Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => But is it Art? => Topic started by: Rob C on March 22, 2010, 06:34:53 pm
-
I made reference to street photography yesterday, from the point of view of what purpose it serves the photographer doing it. Since it was in a thread that wasn't street-specific, perhaps a dedicated thread here might be of interest to some who do this style of work.
My point was, roughly, that though I can understand the challenges of this genre, there was no way that I thought it would suit home decoration purposes but could well find a welcoming wall in offices and their waiting rooms. I then thought that perhaps the best outlet for it was, in fact, where most of it comes my way: the web.
What do those who actually shoot this material see as its purpose if there is one beyond the hunting urge?
Rob C
-
Hi Rob,
I'm very interested in street photography recently.
Well, I saw in the Reina Sofia museum a retrospective of Alberto Garcia Alix and there were many street genre.
He is a photographer from the movida. My sensation is that it makes a great impact as a social witness, but I simplify saying just "social".
To me, street photography is very much like daily journalism. There is an hunting feeling also, very primitive.
Today I was in a district in Madrid doing street where there is a great contrast between 2 worlds. In some years, all that will have disappeared for cold glasses offices windows and aseptics lunch bars.
So it is similar to the portrait, but instead of a person, it is the urban theater where we live at one specific time.
Internet is a good place for street but I do see it in any kind of institutions, medias. France has a very strong demand for street, because of its history?
There is an audience and people buy prints for their home, I do think much more than landscape in France, no doubt.
Now, it is very difficult to master and if everybody have access to it, I do think that even fewer people really do a consistent work than in landscape for example. To me it is the most chalenging of all the photographic "styles".
Cheers,
Fred.
-
I made reference to street photography yesterday, from the point of view of what purpose it serves the photographer doing it. Since it was in a thread that wasn't street-specific, perhaps a dedicated thread here might be of interest to some who do this style of work.
My point was, roughly, that though I can understand the challenges of this genre, there was no way that I thought it would suit home decoration purposes but could well find a welcoming wall in offices and their waiting rooms. I then thought that perhaps the best outlet for it was, in fact, where most of it comes my way: the web.
What do those who actually shoot this material see as its purpose if there is one beyond the hunting urge?
Rob C
Rob, In reply I'd ask, what do you suppose Renoir saw in Le déjeuner des canotiers?
-
Rob, In reply I'd ask, what do you suppose Renoir saw in Le déjeuner des canotiers?
You are asking the wrong guy, Russ: I'm the poster of the original question seeking some sort of insight into the reasons behind the doing! I'm trying hard not to cross-contaminate my own mind from the parallel thread of recent days and San Francisco which does not, I imagine, count as street in that sense of the thing as a people-oriented genre.
However, if reference to other snappers helps, I wonder if Henri C-B really qualifies that well either. I have his book À Propos de Paris and think it quite wonderful but not in a sort of decorative sense which, I'd imagine, is the ultimate purpose behind most current shooters: they wanna move it across a counter which, to me, seems an awfully difficult thing to want to achieve. In fact, as most of HC-B's work was apparently assigned stuff, its raison d'être was predetermined and had little to do with a sense of self-fulfillment which, again, I imagine is part of why civilians do it today, those types of magazines (and commissions) virtually extinct.
Perhaps Fred is closer than that with his sense of recording a dying world. I did play with that idea once when I first came to Spain and was fascinated by the old houses, but I was soon distracted by the main chance and trying to get more stock under my belt. In fact, it was also the difficulties in trying to get owners to co-operate that threw me. I did get into some such places for calendars, but the hassle was worth it only to get material that someone living back in Scotland might not be able to crack - that was, after all, much the reason for moving away in the first place, giving myself a business edge. However, as you might imagine, such edges live on swords that cut both ways!
Something that seems to attract restaurant owners as décor here is photography from around the turn of last century: old couples and people hanging around the local village square in their Sunday best. I have yet to see any of Robert Capa's Civil War on show anywhere!
Speaking of Capa, I have a huge Phaidon tome of his titled simply Robert Capa. I also have a great Don McCullin one. Looking at the two, I fear Capa was not even in the same league as a photographer yet he is the one to get the automatic glory. The world of fame never ceases to amaze with those it seeks to levitate to Valhalla, vanilla scented or otherwise.
Rob C
-
Well, witnessing something that exists today and will not tomorrow is one of the reason of portraiture.
But when I was in the street I did not thought about that, it just came when I was in this location.
So I guess the mistake would be that I would try to reproduce it in a serie, and it is very tempting.
In Barcelona, they did a funny experiment with some photographers: they wanted to emulate or go on the steps of
Bruce Gilden in the city, a sort of Bruce's workshop . The result was simply a disaster. Horrible.
What bruce is talking about? I'm sure he does not know himself, he just do it because he feels he has to do it.
I've noticed that when I look for something, it just escapes me. When I just do what I have to, I'm on track.
Street is great because you can not think about what you want to do, it just happen.
Fred.
-
Well, witnessing something that exists today and will not tomorrow is one of the reason of portraiture.
But when I was in the street I did not thought about that, it just came when I was in this location.
So I guess the mistake would be that I would try to reproduce it in a serie, and it is very tempting.
In Barcelona, they did a funny experiment with some photographers: they wanted to emulate or go on the steps of
Bruce Gilden in the city, a sort of Bruce's workshop . The result was simply a disaster. Horrible.
What bruce is talking about? I'm sure he does not know himself, he just do it because he feels he has to do it.
I've noticed that when I look for something, it just escapes me. When I just do what I have to, I'm on track.
Street is great because you can not think about what you want to do, it just happen.
Fred.
Fred
It's a funny thing, but I remember years ago when I was in the countryside with my first great model whose début in fashion was about two years after mine, and we were looking for a location to do some shots for ourselves and I just drove and drove and got nowhere. She said to me something I never forgot: Rob, you know something about yourself? You just can't function unless you are under pressure. She knew me from much working together - she was right and it never changed, causing me great difficulties when I tried to shoot stock just as stock. I needed the pressure of the assignment in order to take either the work or even myself seriously. With the assignment, it just happened for me too. Now retired, I can't find that drive.
