Luminous Landscape Forum

The Art of Photography => Discussing Photographic Styles => Topic started by: kencameron on February 17, 2013, 04:18:44 pm

Title: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: kencameron on February 17, 2013, 04:18:44 pm
At the time Strand was preoccupied with the difficulty of how to use his bulky Ensign camera to take pictures of ‘people in the streets without their being aware of it’. How do you make your subjects blind to your presence? This is another reason why the photograph is emblematic: it provides a graphic illustration of the photographer’s ideal relationship to his subject. This was the aspect of the picture Strand stressed in an interview in 1971 (the same year that Evans reminisced about seeing it): ‘Although Blind Woman has enormous social meaning and impact, it grew out of a very clear desire to solve a problem.’ Strand’s solution was to take the lens from his uncle’s old view camera and fix it to one side of his own camera. He then held the camera in such a way that this false lens stuck straight ahead while the real lens, partly hidden by his sleeve, was focused at a right angle to the ostensible object of his attention. It may have been a clumsy solution—‘Do you know anyone who did it before? I don’t’—but this clumsiness was in keeping with everything about the cumbersome enterprise of photography at the time. And it worked.

Dyer, Geoff (2009-11-11). The Ongoing Moment (Kindle Locations 346-354). Random House, Inc.. Kindle Edition.


Here (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/media/36296/Blind-Woman-New-York-photograph-by-Paul-Strand-1916) is the picture Geoff Dyer is talking about. For me this gives rise to questions about what strategies, if any, do people use for stealth, and about the pros and cons of stealth (moral and aesthetic). No doubt a subject that has been canvassed before, so references to other threads would be welcome (he says, anticipating a rebuke from an elder).
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Gary Brown on February 17, 2013, 05:00:37 pm
There are a couple of essays on more or less that topic on this site:

Documentary and Street Photography (http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/street.shtml)

Street Photography in China (http://luminous-landscape.com/essays/china-street.shtml)
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: kencameron on February 17, 2013, 05:52:10 pm
There are a couple of essays on more or less that topic on this site:

Documentary and Street Photography (http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/street.shtml)

Street Photography in China (http://luminous-landscape.com/essays/china-street.shtml)
Interesting links, thanks. "Don't be sneaky", writes the author of the first. But he doesn't say much about why not, and there are plenty of examples, from Paul Strand onwards, of photographers who were sneaky and produced interesting work. What you often get in this area are statements which are essentially about people's personal practices but which have morphed into ex cathedra advice to everyone else. These are of some interest - as to the personal practices - but for me, something is missing when it comes to analysis. There is a whole line of argument in the context of the novel about writers who are ruthless in exploiting their families and friends as source material. Of course this doesn't translate directly to the present case, we aren't talking about photographing friends and family, but a similar question comes up - whether or not good art justifies behaviour which would otherwise be reprehensible. My main interest in starting the thread is to find out what people themselves do, and how they feel about it - although the theoretical discussions and the advice may also be interesting.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 18, 2013, 10:05:10 am
Well, Ken, since you ask: I really don't like the idea of shooting people without their knowing in instances where they, the people themselves, become the primary subject. Often it can be as the butt of ridicule, of overweight (in a contemporary scenario especially) or even, as poor Diane A. used to do, of natural disasters of birth or circumstance.

I suspect that each of us already has a built-in moral compass that, followed, would prevent abuses of this sort, but it's possible that the marriage with photography lends such matters a taste of the hunt, and we all know how many animals died because of that glorious, deadly pastime.

Apart from the morality or otherwise, I simply don't have the cojones to confront people in the street in that manner; I know that I would hate to be so confronted... as far those bleats about 'then you should stay off the street', that's simply absurd and facile, nothing but an atempt at faux justification for selfishness and lack of common respect for others.

Having said which, I still enjoy seeing good 'street'. Especially do I like some of the work of William Klein: street fashion is cool - or was. Same genre but no victims.

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Alan Klein on February 18, 2013, 09:45:00 pm
The real question is how do you take pictures of strangers without feeling guilty about it?
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: stamper on February 19, 2013, 03:55:54 am
If you want to "practise" street photography then I suggest shooting political rallies. I have been doing this for about ten years with very little hostility. I have had more hostility shooting street the few times I have tried. Shooting political rallies means that the protesters expect to be photographed and 99% ignore the photographers even when they are in their face. A lot of police in attendance means very few would think about making a fuss. You can get very close or stand back with a long lens. You get the people interaction that happens on the street. In the ten years of shooting I have seen very little violence and in Scotland, where I live, the protesters are civilised and the police rarely antagonize them and vice versa. I also find it more productive than aimlessly wandering the streets. :)
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 19, 2013, 04:50:33 am
If you want to "practise" street photography then I suggest shooting political rallies. I have been doing this for about ten years with very little hostility. I have had more hostility shooting street the few times I have tried. Shooting political rallies means that the protesters expect to be photographed and 99% ignore the photographers even when they are in their face. A lot of police in attendance means very few would think about making a fuss. You can get very close or stand back with a long lens. You get the people interaction that happens on the street. In the ten years of shooting I have seen very little violence and in Scotland, where I live, the protesters are civilised and the police rarely antagonize them and vice versa. I also find it more productive than aimlessly wandering the streets. :)



A better option would be to pop into Waterstone's instead.

;-)

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 19, 2013, 04:52:12 am
The real question is how do you take pictures of strangers without feeling guilty about it?


