Street Photography - Ever been confronted?

ChasG said:
Personally I hate the idea of shooting from the hip is seems sneaky as though you are ashamed to take photos.
I am more in the face. I like to picture beards and have never had a problem asking people to picture them although I have not dared ask members of the female persuasion.

With members of the female persuasion I just say that they are stunning looking and I would like to immortalise them and offer to drop them a copy if they will give me their email address - never had the nerve to ask for telephone numbers ;)
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with asking, if you're after taking portraits in the street!
Telephone numbers? & saying they look stunning?...... sounds like a different agenda altogether!:eek:
 
My Kal said:
Nothing wrong with asking, if you're after taking portraits in the street!
Telephone numbers? & saying they look stunning?...... sounds like a different agenda altogether!:eek:
Click to expand...

Have you seen those viral videos around at the moment? if you say anything nice to a pretty woman in the street it's harassment :)
 
My Kal said:
Never been confronted, and not too sure how I'd react if I was. Probably just crumble!
I'm only really interested in shooting candidly, not to be covert, but just to get as natural looking shots as I can.
Shooting from the hip, (well, waist!), just gives me that nice low angle that (hopefully), engages the viewer.The crossing by My Kal, on Flickr
Click to expand...

I had a go at hip shooting when I had a ricoh GR and while it had a novelty aspect I never really took to it for some reason - i tend to take the approach of looking as if i'm taking a picture of something else - the trick is to avoid eye contact and sort of look past the person in the shot like there is something really interesting behind them. I'm not really into interacting with subjects like some street togs such as Eric Kim who has videos showing him practically directing subjects, posing them etc
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Street sniper ! Lol If that works for you but I would suggest that's more candid photography than Street.
Click to expand...

It is photography. There is time for composition along with other general photographic techniques involved when using a lens long enough to separate you and the subject. With a 50mm or shorter a person puts themselves in a position to take a snapshot in hopes that they get something useful because they have to raise their camera and shoot so fast. Even some are shooting from their hip (now that is being a sniper). I have tried all of this but I did not get into photography to take snapshots. I study and constantly try to better my skills as a photographer but shooting this way takes all of what I have learned and throws it out the window.
One last thing, people always say that the original "street photographers" all used short lenses. That is because they didn't have the zooms we have today. At the end of the day it is the final image that matters, not how you got it.
:exit:
 
shaylou said:
It is photography. There is time for composition along with other general photographic techniques involved when using a lens long enough to separate you and the subject. With a 50mm or shorter a person puts themselves in a position to take a snapshot in hopes that they get something useful because they have to raise their camera and shoot so fast. Even some are shooting from their hip (now that is being a sniper). I have tried all of this but I did not get into photography to take snapshots. I study and constantly try to better my skills as a photographer but shooting this way takes all of what I have learned and throws it out the window.
One last thing, people always say that the original "street photographers" all used short lenses. That is because they didn't have the zooms we have today. At the end of the day it is the final image that matters, not how you got it.
:exit:
Click to expand...

It's definitely photography, I didn't say it wasn't but the term 'Street Photography' is a relatively new name for a genre that was known as candid photography in the 1980s particularly when used with a telephoto lens. In print, in books, the term didn't exist in the UK in the1980s, neither did Bokeh) although Street style was going on. Street photography is just an evolution of photojournalism hence the popularity of the 35mm lens, Even Cartier-Bresson often quoted as a Street Photographer is more correctly attributed to the father of photojournalism. The genre has involved today.
 
Yes. Street photography is a relatively new term. In the 80's it was not used in the UK at all. Candid being the main term. A US influence it seems. Although the the terms seem to describe different things. As not all street is candid.
 
shaylou said:
With a 50mm or shorter a person puts themselves in a position to take a snapshot in hopes that they get something useful because they have to raise their camera and shoot so fast.
Click to expand...

That logic says that all Cartier-Bresson's photos were snapshots. It's just not true.
 