Perhaps that's really why I believe so strongly in Terence Donovan's quotation regarding the difficulty of the amateur.
Rob C
-
Fred
It's a funny thing, but I remember years ago when I was in the countryside with my first great model whose début in fashion was about two years after mine, and we were looking for a location to do some shots for ourselves and I just drove and drove and got nowhere. She said to me something I never forgot: Rob, you know something about yourself? You just can't function unless you are under pressure. She knew me from much working together - she was right and it never changed, causing me great difficulties when I tried to shoot stock just as stock. I needed the pressure of the assignment in order to take either the work or even myself seriously. With the assignment, it just happened for me too. Now retired, I can't find that drive.
Perhaps that's really why I believe so strongly in Terence Donovan's quotation regarding the difficulty of the amateur.
Rob C
Interesting post really, that involve many fundamental aspects.
It's funny, the opposite of pressure is depressure. Pressure is needed, and can be create from zero. But assuming that the human is also a machinery, if you need or want a lot of pressure, you need then the structural strengh according to the grade of pressure, like a machine.
The machines that are made for high pressure environements are oversolid, with escapes etc...
I guess an overpressure leed to depressure, wich is the other side of the coin but a part of one unique thing, like dark and light.
I like pressure, I need it, but I'm learning to depressurize myself without ending bored and on the worst cases for some, depressed, and that is the most difficult task because our genes and habits call us for stimulations. And these are quimicals drugs, exactly like tobaco.
Maybe there is a drive, a truth one that put us back on enthousiasm and I'm sure it is just right next to where we stand now.
But Rob, too many times, and I'm including myself, we tend to look far away ( or in the past or towards the future ), when we should look right here, right now.
Because this thing is there, here and now, but if we look somewhere else, how can we notice it?
I'm sure there is a drive even when one is retired, and it is just where we are at the moment.
Fred.
-
However, if reference to other snappers helps, I wonder if Henri C-B really qualifies that well either. I have his book À Propos de Paris and think it quite wonderful but not in a sort of decorative sense which, I'd imagine, is the ultimate purpose behind most current shooters: they wanna move it across a counter which, to me, seems an awfully difficult thing to want to achieve. In fact, as most of HC-B's work was apparently assigned stuff, its raison d'être was predetermined and had little to do with a sense of self-fulfillment which, again, I imagine is part of why civilians do it today, those types of magazines (and commissions) virtually extinct.
Which is exactly why I feel HCB's early work, when he was shooting for himself, was his best. Later on, though he was on assignment he was the one who always chose and designed the assignment. But you're right. When you're on assignment the world's a different place and you have to perform whether or not you want to. It's not the same as simply walking around with a camera waiting for the flash of brilliance you hope will happen.
I'm not sure the ultimate purpose of most current shooters is to move it across a counter. I know some for whom that's the idea and others who want to shoot pictures simply to satisfy themselves. I think the second group actually is more driven. It's one thing to want to make a buck (or a Euro) and something else entirely to want to create art. The right kind of snapshot can make a buck, and a short film of a presidential assassination can make lots of bucks, but I suspect the majority of the posters I've seen on LuLa aren't particularly interested in making money that way.
Something that seems to attract restaurant owners as décor here is photography from around the turn of last century: old couples and people hanging around the local village square in their Sunday best. I have yet to see any of Robert Capa's Civil War on show anywhere!
And when was that not so? Now it's photographs. Then it was paintings or prints.
Speaking of Capa, I have a huge Phaidon tome of his titled simply Robert Capa. I also have a great Don McCullin one. Looking at the two, I fear Capa was not even in the same league as a photographer yet he is the one to get the automatic glory. The world of fame never ceases to amaze with those it seeks to levitate to Valhalla, vanilla scented or otherwise.
I've never been taken with Capa as a photographer, and I'm not particularly taken with McCullin. Nor am I taken with most of the photographs I see when I pick up one of my several Magnum volumes. War is always war, poverty brought on by war is always poverty, and ever since the days of Matthew Brady both genres have tended to descend into cliches -- touching cliches to be sure, but still cliches. As far as glory is concerned, like fame, and for that matter like life itself, it's a passing thing. The thing I remember most about Capa is that he stepped on his personal land mine while I was still flying F84s out of Taegu, less than three weeks after we'd received the depressing news that Earthquake McGoon had been shot down over Dien Bien Phu. We were more shaken by the loss of McGoon than by the loss of Capa.
-
My point was, roughly, that though I can understand the challenges of this genre, there was no way that I thought it would suit home decoration purposes but could well find a welcoming wall in offices and their waiting rooms. I then thought that perhaps the best outlet for it was, in fact, where most of it comes my way: the web.
What do those who actually shoot this material see as its purpose if there is one beyond the hunting urge?
Rob C
Good question, Rob. I have lots of images which I personally like but would hesitate to hang on my wall because people (visitors) have a tendency to jump to wrong conclusions. Here's one such 'street' shot which I find interesting because it's unusual. I wouldn't expect to come across such a scene whilst ambling down the mall in the centre of Brisbane.
[attachment=21025:3539_cropped.jpg]
-
I've always loved and shot several genres, including nature landscape and street. Some would call me undisciplined. When I started exhibiting my work several years ago, I showed only my landscape work, thinking that no one would be interested in my street work. After a couple of shows and some sales, I had a solo exhibit of only my street work. It caught more attention than ever, and one viewer flatly told me, "Forget about your landscapes. There are so many good ones out there already. But your street work is something special." (Of course, that's what I heard. Perhaps what she really meant was that my landscapes suck!)
I continue to shoot both, but nowadays I spend more time on the streets than in the woods. The majority of my sale are from the street work. Some very subjective (and controversial?) comments on why.
- It is much easier for me to return repeatedly to the same local neighborhood than to drive five hours to a park. My gears are not collecting dust waiting for me to make those drives.
- I get to know the locations intimately, and can return there for just the right lighting and foot traffic. On the other hand, I also know I will find something new and unexpected every time.
- I have developed several projects with different themes for my street work. Being able to return and shoot allows me to critically add/delete each project's portfolio continuously to suit its theme.