Really, you've defined the problem: one instinctively understands that it's intrusion.

Attempting to overcome conscience isn't going to change the nature of the act.

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 19, 2013, 07:56:51 am
Street photography techniques vary from Strand's approach (shoot a blind woman; she won't notice) and various FSA photographers like Ben Shahn, with their right-angle viewfinders, all the way to Bruce Gilden, prancing down the street in a photographer's vest popping a speedlight in people's faces. But the most consistently successful street shooters have been people like HCB and Robert Frank who didn't try to be stealthy, didn't shoot blind people because they were blind, didn't use right-angle viewfinders, and most assuredly didn't use speedlights.

I've been doing street since 1953, and I've always approached it the same way those two approached it: blend in; smile; make yourself as un-threatening as possible; make it seem natural for you to be shooting a picture. Stick around until people get used to you being there with a camera in your hand. If you try for stealth, as soon as somebody notices you sneaking around you become threatening. In order to try for stealth you have to adopt an attitude that people can sense -- see, smell, feel? To me the best approach is the approach the Shadow took: cloud men's minds. Be invisible -- just a guy with a camera. It works.

Of course, if, like Rob, you feel guilty about shooting the picture, you're screwed. I suspect a guilt feeling is just as detectable by people around you as an attempt at stealth. If you feel guilty about shooting people on the street, go shoot landscape. Most landscapes don't seem to be self-conscious.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 19, 2013, 08:51:15 am

Of course, if, like Rob, you feel guilty about shooting the picture, you're screwed. I suspect a guilt feeling is just as detectable by people around you as an attempt at stealth. If you feel guilty about shooting people on the street, go shoot landscape. Most landscapes don't seem to be self-conscious.




That's very true: people can sense emotions, even if they are not exactly aware of what they sense...

It was the bane of looking for new work: the only time one was free to do it, as a self-employed person, was when one had no work. The sense of humiliation must have come through loud and clear; not the best way to face new prospects.

;-(

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 19, 2013, 04:12:35 pm
... the most consistently successful street shooters have been people like HCB and Robert Frank who didn't try to be stealthy...

Quote
Photographers and others who saw him work talked about his swift and nimble ability to snap a picture undetected. (Sometimes he even masked the shiny metal parts of his camera with black tape.)

Cartier-Bresson, Artist Who Used Lens, Dies at 95 (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/05/arts/cartier-bresson-artist-who-used-lens-dies-at-95.html)

Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 19, 2013, 04:17:33 pm
The real question is how do you take pictures of strangers without feeling guilty about it?

Quote
"I asked permission and she agreed to pose for me. I'm not very good at intruding in people's lives, and the way I work I really don't have to. I can ask for cooperation."

"I shot several rolls and then paid the woman for her time. I always offer to pay people when I photograph them. I make a point of that."

 p120, 121 Pete Turner: Photographs (http://books.google.com/books?id=moZrQgAACAAJ)
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 19, 2013, 04:35:45 pm
Isaac, you seem to conflate being undetected with being stealthy. Not true. You don't have to be stealthy to be undetected. I'd be willing to bet that not more than 5% of the people in my street shots were aware I'd shot a picture. Perhaps less. Some of them saw me do it, but the fact didn't register. Have you actually looked at HCB's pictures? A lot of the people in the pictures he shot on (self-imposed) assignment when he was doing photojournalism were aware he'd made the shot. But look at his street photography. Look, for instance, at his Lock at Bougival. Three people in that marvelous picture, not counting the baby, and none of them see him make the shot. Only the dog inside the door saw him do it. Go check the street shots I've posted at http://www.fineartsnaps.com/. Not all of the pictures, especially the color stuff, is strict street. Some are environmental portraits where the subject and I were interacting. But see how many of the people in the street shots knew I shot their picture. The trick is to be innocuous,not stealthy.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 19, 2013, 04:51:51 pm
Isaac, you seem to conflate being undetected with being stealthy. Not true.

"stealth (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/american-english/stealth?q=stealthy): movement that is quiet and careful in order to avoid notice, or secret or indirect action"

"Sometimes he even masked the shiny metal parts of his camera with black tape." Not stealthy?
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Alan Klein on February 19, 2013, 04:53:10 pm
Quote from: Alan Klein on February 18, 2013, 09:45:00 PM

The real question is how do you take pictures of strangers without feeling guilty about it?



<<<Really, you've defined the problem: one instinctively understands that it's intrusion.

Attempting to overcome conscience isn't going to change the nature of the act.

Rob C>>>

Which is why I rarely shoot street shots and mainly shoot landscape.  The trees don't give me funny looks.  However, to each his or her own.  If you are into it and enjoy it, shoot away.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 19, 2013, 06:03:20 pm
"stealth (http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/american-english/stealth?q=stealthy): movement that is quiet and careful in order to avoid notice, or secret or indirect action"

"Sometimes he even masked the shiny metal parts of his camera with black tape." Not stealthy?

Well, I'm not going to play word games. Did you look at the pictures toward which I pointed?
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 19, 2013, 07:44:16 pm
Well, I'm not going to play word games. Did you look at the pictures toward which I pointed?