I think there are a lot of people who shoot candids on the street with zooms & tele lenses (ie over 50mm) but there are very few if any well known street photographers that generally go over 50mm - look for example at in public or burn my eye - there you have some of the top names in modern street photography and its pretty much all 50mm and below.
 
shaylou said:
With a 50mm or shorter a person puts themselves in a position to take a snapshot in hopes that they get something useful because they have to raise their camera and shoot so fast.
Click to expand...

You do know that it's possible to compose a photograph before you raise the camera to your eye?
 
Blank_Canvas said:
It's definitely photography, I didn't say it wasn't but the term 'Street Photography' is a relatively new name for a genre that was known as candid photography in the 1980s particularly when used with a telephoto lens. In print, in books, the term didn't exist in the UK in the1980s, neither did Bokeh) although Street style was going on. Street photography is just an evolution of photojournalism hence the popularity of the 35mm lens, Even Cartier-Bresson often quoted as a Street Photographer is more correctly attributed to the father of photojournalism. The genre has involved today.
Click to expand...

No wrong,when Mangum was set up Cartier-Bresson was going to call himself a street photographer,but Capa said to him you will never get any work,call yourself an photojournalist,if anybody is the father of photojournalism it would be Eugene Smith :)
 
Street photography began long before the 80 's in the U.S. Look at that movie that came out recently about Vivian M (don't remember her last name).

As far as composing goes, I think you know what I mean. Sure hopefully we all compose in our head before letting a camera but that's not the same as composing with the camera to your eye.

I don't think you can get as many candid shots by sticking a camera in someone's face as opposed to have distance separating you from the subject. At least that has been my experience and I do a lot of this type of photography.

When I was in Bangkok's China town
There was a lot more opportunity to get close to the subject and I ended up changing from a 70-200 to a 24-70 on a full frame. Point is, the situation sometimes dictates the focal length. Here it was so crowded that it was much easier to blend into the crowed and get candid shots. For me i find that most of the time that is not the case. I would spend most of my time trying to get a shot without the subject looking into the camera and ultimately that is what would happen. I ended up switching back because I had my girlfriend with me and I could cover a lot more ground without leaving her behind.

Like I said, it's the final image not how you got it that matters.
 
simonblue said:
No wrong,when Mangum was set up Cartier-Bresson was going to call himself a street photographer,but Capa said to him you will never get any work,call yourself an photojournalist,if anybody is the father of photojournalism it would be Eugene Smith :)
Click to expand...

From my studies, if I recall I think Capa acutely said to him "don't be a surrealist photographer - be a photojournalist"

I'm not sure if you've mixed up the quote or its a different one. Can you provide a reference ?
 
Blank_Canvas said:
From my studies, if I recall I think Capa acutely said to him "don't be a surrealist photographer - be a photojournalist"

I'm not sure if you've mixed up the quote or its a different one. Can you provide a reference ?
Click to expand...

Mine comes from the book i read on the forming of Magnum :)
 
simonblue said:
Mine comes from the book i read on the forming of Magnum :)
Click to expand...

I would like to read it Simon, not that I doubt your word but to further my own interest and knowledge. Hence my request for a reference. Please would you be kind enough to provide me with the Title and Author ? Many thanks.
 
shaylou said:
Street photography began long before the 80 's in the U.S. Look at that movie that came out recently about Vivian M (don't remember her last name).
Click to expand...

Maier..

I think people were saying that the term didn't exist rather than the practice.


Steve/
 
The thing is as the camera became smaller and it was much more easer to take out of the studio,the first place it was going to appear was the street,and in those days there weren't not the lens range available that there is about today :)
 
Blank_Canvas said:
From my studies, if I recall I think Capa acutely said to him "don't be a surrealist photographer - be a photojournalist"

I'm not sure if you've mixed up the quote or its a different one. Can you provide a reference ?
Click to expand...

simonblue said:
Mine comes from the book i read on the forming of Magnum :)
Click to expand...

Nick is correct. It was surrealist photographer.