- For each exhibit, I now try to select a gallery location that is relevant to the theme. Viewers may find themselves or someone they know in the photos, or see their neighborhoods in a different perspective.
- If and when I finally have my site up, the galleries will be divided into similar themes, and include many more photos.
- Upon request, or when I feel like it, I often send the subjects in my photos either jpegs or small prints.
- Between landscape and street work, either my own or others', I often find myself responding more *emotionally* to the latter and think of "stories" behind them. Perhaps my buyers feel the same way, and want to hang something other than just "beautiful" on their walls.
-
Chris, Thanks for a very fine explanation of why street photography is more interesting and more satisfying than landscape. My own gallery experience has been that "decorators" buy landscapes; artists and people actually interested in the arts buy street photographs. I've read a lot of books on the history of photography and I'll stick my neck out and say that it's always been so.
-
Following Rob's advice, I paste this topic here previously written in another forum section:
It's about street photography and legal aspects.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Michael lastest pics make me thing about this:
Today I witnessed an unusual dispute in the street of Madrid while I was going to a work meeting.
A tourist with a big 200mm tele shoot from distance an old woman.
The Lady just jumped at him, insulting him like crazy and a group of people started to surrowding the poor guy saying that this was a violation to individual rights etc...in a very agressive way.
The guy erased the pic, (in reality the lady came in its field by accident while he was shooting a building). I tryed to defend him and calm down the others but it was impossible. Finally the tourist just moved a little scared and everything went back to normality. Some people did even want to bring the guy to the police. These extreme reactions and some recent stories that I've heard in Madrid make me wonder about the legal parts of street photography.
Street photography has never been my style, but for some reasons in the recent months I've been pushed by instinct to explore this kind of photography. The scene I just described makes me wonder about how far can we go and what are our rights and the other's.
How can this great Magnum photographer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRBARi09je8 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRBARi09je8) not have problems? Is it because it's New-York?
I'd like to know if the ones who practise "street" regularly are asking these people rights for publishing?
Are they aware the've been photographed? What are your ethics rules?
What can we do and what can't we do?
Have you ever experienced such a situation where you had hostility problems with some people you photographed?
Does Michael publish pics of people here without their consent?
etc...I think you got the idea.
Cheers.
-
Fred, The You Tube sequence of Bruce Gilden simply proves once again that there are a lot more horses asses in the world than horses. Who says Bruce is a "great Magnum photographer?" Bruce? If he's an example of a "great" Magnum photographer then Magnum has gone pretty far downhill since Capa and his buddies started it.This is the kind of guy who turns people against street photography. He's like the bikers who roar around with extra loud mufflers and then can't understand why the city comes up with a noise ordinance.
Your guy with the battleship-gun lens is another guy who proves the horse rule. You simply don't go into a place you're not familiar with and start pointing that kind of lens at people around you. There are places where you can do that. As I pointed out in another thread, St. George street in St. Augustine, Florida is one of those places. So is Disney's Epcot, here in Florida. On Sunday I went to an art fair where you could do that. But to do it you have to be in a place where a large proportion of the people around you are carrying cameras. In that kind of place, people don't really think you're shooting a picture of them. They think you're shooting something behind them. If you're not in that kind of environment and you want to do street shooting you're much better off with something like a Leica or an Olympus E-P1 -- with the strap wrapped around your wrist and the camera in your hand, not around your neck.
As far as the rest of your question is concerned I can only tell you what the situation is in the United States, and even that varies slightly from state to state. Instead of trying to summarize it, here's a reference to a really good summary by an attorney who's also a photographer: http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm (http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm).
Do I ask for model releases? Only if I think I might want to use a picture for advertising or sell it for that purpose. As long as I sell prints as art works or use the pictures for journalistic purposes I don't need a model release. On the other hand, I have to be careful to avoid making someone look ridiculous or mis-represent him in an invidious way. The other catch is "right of publicity." Right of publicity is defined as "an individual's right to control and profit from the commercial use of his/her name, likeness and persona." In most states it only applies to famous people. A movie star, for instance, could sue me on a right of publicity complaint if I tried to make money by selling a picture of her. But I still have the right to photograph her as long as I'm in a public place and she's not in a place like, say, a restroom, where she does have an expectation of privacy.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: if you look at the pictures of people on my web you'll realize there are very few instances where the person was aware I shot the picture. I think that anyone who does street photography regularly can say the same thing. It's just not that hard to remain inconspicuous while you shoot pictures -- once you learn how. But, of course, there's always the Bruce Gilden type around, detached from his horse.
-
Russ, your frank repply is refreshing and I thank your wisdom and common sense in this terrain that you know very well.
I agree with all your points, except one: think that the Gilden's photographs are really good. He is crazy in his approach, but his final work is over the top IMO.
He's been in Magnum for a long time and generally Magnum does not work with average photographers, don't you think? Now his ethic is another story...
Cheers.
-
Russ, your frank repply is refreshing and I thank your wisdom and common sense in this terrain that you know very well.
I agree with all your points, except one: think that the Gilden's photographs are really good. He is crazy in his approach, but his final work is over the top IMO.
He's been in Magnum for a long time and generally Magnum does not work with average photographers, don't you think? Now his ethic is another story...
Cheers.
Fred, Yes, I'll admit that Gilden's work is reasonably good, but his performance on the streets of New York City should at least have gotten him whopped with an umbrella or a cane. Using flash for street photography??? HCB must be rolling over in his grave. And, yes, once I even thought about trying to join Magnum -- but I was 26, I'd recently come back from a year of flying in Korea, and I was indestructible. But I had the pictures to show I could do the work, and I wasn't a stranger to war. Then I realized how much I loved flying, and, besides, I'd probably never have made the cut. I've always had a lot of respect for the outfit, though not always for all of its members.
-
Yes, the bruce method is extremely agressive. I'd be totally unable to do this even if I where trying hard.
But I do think that more Magnum photographers are using similar methods, in wars or poor countries.
Ethic is not that easy to define when you think about it, in that style.