When you have your own definition of stealthy which doesn't match a dictionary definition -- you are playing word games :-)

When you say "none of them see him make the shot" it tells us nothing about why "none of them see him make the shot" -- maybe he was being stealthy.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 19, 2013, 09:04:49 pm
You didn't answer my question.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: stamper on February 20, 2013, 04:55:15 am
A couple of weeks ago I shot an image of a street busker and someone talking to him. The talkative person then took me to task for shooting the image and I should pay the busker for taking the image. I wandered on after an exchange of words. When I looked at the image on my monitor the talkative person had the back of his head to me. He must have had eyes in the back of his head! So much for being stealthy.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 20, 2013, 09:11:28 am
A couple of weeks ago I shot an image of a street busker and someone talking to him. The talkative person then took me to task for shooting the image and I should pay the busker for taking the image. I wandered on after an exchange of words. When I looked at the image on my monitor the talkative person had the back of his head to me. He must have had eyes in the back of his head! So much for being stealthy.



No, ears at the side. That's why the Leicas had silent shutters.

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 20, 2013, 09:16:49 am
"Sometimes he even masked the shiny metal parts of his camera with black tape." Not stealthy?



I do the same with the logos on my cameras; I even unpicked the logo off the supplied neckstrap. I don't shoot people as in 'street' either.

I hate being an unpaid sandwich board.

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 20, 2013, 09:29:12 am
When you have your own definition of stealthy which doesn't match a dictionary definition -- you are playing word games :-)

When you say "none of them see him make the shot" it tells us nothing about why "none of them see him make the shot" -- maybe he was being stealthy.

Hi Isaac. The bottom line is: if HCB had been trying to be stealthy he'd have used a 135mm lens, which is what a lot of beginning street shooters try before they discover that the perspective in their shots is all screwed up. He understood that a street shot needs to have the kind of intimacy you can't get with a long lens. To be successful the shot needs to put the viewer, and therefore the shooter, in the middle of the action. He used a 50mm "normal" lens, and sometimes, especially in the U.S., a 35mm.

Where can I go to take a look at your street photography? Looking at them will tell me whether or not you're trying to be stealthy.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 20, 2013, 10:11:14 am
You didn't answer my question.

I didn't respond to your attempt to assert authority and control.


Have you actually looked at HCB's pictures?

During the last week --

Henri Cartier-Bresson and the artless art

Henri Cartier-Bresson : the early work
   
Henri Cartier-Bresson, Walker Evans : photographing America 1929-1947
   
Henri Cartier-Bresson : à propos de Paris

Henri Cartier-Bresson in India
   
An inner silence : the portraits of Henri Cartier-Bresson
   
Tête à tête / portraits by Henri Cartier-Bresson

Cartier-Bresson: Photographs
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 20, 2013, 10:34:25 am
The bottom line is: if HCB had been trying to be stealthy he'd have used a 135mm lens...

Russ, you seem to conflate being distant with being stealthy. Not true.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 20, 2013, 10:39:30 am
Still looking for your street shots so I can see if you're stealthy.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 20, 2013, 10:42:14 am
Something important is not being understood in this conversation: the matter of expectations.

During the 50s, in Britain, there was a bottom feeder level of photographer who made his living by working the streets of holiday resorts and market towns. These needed no more than a hawker's licence, and they were off! People walking down the High Street would find one such guy pointing a camera and pretending to take a snap of them followed with an offer to sell a print for whatever price; once accepted, the snapper would say: one more for safety! and then make the actual, single exposure. The point was, back in the day, people were not so aware of, nor concerned with privacy, the various ways in which they could subsequently be exploited. They even supplied names and addresses so the snapper could post the prints! The digital age has changed a lot of public conceptions and created a higher sense of awareness. We are not the innocent and accepting society we used to be in the day of HC-B!

No wonder that in today's world a street hunter is looked upon with little love. Walking down the street with your secretary en route to lunch could have you end up as tabloid fodder by the afternoon! Or worse: divorce court. Innocence is no defence against insinuation. And abuse of one's freedom to walk the public walkway without being molested should not be tolerated.

Radical Rob has spoked!

;-)

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 20, 2013, 11:12:02 am
Still looking for your street shots so I can see if you're stealthy.

Another attempt to assert authority and control.


I think we can all agree with your statement that "street photography techniques vary"; but you should also apply that to HCB.

You seem to be using a categorical assertion that HCB didn't try to be stealthy as authority for your personal practice, and in doing so you provide the example for kencameron's comment --

What you often get in this area are statements which are essentially about people's personal practices but which have morphed into ex cathedra advice to everyone else.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 20, 2013, 11:19:50 am
The point was, back in the day, people were not so aware of, nor concerned with privacy, the various ways in which they could subsequently be exploited.

Yes.

No, ears at the side. That's why the Leicas had silent shutters.

iirc Bernard Languillier made that point about the silent operation of the Nikon J1.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 20, 2013, 01:41:22 pm
Isaac, I think what we have is a semantic problem. My small dictionary defines "stealth" as "Marked by quiet and caution and secrecy; taking pains to avoid being observed." With reference to HCB or any really effective street photographer I'll buy all of that except the word "secrecy." So if you mean a good street photographer tries to avoid being observed, and if that's your definition of "stealth" then I'll agree with you. But avoiding being observed doesn't mean being furtive or sneaky, which is what I think you're implying.

Let's examine what that definition means in terms of street photography. The word that jumps out at me is "observed." I don't think any competent street photographer expects not to be observed in the sense that he expects his subject not to see him. What he expects is to be ignored. Which takes us back to what I said earlier about being non-threatening. And, yes, it helps to have a small, quiet, black camera. If you come on with a Nikon D4 sporting a 70-200 f/2.8 lens you're not likely to be ignored even though the rig is black.