From HCB himself (the exact quote is at around 1:00):
 
I try to be discreet when I photograph strangers. Sometimes I ask but mostly not; and nowadays with small camera with a variable-angle screen on the back, being discreet is even easier. I've been confronted a few times, mostly by security, & usually when I've not even been pointing the camera that way anyway. Once by someone who saw me taking photos near a building he said was his. I said I didn't know who he or his business was and wasn't interested in photographing it. (I hadn't been pointing my camera in that direction in any case) He left the matter there but added: 'don't you dare photograph my building' - or something like that; leaving me wondering if his business was dodgy & his concerns were genuine. Also by some idiot at Procter & Gamble, Egham (not security - this guy was just jogging around the site perimeter - I was on a public footpath) Apparently I was a 'security risk'. I humoured him but was close to telling him to, er, 'go away'. This was around the time when there were several pieces in the news about police harassment of photographers, so this fool probably thought he'd have a go too.
 
Last edited:
fabs said:
You do know that it's possible to compose a photograph before you raise the camera to your eye?
Click to expand...
I always compose in my head first it just never turns out the same in camera :LOL:
 
Some of these pedicab guys in London seem quite aggressive. One mentioned something about smashing my stupid face in with my camera!
 
I was once asked to desist from taking photos outside a building in Los Angeles. Fair cop - I hadn't realised was actually on their property as there was no barrier. I could see the security guy looking at me, but he allowed me to stop taking photos anyway before approaching & asking me to stop. One of the good guys.
 
Sassafras said:
Some of these pedicab guys in London seem quite aggressive. One mentioned something about smashing my stupid face in with my camera!
Click to expand...
You should have said "What are you going to do? Chase me on your tricycle?" And then hummed the Benny Hill chase scene music.
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Street photography is just an evolution of photojournalism
Click to expand...

I disagree. If anything, street photography represents the devolution of photojournalism. Taking banal random pictures of people, without context, without subtext, without engagement, without anything that may evoke emotion does not represent evolution. It's a poor attempt at emulation and nothing more. Don't try to dress it up as something it isn't.
 
adrianday said:
I disagree. If anything, street photography represents the devolution of photojournalism. Taking banal random pictures of people, without context, without subtext, without engagement, without anything that may evoke emotion does not represent evolution. It's a poor attempt at emulation and nothing more. Don't try to dress it up as something it isn't.
Click to expand...
That is exactly how I feel about landscape and bird photography ;) :kiss:
 
adrianday said:
I disagree. If anything, street photography represents the devolution of photojournalism. Taking banal random pictures of people, without context, without subtext, without engagement, without anything that may evoke emotion does not represent evolution. It's a poor attempt at emulation and nothing more. Don't try to dress it up as something it isn't.
Click to expand...

Nobody said it had to be banal or random. Whilst there is undoubtedly a great proliferation of them there are equally as many fine examples of people engaged in street life and context . Perhaps more a continuum than evolution then !
 
Blank_Canvas said:
Nobody said it had to be banal or random. Whilst there is undoubtedly a great proliferation of them there are equally as many fine examples of people engaged in street life and context . Perhaps more a continuum than evolution then !
Click to expand...

There are countless thousands more bad examples than there are fine. Calling it a continuum does a long line of exemplary photojournalists and documentary photographers a massive disservice. I think that, on the whole, street photography is a hugely misunderstood and misinterpreted sub-genre. But that said, if taking banal and random snaps of people as they go about their banal and unexciting day is what makes you happy, then fair play.
 
adrianday said:
There are countless thousands more bad examples than there are fine. Calling it a continuum does a long line of exemplary photojournalists and documentary photographers a massive disservice. I think that, on the whole, street photography is a hugely misunderstood and misinterpreted sub-genre. But that said, if taking banal and random snaps of people as they go about their banal and unexciting day is what makes you happy, then fair play.
Click to expand...
I don't like any banal image, regardless of genre or topic. Picking on one particular genre is rather silly and unnecessary in my opinion n
 
dancook said:
Maybe you should go find some landscape threads to spread your negative attitude :D
Click to expand...
There is no point. I wouldn't want to spoil anyone else's fun just because I don't like it. I really find landscapes incredibly boring and people fascinating. But I appreciates others do not and wouldn't dream to judge them on their subject.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top