Here is its link for the one who are interested: http://www.magnumphotos.com/Archive/C.aspx...=Bruce%20Gilden (http://www.magnumphotos.com/Archive/C.aspx?VP=XSpecific_MAG.PhotographerDetail_VPage&l1=0&pid=2K7O3R1482X4&nm=Bruce%20Gilden).
-
Yes, the bruce method is extremely agressive. I'd be totally unable to do this even if I where trying hard.
But I do think that more Magnum photographers are using similar methods, in wars or poor countries.
Ethic is not that easy to define when you think about it, in that style.
Here is its link for the one who are interested: http://www.magnumphotos.com/Archive/C.aspx...=Bruce%20Gilden (http://www.magnumphotos.com/Archive/C.aspx?VP=XSpecific_MAG.PhotographerDetail_VPage&l1=0&pid=2K7O3R1482X4&nm=Bruce%20Gilden).
Fred, It's not the ethic that bothers me as much as the destruction of the ambient light. Look at the washed out features of the people in his street shots. That's what comes from flash. Yes, he's holding the flash in his other hand, so it's not on-camera, but the damned flash still clobbers the ambient light. Fill-flash is one thing, though using it for street photography doesn't make sense, but this isn't fill-flash. This is flash he's using to make sure he's going to get something, even if it's a washed-out face. Henri Cartier-Bresson never used flash. Elliott Erwitt almost never used it. Chim didn't use it. These people all understood light. Bruce doesn't seem to understand it. Seems a strange lack of understanding for a photographer.
-
I think in his case it is more a style "research". Sure that Bruce knows perfectly the rules of photography but deliberatly decided to broke them.
You can recognize his pics very easily because of that flash washing machine.
In between us, I don't use flash either. Prefer the Erwitt approach.
Cheers.
-
Fred, It's not the ethic that bothers me as much as the destruction of the ambient light. Look at the washed out features of the people in his street shots. That's what comes from flash. Yes, he's holding the flash in his other hand, so it's not on-camera, but the damned flash still clobbers the ambient light. Fill-flash is one thing, though using it for street photography doesn't make sense, but this isn't fill-flash. This is flash he's using to make sure he's going to get something, even if it's a washed-out face. Henri Cartier-Bresson never used flash. Elliott Erwitt almost never used it. Chim didn't use it. These people all understood light. Bruce doesn't seem to understand it. Seems a strange lack of understanding for a photographer.
Not only he is destroying the ambient light with his flash, his aggressive approach produces a reaction on the people;
I find street photography interesting when it tells a story about the people, not the photographer.
-
Reportage; Martin Parr; English 'holiday' towns; junk food/people; flash; colour; cult of the ugly and the defeated; exploitative crappy images; Magnum; personal opinion.
Rob C
-
Russ,
your last few posts have been very insightful and you obviously are speaking from experience. A few years ago I did some street photography with a long lens and I quickly realised it wasn't the "right thing" to do and stopped despite it being legal. As I stated in another post political rallies are the way to go if you want to do this sort of thing. After a while you get to know who likes to be photographed and who doesn't and who doesn't care. The ones that like it tend to look at you thus spoiling it a little. The ones who don't look away and the disinterested look ahead and try and ignore you. As you stated you should think about what you are doing and don't pester people. As to putting a flash in front of someone then you deserve it to be inserted in your rear?
-
Reportage; Martin Parr; English 'holiday' towns; junk food/people; flash; colour; cult of the ugly and the defeated; exploitative crappy images; Magnum; personal opinion.
Rob C
Too cryptic; not understood; personal opinion.
-
Too cryptic; not understood; personal opinion.
Eduardo
Clear; well understood; accurate response!
;-)
Rob C
-
Reportage; Martin Parr; English 'holiday' towns; junk food/people; flash; colour; cult of the ugly and the defeated; exploitative crappy images; Magnum; personal opinion.
Rob C
-Agree
-disagree
"Reportage; Martin Parr; English 'holiday' towns; junk food/people; flash; colour; cult of the ugly and the defeated; exploitative crappy images; Magnum; "
-
Reportage; Martin Parr; English 'holiday' towns; junk food/people; flash; colour; cult of the ugly and the defeated; exploitative crappy images; Magnum; personal opinion.
Rob C
Rob, I'm not quite sure what you're saying, but Martin is a member of Magnum.
-
Russ,
your last few posts have been very insightful and you obviously are speaking from experience. A few years ago I did some street photography with a long lens and I quickly realised it wasn't the "right thing" to do and stopped despite it being legal. As I stated in another post political rallies are the way to go if you want to do this sort of thing. After a while you get to know who likes to be photographed and who doesn't and who doesn't care. The ones that like it tend to look at you thus spoiling it a little. The ones who don't look away and the disinterested look ahead and try and ignore you. As you stated you should think about what you are doing and don't pester people. As to putting a flash in front of someone then you deserve it to be inserted in your rear?
Russ has been doing street for many years I guess, maybe in Lu-La the most implicated in street photography (that I know so far) so his advices in this terrain are experienced and always usefull, so as his picture critics comments. That's a great aportation.
I don't use any more a big long lens either (don't like the weight balance) so I'm doing street with short and discrete 28mm-50mm and 16. All manual focused.
But then, if pointing with a huge tele on the face of the people is agressive in some situations, what about the compact cams now that feature big tele lens?
They are discrete yes, but if you think about it, you can get the face as the main subject from a distance and the person does not even know it.
I'm not sure if it's not worse than clearly showing what are your intentions with the big tele lens. Because then, the person is aware of your action. In the other case it is clearly a rob. So when Gilden is jumping at the face of his victims, there is nothing hidden in that process. What's right then? Being discrete, not disturbing anybody but stealing pics without consent? or just showing what you are doing clearly, even if it can be agressive.
I notice that in the Michael's pics, people are generally aware is shooting them.
-
Fred, First of all, it isn't the focal length of the lens that appears aggressive; it's the size of a rig that seems to threaten people. I'd say that stealth is the best way to do street photography, but the word "stealth" has a connotation of "furtive," and that's not what I mean at all. If a long focal length lens on a small camera will do the job quietly and unobtrusively, fine. But there's a perspective change when you use a long lens that may or may not be appropriate, depending on the particular scene.