In spite of your tendency to make amateur forays into popular psychology I'm certainly not trying to assert authority or control. But when I see somebody making judgments about an endeavor which I love and in which I'm involved I like to know whether or not he knows anything about it. Street photography isn't an area where you can simply pontificate about methods and expect your statements to be accepted. You need to demonstrate that you've done it. If all I knew about Bruce Gilden were how he operates, I wouldn't believe a damned thing he has to say about street photography. But having seen his work I can't ignore what he says. The proof's in the pudding. I haven't seen your pudding.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 20, 2013, 01:56:27 pm
I haven't seen your pudding.




My fear, Russ, is that I think I may have pretty much eaten mine!

;-)

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 20, 2013, 02:12:05 pm
Well, considering the subjects of your work I can underst. . . Oops, best not finish that.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: kencameron on February 20, 2013, 04:08:30 pm
The proof's in the pudding. I haven't seen your pudding.
Let's see if I've got this right. In order to decide whether or not Isaac is right about how best to describe Henri Cartier-Bresson's approach to street photography, I need to look at some street photographs taken by Isaac? I don't find that at all persuasive. I need to look at HCB's photographs, HCB's writings, and other informed writing on the subject, sure, but Isaac's photographs are no more relevant than the color of his eyes. You are running a broad-brush notion of "credibility" that doesn't survive even the most rudimentary examination and which I suspect you don't really subscribe to yourself. If Isaac turned out to be a modern master of street photography, would that change your mind about HCB's practice? Arguments need to be assessed on their own merits and not by reference to their proponents. This is fundamental to rational discourse.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 20, 2013, 05:20:17 pm
With reference to HCB or any really effective street photographer I'll buy all of that except the word "secrecy."

Have you looked up the definition of secret?

For future reference, Merriam Webster online -- stealthy (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stealthy), secret (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/secret).
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 20, 2013, 05:49:05 pm
Let's see if I've got this right. In order to decide whether or not Isaac is right about how best to describe Henri Cartier-Bresson's approach to street photography, I need to look at some street photographs taken by Isaac?

Hey, Ken, you got it. Congratulations. If Isaac were talking about the content or composition of  Henri's photographs that would be one thing, but he's talking about the technique Henri used to get those photographs. If he's never done street photography he's not in a position to determine WHAT technique Henri used to get his photographs. If you've never sailed a boat you're hardly in a position to explain sailing techniques. If you've never played a piano you're in no position to talk about finger techniques on the piano. If you've never done street photography you're in no position to talk about techniques to achieve street photograph, HCB's or anyone else's.

Quote
If Isaac turned out to be a modern master of street photography, would that change your mind about HCB's practice?

No, but it might change my mind about Isaac's knowledge of the subject, and I might be willing to listen to his ideas about the practice of street photography.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 20, 2013, 05:53:07 pm
Have you looked up the definition of secret?

For future reference, Merriam Webster online -- stealthy (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stealthy), secret (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/secret).

I'm not going to play word games with you any more, Isaac. If you have something illuminating to say about street photography technique, give it a try. But as I just pointed out, unless I can be assured you know at least something about it, I'm finished replying to your remarks.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: kencameron on February 20, 2013, 06:54:45 pm
I am afraid I can't return the compliment, Russ. You haven't "got it" - or at least, not the point I am making.

...If you've never sailed a boat you're hardly in a position to explain sailing techniques...

Yes you are. You might be disadvantaged in what you say, you might not choose to take on the task, but what you say will be right or wrong because it is right or wrong not because you have or haven't sailed a boat. In order to put yourself in a position to explain sailing techniques, you could conduct an exhaustive study of sailors at work, interview large numbers of them, read everything that has been written about sailing techniques. You might - or might not - miss something because you hadn't sailed. When would you miss something? Prima facie, only if there was something unique about your own (potential) experience. On the other hand, if you hadn't done the study and based your remarks solely on your own practice you would almost certainly miss a lot, because you would be generalizing based on one instance.

Best, of course, to have both sailed and studied, but that is not the point I am disputing. When it comes to the merits of the actual observation - whether the explanation of sailing techniques is a good one or not - the biography of the author is neither here nor there. Consider, for example, the case where a non-sailor (but skilled interviewer, thinker and writer) offers an explanation based on detailed advice from expert sailors. She might be disadvantaged in understanding what they are saying, but that could be overcome, and she might also be disadvantaged if she had done a bit of sailing, because that could lead her to privilege her own mistakes, but that could be overcome. Practical experience needs to be part of the input to the explanation, but not necessarily part of the life history of the author.

A text which offers an explanation of something out there in the world needs to be judged on the correspondence between what it says and our experience of the world. It doesn't matter if we know nothing about the author. If you read an essay about street photography authored by anonymous, would you be unable to decide whether or not it was any good?

Art critics don't have to be artists. Separate skills.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 20, 2013, 07:21:31 pm
A text which offers an explanation of something out there in the world needs to be judged on the correspondence between what it says and our experience of the world. It doesn't matter if we know nothing about the author. If you read an essay about street photography authored by anonymous, would you be unable to decide whether or not it was any good?

Art critics don't have to be artists. Separate skills.

Well, I thought you got it, but it's obvious you didn't. You really need to read more carefully Ken. This isn't about art criticism. It isn't even about art ability. It's about art technique. Different subject, different kind of knowledge needed. It's kind of like brain surgery. You might be able to discuss the benefits of brain surgery and the qualifications of various brain surgeons intelligently if you've never done brain surgery, but God help you if you decide to do brain surgery and you take your cues about technique from somebody who's never done it. It's not about "your experience with the world." It's about your experience with the mechanics of the particular task.

