way to highlight the subject in your snaps too. My advice would be to grab a 35mm or a 50mm lens and embrace the life of almost getting into the shot to get a good image. You're a photographer, not a paparazzi.
Another benefit is that prime lenses like 50mm give you better apertures to work with, such as 1.8 and so on. Which is good not only for the depth of field but also for shooting in low light.
Click to expand...

That was hardly succinct either!
 
I think 1 is quite a nice image. The subject is interesting to me -- traditional dress, reading a rag like the Express and so engrossed in it. It may not be "street photography" by some people's definitions, but imho you shouldn't give a damn about that ;-)

Here's an attempt to make him a little more prominent - I first cropped off the sides a little to lose the "border" they create, then thought to crop off the whole right hand side to change the point of view. I also wanted to lose the colour of the wood without losing the texture, and thought this is one of the rare places where a sepia kind of feel works quite well, both with the wood and with the concern in his facial expression. Of course, some people might hate this take on it too, that's their prerogative!

View attachment 16897
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top