I'll say it again: When you make someone aware that you're shooting a picture of him, what you get is a posed picture. If you're a landscaper that probably doesn't bother you because you're not after relationships between people, other people, and their surroundings. You're shooting a static shot -- same as a landscape. Here's a shot I made on Sunday at an art fair. There's no way I'd have been able to get that expression if the guy had known I was shooting his picture.
[attachment=21702:Carver.jpg]
Fred, you keep talking about "stealing" pictures without consent. But every time you go out in public people are stealing your picture -- with their eyes if not with cameras. Seeing other people is a necessary, and sometimes delightful, part of human existence. To fix an image of someone in time -- with a camera -- hardly seems "stealing."
-
Fred, you keep talking about "stealing" pictures without consent. But every time you go out in public people are stealing your picture -- with their eyes if not with cameras. Seeing other people is a necessary, and sometimes delightful, part of human existence. To fix an image of someone in time -- with a camera -- hardly seems "stealing."
Russ, I certainly agree with this idea. And you're right, if the man had been aware of you, the picture would have been a pose.
Cheers.
-
Fred, you keep talking about "stealing" pictures without consent. But every time you go out in public people are stealing your picture -- with their eyes if not with cameras. Seeing other people is a necessary, and sometimes delightful, part of human existence. To fix an image of someone in time -- with a camera -- hardly seems "stealing."
Come on, Russ, you are being disingenuous with that line! Even catching the eye in some quarters is enough to get you floored!
Rob C
-
Come on, Russ, you are being disingenuous with that line! Even catching the eye in some quarters is enough to get you floored!
Rob C
Rob.....you must be visiting some strange places?
-
Well, I think I forgot to mentionned an important detail in my tale: The tourist was actually in a "dangerous" area of downtown. He obviously did not know it.
I mean, the way the old lady insulted him was primitive and probably alcool was involved. The reactions of the people were completly exagerate, passionate and uncontroled minds. This place is a drug area and prostitution in the street. Here only a look could be enough to get problems.
But look at the minds control in action: when I tried to defend him, one guy said:"And if he his a terrorist?" No comments...
-
Come on, Russ, you are being disingenuous with that line! Even catching the eye in some quarters is enough to get you floored!
Rob C
I don't shoot pictures of wolves, Rob. But my wife had an encounter with a cougar last spring. She was all by herself, early in the morning, crossing an open field in Garden of the Gods on the outskirts of Colorado Springs when she saw the cougar -- a big one -- standing about a hundred fifty feet away. She stopped and made the mistake of making eye contact with him. Fortunately the cat evidently had just gorged himself because he turned and waddled off. So, you're right. Eye contact can be dangerous, but you don't have to make eye contact when you're seeing other people -- with or without a camera.
-
I don't shoot pictures of wolves, Rob. But my wife had an encounter with a cougar last spring. She was all by herself, early in the morning, crossing an open field in Garden of the Gods on the outskirts of Colorado Springs when she saw the cougar -- a big one -- standing about a hundred fifty feet away. She stopped and made the mistake of making eye contact with him. Fortunately the cat evidently had just gorged himself because he turned and waddled off. So, you're right. Eye contact can be dangerous, but you don't have to make eye contact when you're seeing other people -- with or without a camera.
Appearing meek and avoiding eye contact is the advice for brown bears, not cougars. With cougars you want to appear as big and threatening as possible, so they aren't tempted to think you might easy prey.
-
Appearing meek and avoiding eye contact is the advice for brown bears, not cougars. With cougars you want to appear as big and threatening as possible, so they aren't tempted to think you might easy prey.
Jeff, Maybe that's the way Texas cougars behave, but in Colorado they don't like eye contact. Bears either. In the springtime there are almost always bears around our house since we live on the edge of Garden of the Gods, most of which is wild.
-
[...]I'll say it again: When you make someone aware that you're shooting a picture of him, what you get is a posed picture.[...]
My thoughts, exactly.
Fred, you keep talking about "stealing" pictures without consent. But every time you go out in public people are stealing your picture -- with their eyes if not with cameras. Seeing other people is a necessary, and sometimes delightful, part of human existence. To fix an image of someone in time -- with a camera -- hardly seems "stealing."
Not to mention surveillance cameras: oh, the irony (http://www.flickr.com/photos/karramarro/19138872/).
-
Jeff, Maybe that's the way Texas cougars behave, but in Colorado they don't like eye contact. Bears either. In the springtime there are almost always bears around our house since we live on the edge of Garden of the Gods, most of which is wild.
It's not a matter of what they "like", but what is most likely to trigger an attack. A quick search on google and you'll find that all of the advice warns against looking away or turning your back on a mountain lion. Much of it explicitly suggests maintaining eye contact.
http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/sequoia/maps/brochures/lions.pdf (http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/sequoia/maps/brochures/lions.pdf)
http://www.nps.gov/grca/photosmultimedia/r...03lions_wmv.htm (http://www.nps.gov/grca/photosmultimedia/rangmin200703lions_wmv.htm)
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/news/news04/04009.html (http://www.dfg.ca.gov/news/news04/04009.html)
http://www.angelfire.com/co/KlueLass/lions/ljohnson.html (http://www.angelfire.com/co/KlueLass/lions/ljohnson.html)
http://users.frii.com/mytymyk/lions/onguard.htm (http://users.frii.com/mytymyk/lions/onguard.htm)
-
http://www.prime-junta.net/pont/Pontificat...or_Cowards.html (http://www.prime-junta.net/pont/Pontification/n_Telephoto_Is_For_Wimps/a_Telephoto_Is_For_Cowards.html)
-
Excatly DarkPenguin. Read the short article and that is where my concern are. In this thread the idea that emerged so far is that using a big tele lens for street is agressive and has to be done carefully according to the circumstances. Logical, nothing to say about that. But then, if telelens is banned in a way, it is accepted to "rob" pictures in the name of authenticity, to avoid poses. Here I'm not sure. If I'm ready to accept that either, I'll have to accept the first part also.