And yes, if I read an article about the techniques of street photography by anonymous I'd know immediately whether or not it was any good.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 20, 2013, 08:08:12 pm
If Isaac were talking about the content or composition of  Henri's photographs that would be one thing, but he's talking about the technique Henri used to get those photographs. If he's never done street photography he's not in a position to determine WHAT technique Henri used to get his photographs.

I'm in a position to listen to M. Cartier-Bresson -- "One has to tiptoe lightly (my camera never leaves me) and steal up on one's quarry; you don't swish the water when you're fishing."


I'm not going to play word games with you any more, Isaac.

Rob C's description is apt. (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=74650.msg595986#msg595986)

At least you know what stealthy means now.

Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: kencameron on February 20, 2013, 08:39:37 pm
You really need to read more carefully Ken.
Since that is, at this point, exactly what am thinking about you, there is probably not much point in taking this further. However, I will have one more go, and I will base it on your own metaphor, to simplify the reading task.

HCB is the Brain Surgeon. What we are talking about is his approach to brain surgery - as a matter of fact.  The way to decide that is to look at his work, read his utterances, consult his colleagues etc. We weren't talking about the best source of advice on how to do anything. If I wanted to get advice about how to practice photography, or brain surgery, sure, I would go to a photographer, or a brain surgeon, or maybe a text by someone who had talked to a lot of photographers and brain surgeons. But Isaac wasn't giving advice about how to practice photography. He had a different view to  yours, or, maybe, he was trying to probe your view, on whether HCB was stealthy, sneaky etc, in his practice.

Setting aside the semantics, which took up too much of the argument, my own view on that subject is not far from yours, and I think your notion of being inconspicuous is persuasive in relation to a lot of fine work. However, in assessing your view, and Isaac's, on what HCB did or did not do, I have no interest whatsoever in your photographs, or in Isaac's*. Instead, I would go to HCB's photographs, and to what he said about his practice, and assess your respective views accordingly. On the other hand if I wanted advice about how to do street photography, I would certainly want to hear from photographers whose work I admired - and also from people reporting the views of photographers whose work I admired. But that was never the subject - was it? It certainly wasn't the question I asked in the original post.

*Just to clarify - with an irrelevant point - I like many of your photographs.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 21, 2013, 09:12:45 am
Right. It's time to end the conversation. In the end I don't think we're very far apart.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 21, 2013, 12:39:36 pm
Dear God.

I thank my lucky stars I never sailed into the wide blue yonder with a professional skipper who'd only read about navigation; I am just as grateful that my stents were inserted by surgeons who'd been taught in hospitals and had had plenty of actual experience. In the case of the latter, during my first experience, I felt faint and they immediately pumped some nitroglycerine into me. On asking if that wasn't inclined to explode, the surgeon replied that yes, but no, and just as long as I didn't decide to have a cigarette right at that juncture, all would be well. As I'd given up ciggies in '66 we were all safe.

If folks will forgive me saying so, I get the impression that these sorts of very dubious arguments, with positions based on stretched fantasy, only exist today because of the advent of digital. Before that, people tended to respect reality a bit more, but now - who knows which new god becomes flavour of the sect. Seems anything can be argued from any angle, however dumb. The secret of success is never to give up; take the Parthian shot, if you can think of it. And if you can't, take a poke at it anyway, who'll be any the wiser?
 
Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 21, 2013, 01:49:42 pm
I get the impression that these sorts of very dubious arguments, with positions based on stretched fantasy, only exist today because of the advent of digital.

We see lengthy bad analogies in discussion forums because the medium supports them (in verbal conversation we lose track of the details).

Of course, people squabbled over the meaning of words and had to resort to dictionaries long before digital.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 21, 2013, 07:33:30 pm
Hi Isaac, Like the other thread, I'm out of this one as far as the primary topic is concerned, but I have one question for you:

Why does the question of whether or not HCB was "stealthy" (however you define the word) matter to you? Would his pictures be less acceptable to you if it turned out he was trying to sneak up on his subjects, as opposed to simply shooting them head-on? Since you obviously don't do street photography yourself, why does it matter to you? It's a question that's bothered me since it first came up.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 22, 2013, 02:06:25 pm
Why does the question of whether or not HCB was "stealthy" (however you define the word) matter to you?

It doesn't; and I don't own a definition of "stealthy", I'm happy to accept the ordinary dictionary definitions (that's why I pointed to both British English and American English dictionary definitions).

I was simply astonished that you would insist that when M. Cartier-Bresson sometimes masked the shiny metal parts of his camera with black tape that was not a deliberate attempt to hide the fact that he was taking photos of those around him.

"One has to tiptoe lightly ... and steal up on one's quarry" -- Not stealthy? Really?


Since you obviously don't do street photography yourself...

Another day, another assumption based on absence of evidence.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: PhillyPhotographer on February 23, 2013, 12:28:36 pm
The real question is how do you take pictures of strangers without feeling guilty about it?

Why would you feel guilty ?
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: PhillyPhotographer on February 23, 2013, 12:34:49 pm
Replace the word "stealth" with the word "blend", as in blend in with the crowd. You're not a Ninja or a member of Special Forces, you're a photographer. The object is not to look like one. Use the smallest and quietest camera you're comfortable with. Leave the camera bag and any swag at home. Use a wrist strap. It's that simple, you're just another person walking around the streets except you have a camera.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 23, 2013, 01:27:45 pm
Another day, another assumption based on absence of evidence.