In my understanding, Gilden is extremely agressive (I do not like that), but he is inside the crowd his photographing, not outside and does not hide to the people the fact that they just have been "caught". If there is a lot to say about his method, it's not clear for me if his ethic is not better in a way.
When I get more experience in street I'm sure I'll overcome these contradictions and be able to get a clear opinion about these facts.
-
Rob.....you must be visiting some strange places?
Like Glasgow?
;-)
Rob C
-
Looking or not looking a pussycat in the eye isn't the point: the point is avoiding ever being in the same place as said cat!
Rob C
-
Looking or not looking a pussycat in the eye isn't the point: the point is avoiding ever being in the same place as said cat!
Rob C
Exactly!
-
Russ, after much casual wondering about your picture on the right, here, which had me thinking self-portrait playing piano, I finally realise it's the 'little girl' shot! I also thought much of the Egret in the Sun. At least you didn't waste your time all these years, unlike someone I know too well.
Rob C
-
Russ, after much casual wondering about your picture on the right, here, which had me thinking self-portrait playing piano, I finally realise it's the 'little girl' shot! I also thought much of the Egret in the Sun. At least you didn't waste your time all these years, unlike someone I know too well.
Rob C
Rob, Thanks for the kudos. That kind of appreciation, especially from a pro is always welcome, but I don't know which little girl shot. I've made a lot of them.
-
Rob, Thanks for the kudos. That kind of appreciation, especially from a pro is always welcome, but I don't know which little girl shot. I've made a lot of them.
Hi Russ
It's in the far eastern section I think - just the same shot but, obviously, larger.
Rob C
-
Hi Russ
It's in the far eastern section I think - just the same shot but, obviously, larger.
Rob C
This one? It's from Can Tho, Vietnam, in 1965.
[attachment=21738:The_Frown.jpg]
It's one of my all-time favorites. I often wonder what kind of life this kid had. She's be pushing sixty by now.
-
This one? It's from Can Tho, Vietnam, in 1965.
[attachment=21738:The_Frown.jpg]
It's one of my all-time favorites. I often wonder what kind of life this kid had. She's be pushing sixty by now.
Russ, you need to look at your site more often: ASIA, 40/42!
;-)
Rob
-
Okay. Yes. Now I get it. My avatar. That picture came from Can Tho too, along with the other three little Vietnamese girls. All those kids would be pushing sixty now. When I had some time off I used to drive around town shooting pictures like those. Helped keep me from going nuts.
-
Russ, after much casual wondering about your picture on the right, here, which had me thinking self-portrait playing piano, I finally realise it's the 'little girl' shot! I also thought much of the Egret in the Sun. At least you didn't waste your time all these years, unlike someone I know too well.
Rob C
Hey Rob,
If you had said left instead of right it might have been easier to guess that you meant Russ's avatar.
Eric
-
Hey Rob,
If you had said left instead of right it might have been easier to guess that you meant Russ's avatar.
Eric
Eric, it's all done with mirrors; just like with a Rolleiflex TLR, if you think about it.
Rob C
-
Eric, it's all done with mirrors; just like with a Rolleiflex TLR, if you think about it.
Rob C
I can't read what you wrote, Rob. It looks upside down to me (like on a view camera ground glass.)
Eric
-
My preferred genre is now "street photography". Over the last year I've spent hundreds of hours roaming the streets of New York City and Philadelphia, I can't imagine doing anything else. I still do landscape, architectural and long exposure photography but none of them gives me the true feeling of being a photographer than being in the middle of a crowded street during the day and an desolate street at night. It takes a person willing to get over their fears of getting really close to strangers and taking photos without worrying about strange looks or being yelled at which still hasn't happened to me. The first thing I noticed too was an increase in my reflexes and ability to compose an image, it's a great photographic exercise. The genre has gown be leaps and bounds over the last 5 years with magazines purely dedicated to it and the amount of exhibitions.
"Street, what to do with it after you shoot it." , what ever you want, most street photographers take photographs for themselves not because they think they can sell them, that's an added bonus.
PS you can see some of my work in June's issue of B&W Magazine when it's released
-
Right on, Michael. Most people who finally get over their shyness and take a shot at serious street photography soon find that it's far more satisfying than landscape or any other kind of photography.
I'll be looking for your stuff in the next B&W. I have an ad in that issue too -- not street -- can't use that kind of thing in an ad without model releases -- but street's always been my favorite kind of shoot.
-
Right on, Michael. Most people who finally get over their shyness and take a shot at serious street photography soon find that it's far more satisfying than landscape or any other kind of photography.
I'll be looking for your stuff in the next B&W. I have an ad in that issue too -- not street -- can't use that kind of thing in an ad without model releases -- but street's always been my favorite kind of shoot.
Do you know about this ?
http://www.in-publication.com/home (http://www.in-publication.com/home)
You might want to keep an eye out for this book when it's released in the fall.
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2786/4307279785_ab155d4eaa_b.jpg)
-
What to do with it afterwards? I think for most, it's an extended journey to even feel that you are able to truly capture the essence of a moment involving a person or people candidly that has a timelessness to it. On the road to that point it's possible to get many, many interesting, provocative, humorous images that are fun to have, fun to share and in some cases possible to put to other uses in stock or the occasional art sale.
Similar to Mike, I've also spent many hundreds of hours out in the cities I live and work taking street photographs. But different in so much as I've strayed into a more documentary-style as I began to realise I had the bones of a project that I became compelled to get to some level of completion. Subjective as it may be, I think I've grown extensively as a photographer as a result. Since the only other time I've posted here, I've been on a cover of a commercial magazine in the US and exhibited in Shanghai.
I won't, can't stop taking long walks or finding a perspective from a corner or an alcove in the city that has potential and seeing what I can do with it visually. And while I definitely enjoy having the images myself, they only take on meaning when shared and seen by others.
-
Do you know about this ?
You might want to keep an eye out for this book when it's released in the fall.
Michael,
I don't know how I missed your post. I guess it's because I was moving into my new studio. I'll certainly keep my eye out for this one. Unfortunately, the hyperlinks on the site don't seem to work.
-
Michael,
I don't know how I missed your post. I guess it's because I was moving into my new studio. I'll certainly keep my eye out for this one. Unfortunately, the hyperlinks on the site don't seem to work.