Hardly. I've asked you several times to show some of your street work. So far none has been forthcoming. I have to conclude either that you don't do any or that it's so bad you don't want anyone to see it.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 23, 2013, 01:44:41 pm
Why would you feel guilty ?



The greater question was in the original: how can you possibly not feel guilty when you intrude into someone else's life, totally without benefit of invitation?

I am aware of the extraordinary belief held  by some that, should you respect and also expect other people to respect universal rights to privacy, then you should confine yourself to a nunnery. However, I don't think that the onus is upon the innocent to protect themselves by retreating from public places which, by definition, are for the use of the public, not the hunters and stalkers of that public. I don't really think that the issue is complicated. I do understand that some people enjoy the hunt; I simply don't think I like the idea of anyone being hunted, which this sort of photography obviously does.

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: PhillyPhotographer on February 23, 2013, 03:06:06 pm
I'm out there to capture and document. I have no social responsibility.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 23, 2013, 04:59:50 pm
I'm out there to capture and document. I have no social responsibility.


For you, that's fair enough; for others, obviously not so.

I suppose that the way you put it, the same concept could be applied to hunting of any kind. You know, like gunning down stray dogs on the main street through town, regardless of traffic, pedestrian or mobile; no social responsibility sounds like a cool idea.

;-)

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 23, 2013, 05:38:13 pm
Hardly. I've asked you several times to show some of your street work. So far none has been forthcoming.

You may ask, and I may decline.


I have to conclude either that you don't do any or that it's so bad you don't want anyone to see it.

Utter nonsense:
As it happens, I feel no need to dance to your tune.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 23, 2013, 05:53:31 pm
when you intrude into someone else's life

Do we feel OK about the idea of someone with a directional microphone recording what we say to other people when we are in a public place, or recording a cell phone conversation made from a public place?

Why should we feel OK when our image is taken without consent?

Is it that we assume no one is taking our image without our consent, and no one is recording what we say without our consent?
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: PhillyPhotographer on February 23, 2013, 06:06:57 pm
I find it hilarious that people are clamoring for privacy when out it public. People are looking at you, people hear you talk, what's the difference if someone takes a photo and you happen to be in it ? Should every tourist ask for everyone's permission when they take a photo of the Liberty Bell and they happen to be in the photo ? Seriously, what's the big deal because 99% of the time they don't even know they're being photographed.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: PhillyPhotographer on February 23, 2013, 07:32:18 pm

For you, that's fair enough; for others, obviously not so.

I suppose that the way you put it, the same concept could be applied to hunting of any kind. You know, like gunning down stray dogs on the main street through town, regardless of traffic, pedestrian or mobile; no social responsibility sounds like a cool idea.

;-)

Rob C

Works for me just fine.

Here is a photograph I took a little over a month ago that shows a man who overdosed and died at a bus stop in Philadelphia. I took the picture because of the ironic sign and the change that fell out of his pocket. This photograph depicts the struggle some go through in life and how it can be ironic. Should I have asked the police permission to take this photo ? The dead guy ? How about the other dozen people watching it with their own eyes ? The people operating the 5 security video cameras that look down at this location ?
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10200456971694937&set=a.10200452254257004.2207589.1476143245&type=3&theater

(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/9474_10200456971694937_727971178_n.jpg)
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: PhillyPhotographer on February 23, 2013, 07:39:54 pm
At the time Strand was preoccupied with the difficulty of how to use his bulky Ensign camera to take pictures of ‘people in the streets without their being aware of it’. How do you make your subjects blind to your presence? This is another reason why the photograph is emblematic: it provides a graphic illustration of the photographer’s ideal relationship to his subject. This was the aspect of the picture Strand stressed in an interview in 1971 (the same year that Evans reminisced about seeing it): ‘Although Blind Woman has enormous social meaning and impact, it grew out of a very clear desire to solve a problem.’ Strand’s solution was to take the lens from his uncle’s old view camera and fix it to one side of his own camera. He then held the camera in such a way that this false lens stuck straight ahead while the real lens, partly hidden by his sleeve, was focused at a right angle to the ostensible object of his attention. It may have been a clumsy solution—‘Do you know anyone who did it before? I don’t’—but this clumsiness was in keeping with everything about the cumbersome enterprise of photography at the time. And it worked.

Dyer, Geoff (2009-11-11). The Ongoing Moment (Kindle Locations 346-354). Random House, Inc.. Kindle Edition.





Here (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/media/36296/Blind-Woman-New-York-photograph-by-Paul-Strand-1916) is the picture Geoff Dyer is talking about. For me this gives rise to questions about what strategies, if any, do people use for stealth, and about the pros and cons of stealth (moral and aesthetic). No doubt a subject that has been canvassed before, so references to other threads would be welcome (he says, anticipating a rebuke from an elder).

Watch this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUAk84LDFVA
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 24, 2013, 04:33:33 am
Works for me just fine.

Here is a photograph I took a little over a month ago that shows a man who overdosed and died at a bus stop in Philadelphia. I took the picture because of the ironic sign and the change that fell out of his pocket. This photograph depicts the struggle some go through in life and how it can be ironic. Should I have asked the police permission to take this photo ? The dead guy ? How about the other dozen people watching it with their own eyes ? The people operating the 5 security video cameras that look down at this location ?
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10200456971694937&set=a.10200452254257004.2207589.1476143245&type=3&theater

(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/9474_10200456971694937_727971178_n.jpg)



That photograph of the dead dude isn't 'street'; that photograph, for me, is valid photojournalism with which I'd have no beef. It's a shot of preventable human tragedy and, as such, requires circulation.

It has nothing to do with what passes for 'street' which is nothing but intrusion with a subtext of mockery, because the frailties of others are what often make then the focal point of prying optics. Were they simply 'normal' people going about their lives there would be precious little subject to photograph.

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 24, 2013, 04:43:14 am
I find it hilarious that people are clamoring for privacy when out it public. People are looking at you, people hear you talk, what's the difference if someone takes a photo and you happen to be in it ? Should every tourist ask for everyone's permission when they take a photo of the Liberty Bell and they happen to be in the photo ? Seriously, what's the big deal because 99% of the time they don't even know they're being photographed.



That's being disingenuous; people are usually not hearing you talk - conversation in public, short of when sitting on a bench, is seldom overheard, and if it is, it happens for such brief moments as to be devoid of meaning and/or context to alien ears.

Street is not about shooting people who 'happen' to be in the frame; street is about hunting them out and 'framing' them (in several senses of that word).

As for their unawareness of being 'framed', is that unawareness then justification for the street pickpocket of whom one is also unaware until embarrassment hits later on?

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: stamper on February 24, 2013, 05:31:39 am
I think the word hunting is inappropriate Rob and I think you are using it to try and reinforce a dubious defence of privacy. The Amateur  Photography magazine - UK - stated bluntly that if a person doesn't like their image in photograph then they should stay in the house. It was blunt and to the point. There isn't a privacy law in the UK and imo that should be the norm. Take the argument to it's conclusion then there wouldn't be any street images - with people in them - published in newspapers, magazines or the internet and television. A poorer world? Rob I conclude that you don't like your picture taken in public and this is the nub of your argument. I bet you have taken images that have people in them in public.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: RSL on February 24, 2013, 06:41:37 am
You may ask, and I may decline.

Sorry, Isaac, but when it comes to street photography you're sounding as if you're all hat and no cattle.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: PhillyPhotographer on February 24, 2013, 08:47:06 am


As for their unawareness of being 'framed', is that unawareness then justification for the street pickpocket of whom one is also unaware until embarrassment hits later on?

Rob C

Your comparison of street photography to a crime is amusing.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 24, 2013, 09:27:30 am
You comparison of street photography to a crime is amusing.


Only if you are not sensitive to being photographed without your consent.

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: PhillyPhotographer on February 24, 2013, 09:41:08 am

Only if you are not sensitive to being photographed without your consent.

Rob C

People's sensitivity levels in a public place is their problem. Maybe they need counseling or have self-esteem issues. Either way I couldn't care less and I'm wondering why you do.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 24, 2013, 10:38:10 am
I think the word hunting is inappropriate Rob and I think you are using it to try and reinforce a dubious defence of privacy. The Amateur  Photography magazine - UK - stated bluntly that if a person doesn't like their image in photograph then they should stay in the house. It was blunt and to the point. There isn't a privacy law in the UK and imo that should be the norm. Take the argument to it's conclusion then there wouldn't be any street images - with people in them - published in newspapers, magazines or the internet and television. A poorer world? Rob I conclude that you don't like your picture taken in public and this is the nub of your argument. I bet you have taken images that have people in them in public.




1.  “I think the word hunting is inappropriate Rob and I think you are using it to try and reinforce a dubious defence of privacy.

2.  The Amateur  Photography magazine - UK - stated bluntly that if a person doesn't like their image in photograph then they should stay in the house. It was blunt and to the point.

3.  There isn't a privacy law in the UK and imo that should be the norm. Take the argument to it's conclusion then there wouldn't be any street images - with people in them - published in newspapers, magazines or the internet and television. A poorer world?

4. Rob I conclude that you don't like your picture taken in public and this is the nub of your argument. I bet you have taken images that have people in them in public.”




1. I think the word hunting is precise, and to the point: which euphemism would you rather I adopt – hanging around waiting for something to happen?

2. The AP has never been my bible. It’s produced for the people it says on the cover, and what else would you expect it to say? Think before you shoot?

3. Are you absolutely sure of that? If you are right, then perhaps it’s time to have one. Published pictures of people in the media you mention  almost invariably (today) carry the tag Getty. Traditional magazines mainly use commissioned or stock images of people doing things for which they are either paid or from which they seek publicity. Rights to privacy are very real in that world: try selling model pix without a model release or, in France, shots of somebody’s country estate as background to your car adverts if you don’t have a property release. Television regularly shows moving images of fat people walking down the public streets every time there’s a news item about the dangers of obesity; mostly these are trimmed off below the chin. I rather suspect that it’s more a legal consideration than any deep sense of friendliness and compassion on the part of the studios.

On Aljazeera today (it might have been yesterday – one day runs in to the next) there was a programme about tv reporters and also other types of photographers covering the Arab Spring. It seems that many of them (one actuall bullet killing was shown to happen on camera) are now targeted because no faction trusts them to present a straight report. How quickly they learn the mores of the press!

4. You conclude correctly. Yes, I have made pictures in public places with people I don’t know in the shot; these people are not the subjects of the images and as far as I can remember, they are nothing more than stuffing for the main course, which ain’t them. I don’t think any would be able to identify themselves; they were certainly never held to ridicule.