Russ, have you been kicked out of your house?
Rob C
-
Rob, No. Just the reverse. For decades I've had an office in the heart of downtown Colorado Springs, about five miles from my home in Manitou Springs, just below Pikes Peak. Last year, since my wife and I both do things that require more space than we had, we converted our interior garage to workrooms and storage, then built a detached two-car garage with a workroom (studio) above it. This year, when we returned from our winter in Florida, I closed my downtown office and moved home -- into the studio. I've attached some pics. I shot these just after I moved my stuff in. Now there are a lot more pictures on the walls, etc., but it's the same space. I'm going to have a hard time giving it up for the winter when we go back down south.
[attachment=23555:Looking_East.jpg] [attachment=23556:Looking_North.jpg]
[attachment=23557:Looking_South.jpg] [attachment=23558:Looking_West.jpg]
-
Rob, No. Just the reverse. For decades I've had an office in the heart of downtown Colorado Springs, about five miles from my home in Manitou Springs, just below Pikes Peak. Last year, since my wife and I both do things that require more space than we had, we converted our interior garage to workrooms and storage, then built a detached two-car garage with a workroom (studio) above it. This year, when we returned from our winter in Florida, I closed my downtown office and moved home -- into the studio. I've attached some pics. I shot these just after I moved my stuff in. Now there are a lot more pictures on the walls, etc., but it's the same space. I'm going to have a hard time giving it up for the winter when we go back down south.
[attachment=23555:Looking_East.jpg] [attachment=23556:Looking_North.jpg]
[attachment=23557:Looking_South.jpg] [attachment=23558:Looking_West.jpg]
What a great working space, Russ!
If I were to try posting a shot of mine, I'd first need an ulta-wide optic... My dream had been (lottery permitting) to take the plan of the apartment we have and plonk it in the middle of an orchard or Mallorcan wilderness and then have a space with no interior walls built up on top of that, one part for computing and the other for a wide Colorama roll or a solid curved floor/wall line.
However, if the numbers come up, the first priority after the initial divestment of most of it to the yonger set would be that two-seater de luxe and a tour of some of Europe's top hotels, the Côte d'Azure again and Switzerland and northern Italy. That's today; in the event, the shock of the win might just kill me. Willing to chance it, though!
Rob C
-
Well, I'm not in an orchard or a Mallorcan wilderness, but this view out the south window of my studio is a fair substitute. I just stepped outside and shot with a 24mm lens on a full-frame camera, so that hill is a lot steeper than it appears in this picture. If I climb the path, which is a hell of a lot harder to do at 80 than it was at 70, I can stay on the ridge, walk around to the right, and be in Garden of the Gods. It's as close to wilderness as I want to be while I'm working.
[attachment=23559:Back_Yard.jpg]
-
Well, I'm not in an orchard or a Mallorcan wilderness, but this view out the south window of my studio is a fair substitute. I just stepped outside and shot with a 24mm lens on a full-frame camera, so that hill is a lot steeper than it appears in this picture. If I climb the path, which is a hell of a lot harder to do at 80 than it was at 70, I can stay on the ridge, walk around to the right, and be in Garden of the Gods. It's as close to wilderness as I want to be while I'm working.
[attachment=23559:Back_Yard.jpg]
Very nice too; if you've done the climb at 70, then no need to do it again today; unlikely that too much has changed other than that the trees/bushes have grown...
There's a hedge and then a farmer's abandoned field across from our terrace - south-facing. The pines are growing nicely where once there was cereal, and in a year or two they will have masked completely the high-tension wires that run across the field. Downside? Well, the walls are made of breeze block and so they are home to colonies of ants which take mad turns and come out of the electricity sockets now and again. There are largish spiders that like to try to break and enter in the darkness, but the glass stops them when they attempt it, so if they are there in the morning, I get the broom and scoop them back into the field whence they came. They have stopped being so persistent since we had a watering system installed for the lawn - took them a year or two to get the message, though, but they are clearly not natural swimmers.
I admire rats. I once made a bird bath out of steel conduit tubing and a plastic tray. The thing was about six feet tall and one day, watching to see what might arrive for a drink, we were stunned to see this large rat climb the tubing, reach around the underside of the tray and swing free and then pull itself up from the edge. Its way off was easier: it just leaped right onto the hedge, a foot or so away. Amazingly acrobatic animals; shame they are so doubtful in the hygiene department and have such a bad press. Of course, they do still spook me.
Rob C
-
Rob, Sounds like a pretty active animal community. The ants, especially, sound like a problem. Our animal problems are with bears and cougars.
About two weeks ago my wife was gardening in some pots on a deck that extends from the house to a pond -- used to be a koy pond but it now harbors plain old goldfish instead of koy. She says she felt a presence behind her, turned, and saw a large brown bear letting himself down the little artificial waterfall that feeds the pond. She came inside and called me. We both watched the bear lower himself into the little pond and take a nice bath, then lumber back up the hill. Here's a picture of the bear. I shot this one last year as he was crossing the driveway below us. He lives somewhere in the neighborhood.
[attachment=23565:Bear.jpg]
Then, last year, early in the morning my wife was walking on a path in Garden of the Gods. Again, she says, she felt a presence. She looked up and was looking right at a full-grown cougar standing about twenty yards away, eyeing her. She raised her hands to make herself look bigger and gradually eased out of the area as the cat moved on into the brush. She says she thinks the main reason the cat didn't come after her is that he'd just eaten and his muzzle was covered with blood.
-
Rob, Sounds like a pretty active animal community. The ants, especially, sound like a problem. Our animal problems are with bears and cougars.
About two weeks ago my wife was gardening in some pots on a deck that extends from the house to a pond -- used to be a koy pond but it now harbors plain old goldfish instead of koy. She says she felt a presence behind her, turned, and saw a large brown bear letting himself down the little artificial waterfall that feeds the pond. She came inside and called me. We both watched the bear lower himself into the little pond and take a nice bath, then lumber back up the hill. Here's a picture of the bear. I shot this one last year as he was crossing the driveway below us. He lives somewhere in the neighborhood.
[attachment=23565:Bear.jpg]
Then, last year, early in the morning my wife was walking on a path in Garden of the Gods. Again, she says, she felt a presence. She looked up and was looking right at a full-grown cougar standing about twenty yards away, eyeing her. She raised her hands to make herself look bigger and gradually eased out of the area as the cat moved on into the brush. She says she thinks the main reason the cat didn't come after her is that he'd just eaten and his muzzle was covered with blood.
Of close encouters of the dangerous kind, I think I'd settle for spiders and ants - I don't think either is venomous, just a pest! Fortunately, we have almost no snakes.
I thought folk lore has it that none of the large animals is inclined to attack humans unless either is injured - or is that urban myth?
Rob C
-
Russ
Can't claim any four-legged exotica, but this is a couple of shots on the manual 2.8/24mm that I have just done in order to illustrate what I was writing about the hedge in front of us: the space beyond used to be rolling wheat/corn (what's the difference, anyway?) and is now garrigue with a few pines growing from seed blown off the hill on the left. In the other shot you can make out one of the high-tension pylons that might or might not be carcinogenic... when I think of these I think also of some hotels that carry huge communication masts on the roof, and of the office of the community's administrator which is across the road from yet another multi-dish monstrosity on the roof of an apartment block.
You might also spot the roofs of a couple of villas built on farming land - illegally -but resolved/'legalised' by payent of a small fine. Something is far wrong.
The hill on the far left, which overlooks the Bay of Pollensa, used to be virgin mountain and I would to take our alsabrador for walks up it every day. Unfortunately, it was granted planning permission maybe fifty years ago when laws were bought (some still are) and now that land has become so scarce and expensive, building has got underway and cement rules. Viewed from the sea, it looks like somebody dumped a few rows of rabbit hutches along it. A disgrace - una lastima!
But hell, I love most of the things about this wonderful country.
Rob C
-
It's a lovely vista, Rob. I can understand why you treasure it.
-
I thought folk lore has it that none of the large animals is inclined to attack humans unless either is injured - or is that urban myth?
Rob C
It's definitely urban myth. Last year a mountain biker was attacked and killed by a cougar. A couple years ago a fairly large family group was walking up one of our trails. One part of the party was walking faster than the other part. Eventually they became quite separated. There was a little kid with them who would run back and forth between the two groups. Eventually the kid disappeared. It took the authorities quit a while to find him -- or his remains. A cougar had gotten him too.
-
Of close encouters of the dangerous kind, I think I'd settle for spiders and ants - I don't think either is venomous, just a pest! urban myth?
Rob C
Spiders are venomous Rob. Fortunately the ones that can kill ( they have heamotoxic poison which affects the blood) administer very small doses. It's the cytotoxic species that are a nuisance though as they are more common. Wounds from their bites take forever to heal. Appologies for an off topic comment.
-
Spiders are venomous Rob. Fortunately the ones that can kill ( they have heamotoxic poison which affects the blood) administer very small doses. It's the cytotoxic species that are a nuisance though as they are more common. Wounds from their bites take forever to heal. Appologies for an off topic comment.
No, my fault: I was referring to the ones I met on my windows when they used to climb up them when they wanted to invade from the garden, but that's in Mallorca. I think even the snakes are not dangerous, unlike on the mainland where there are versions of the adder/asp or whatever the damn things get called! However, I am unlikely to do a Cleopatra and clutch any of them to my bosom.
;-)
Rob C
;-') Is this how Cindy Crawford or Marilyn would write it?
(Rob C now in invisible writing mode.)
-
Now, if this was the way it is, I'd settle for shootin' street right away!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPjfMSn4f6c
Rob C
-
About 16.00hrs yesterday I was shooting sunsets at the Clydeside, Glasgow, when another photographer stood next to me looking nervously around. I looked around and saw that two "animals" were staggering towards us. One stopped about 15ft away and the other behind us. This was on a narrow pedestrian bridge. Both swaying and they looked as if they were about to attack. After about 30 seconds the other joined his mate behind us. By this time my camera was in the bag and the tripod was ready for use as a weapon. "What are youse doing pals" was the question asked by one. " Taking photies" was the reply. They decided to stagger off. One had scabs on his face. Both in their early twenties and drugged to their eyeballs. The other photographer then confessed he only stood beside me because he thought there was safety in numbers. Thanks a lot mate. Here was me thinking I attracted attention because I looked as if I knew what I was doing? A close call. This on a Sunday afternoon/evening. :(
-
Now, if this was the way it is, I'd settle for shootin' street right away!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPjfMSn4f6c
Rob C
Those damned guys at Sony Music Entertainment have decided that Australia doesn't deserve to watch this particular video. Of course in a day or two, I'll be back in China where the government has decided Youtube is a waste of bandwidth. Oh well.
-
Stamper,
I've been in somewhat similar situations as yours with tripod and full kit and you're definitely out there. Not comfortable if the locals aren't happy about you being there. But, the situation you described isn't one that a street photog would get into without intention.
-
Those damned guys at Sony Music Entertainment have decided that Australia doesn't deserve to watch this particular video. Of course in a day or two, I'll be back in China where the government has decided Youtube is a waste of bandwidth. Oh well.
South Africa doesn't deserve the privelege too it seems, seeing that I can't watch it either. Oh well..
-
South Africa doesn't deserve the privelege too it seems, seeing that I can't watch it either. Oh well..
The U.S. of A. seems to be included in the list of backwater nations that aren't privileged to see it either, alas!
-
The U.S. of A. seems to be included in the list of backwater nations that aren't privileged to see it either, alas!
WOW..never thought that would be even remotely possible..
-
Wow!
That's the best MJ video of them all, for me, as none of the others touches it for a sort of romantic thing that's part bragging/part innocent. And lovely moves.
I had that number on a tape that I kept in the car; funny how car tape players last five minutes but domestic ones do quite well. Having said that, last night saw the computer music one chew up an irreplaceable tape from 29 Nov. 01. I should have stayed with klrzfm.com! But then, I suppose something else would have gone next time I used the machine...
Rob C