On this point, there’s a personal tale to relate. Back in ’81 I was given an assignment by a tour operators’ location representative company  to shoot a list of hotels in Spain for possible brochure illustrations. The principal selling points were the pools. I was give a letter of authorisation by the head of the company which I was supposed to show at reception in each hotel on his list in order to get their permission to work. After doing a few of these hotels I realised that no official gave a damn, so I ended up not showing the letter to anyone, just getting on with the job. Big mistake. In one hotel, I was working at the pool when a member of staff came up to me because a complaint had been made by a resident. I was marched off to the reception where I produced the letter. Smiles all round, and I was accompanied back to the scene of the crime, where I was then left in peace to work. I was embarrassed as hell, but also a bit smug to have survived the ordeal. So yes, even back then during the Age of the Deluge, people were sensitive to being photographed. So why was I embarrassed? Because I understood perfectly well the feelings of the person /persons who complained; it just didn’t suit my agenda, as it doesn’t suit that of the amateur street camera-artist.

During the same shoot I was in Marbella; on  presenting the offical letter to the desk, the PR manager refused permission because of the class of guest he had staying there – celebs don’t appreciate snappers unless they are invited. I understood. I went on to the next hotel.

I was working at Lindos, in Rhodes, on a calendar shoot; A then-famous tv  presenter was on the beach, stoned out of his mind, and surrounded by a group of topless girls. My model kept urging me to shoot, shoot, the tabloids will pay you a fortune for the pictures! I didn’t even raise the camera. In the end, you have to live with yourself.

Nope, I’m no paragon of any virtues, stamper; I just don’t happen to like to cause other people discomfort or possible damage, especially for no valid reason at all, which amateur street certainly does not have either. It serves no purpose other than snapper ego: the thrill where we came in.

;-)

Rob C


Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 24, 2013, 10:42:37 am
People's sensitivity levels in a public place is their problem. Maybe they need counseling or have self-esteem issues. Either way I couldn't care less and I'm wondering why you do.



How many times do I have to spell it out: I dislike intrusion as I dislike intruding.

Nothing at all to do with self-esteem; you must have already guessed I'm not exactly underpowered in that department!

;-)

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 24, 2013, 12:39:41 pm
Sorry, Isaac, but when it comes to street photography you're sounding as if you're all hat and no cattle.

You are welcome to your opinion -- don't confuse your opinion with knowledge.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: PhillyPhotographer on February 24, 2013, 02:32:59 pm


How many times do I have to spell it out: I dislike intrusion as I dislike intruding.

Nothing at all to do with self-esteem; you must have already guessed I'm not exactly underpowered in that department!

;-)

Rob C

Maybe you're just too self important. How does someone standing on a corner taking you picture as you walk by intrusion ? Are you being injured, defamed or are they just stealing your soul ?
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Isaac on February 24, 2013, 05:01:52 pm
Maybe Rob C. expressed consideration for someone other than himself.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: stamper on February 25, 2013, 04:53:37 am
Rob you aren't happy that people get photographed in the street but you are happy shooting people - with permission - at a poolside to earn money. When the hotel owners gave permission for you to shoot did they ask permission of the the hotel guests before granting permission? I see double standards. Okay for you to shoot at a poolside but not for others in the street. Money seems to be the demarcation line.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: Rob C on February 25, 2013, 05:49:01 am
Money is indeed one consideration, but not quite in the manner you imply.

You have to think about several important things: one, the location; the next, what people are doing there.

In a street, people are going somewhere, are deep in their own worlds of hope, anxiety or simply lack of time to achieve that which they need to achieve. In a nutshell, they are not on display and certainly not expecting (or prepared) to be immortalised in print.

At a poolside, people get there after a year of planning the where, the when, the impact of what they buy to wear when they are there: in other terms, it's their grand entrance, their Warhol minutes. They seek attention. Mostly, they don't get any because everybody else is doing the same thing. Why else did you imagine the topless craze came into broader popular acceptance during the 70s/80s? Pools are about exhibitionism. That one person complained or felt uneasy about my shoots, in maybe twenty-five different hotel pool locations across the Costa del Sol and the Balearic Islands, tells (and shows) me that when they are on conscious display, people not only seem happy to be photographed, but actually sit up straighter, hold in their tummies and breath a little more deeply... It's a bit like amateur dramatics.

But look, I don't need to join in a war here: I'm only stating my views on a particular type of photographic 'work' and if others disagree, that's fine; I don't have to approve. In fact, some such work can be very interesting indeed, but when it is, in my idea of interesting, it isn't really about individuals à la Arbus, but more like the stuff Seamus pulls off with such apparent and frequent ease.

Rob C
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: stamper on February 25, 2013, 06:22:53 am
This isn't war Rob. So far an interesting thread which has remained on an even keel. Hopefully it will continue because some of us are skating on thin ice and don't fancy the dpreview forum where we will be chewed up. What Seamus does takes nerve and hopefully nobody notices.
Title: Re: Strategies for stealth on the street
Post by: cjogo on March 25, 2013, 04:22:52 am
I still consider myself a fine-art war correspondent with a smile.  Check my other threads > I get the shot but usually with a tripod and 120 camera.   So the subjects do have a chance run ...call for help ...etc.  I mean : non-zoom - manual focus- handmeter - long exposures -large tripod ..they could easy exit~~  BUT for some reason they stayed for the shot.