Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 13   Go Down

Author Topic: Love Real Street  (Read 24438 times)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14460
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #20 on: February 04, 2013, 03:31:27 PM »

Last but not least.

Hurrying home.


Great one, stamper.

Rob C

RedwoodGuy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #21 on: February 04, 2013, 08:27:47 PM »

Night scene from this past Saturday night. 
Logged

RedwoodGuy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #22 on: February 04, 2013, 09:13:59 PM »

Man with pet turkey.
Logged

RedwoodGuy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #23 on: February 04, 2013, 10:32:43 PM »

Ice cream.
Logged

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4769
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #25 on: February 05, 2013, 04:48:00 AM »

Quote Russ reply #17

As far as the black gal among the sea of white faces is concerned: First, I can't be sure those are all white faces. Looks as if there might be a darker kid in the background. Second, integration has succeeded in the United States so completely that a black face in a white crowd or a white face in a black crowd doesn't look unusual to me. Fifty years ago it might have.

Unquote

In the west of Scotland where I live and in Glasgow - a large city - it is still comparitively rare to see a black person. Coloured people are more common. To see a black person among a lot of white people is a stand out, not in a racist way. Last year a football commentator on television referred to a coloured footballer as .... coloured...... and was forced to apologise for making the distinction between coloured footballers and white footballers. Just in case anyone thinks my image has racist overtones then it most definitely hasn't....on my part.

stamper

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4769
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #26 on: February 05, 2013, 04:51:56 AM »

Redwood Guy. I like your two B&W images better than the coloured one, especially the third one. The helmeted guy looks "rough" so seeing him with an ice cream has a bit of ambiguity. :) I have had another look at the first one and there is more to it than meets the eye. A bit like the Fonz in Happy Days.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fonzie

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 8256
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #31 on: February 05, 2013, 09:02:49 AM »

Stamper, all four of these are good shots, but the artifacts have almost taken over the images in the last two. That, the foreshortening, and the square format make me suspect you of cropping!
« Last Edit: February 05, 2013, 09:10:58 AM by RSL »
Logged

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 8256
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #32 on: February 05, 2013, 09:06:19 AM »

Not bad, Patricia. What makes the picture is the missing leg. The guy's foot is up on the bumper, but unless you look closely it almost looks as if he's one-legged.

RSL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 8256
    • http://www.russ-lewis.com
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #33 on: February 05, 2013, 09:09:46 AM »

Guy, Sorry, but what I see is one high-school type snapshot and two environmental portraits -- no street photography. You need to go to a library or bookstore, pick up a book of Cartier-Bresson's photographs, and study it.

RedwoodGuy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #34 on: February 05, 2013, 11:36:18 AM »

Guy, Sorry, but what I see is one high-school type snapshot and two environmental portraits -- no street photography. You need to go to a library or bookstore, pick up a book of Cartier-Bresson's photographs, and study it.
Oh my. Thanks for the advice. However, it brings to mind two of the worst dangers in art - emulation and assumption of rules. And I thank you for presenting me the opportunity to say something about them. Emulation is deadly to anyone seeking their truth through art. To grab a forerunner's style, and assume it is a standard by which your own truth must conform, will kill the enterprise before it even begins. Whatever CBs truths were as he snapped his shutter are not my truths. His life is not my life. If art is life, how can I adopt his? This is not to deny in any way the appreciation of his life, no not at all. But it is to say that his is his, and mine is different. Necessarily then, my art wouldn't be his either. This confuses many people. This difference between appreciation and emulation. Never emulate! Always seek the truth within. And yes, CB had a certain way with his photographic truth, didn't he?

As to assumed rules of photography, be ever so careful of that tight box. A rule is a boundary generally claimed by someone who might have run out of ideas and seeks to assemble the world within the limits (rules) of their imagination. This is street photography, that is not! The more exclamatory the lecture, the more one should run. The first thing you learn in the study of art (study being the dictate of the poster) is that art advances in movements by means of rule breaking. A box becomes too stale for further exploration because of the existing rules, and then POW! someone breaks them, and all chaos breaks out.  Rules are tools for learning, but not intended to bound one's own expressions and truths, lest the whole world of photography suddenly look like there was but one photographer!

Photography is by far the most difficult art form of them all, precisely because it is the most open-ended of them all. (Painters can only dream of what can be done with a camera.) But what makes photography ever the more difficult is falling into the trap of emulating others who have had notoriety. How many tedious attempts have we all seen of the photographer trying to emulate Ansel Adams, instead of seeking their own truth? 

The thread title was "Love Real Street." And the obvious implication is that, "real" is a state of one's own truth in their photographs out on the street, not a universal dogmatic truth passed on by some High Priest of Street Photography. If you want to join a religion that's fine with me, but I choose to search out my own universals through photography, and they are not found at the local library or bookstore under "Cartier-Bresson."

Logged

RedwoodGuy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #35 on: February 05, 2013, 11:53:26 AM »

.....I have had another look at the first one and there is more to it than meets the eye. A bit like the Fonz in Happy Days......
 
The dozen kids are on a junior prom night in front of the Ritz - a cocktail lounge normally having a few boring old people toddling in and out. To turn the corner and see this huge release of youth energy and laughter and excitement was really fun. In a matter of about 90-seconds it was all gone as they jumped into waiting limos and were off to the dance. But for a minute "the street" was positively pulsing with their energy and color. In the year long life of the Ritz, it might have been the most energetic minute experienced.
Logged

jeremypayne

  • Guest
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #36 on: February 05, 2013, 12:00:56 PM »

There is a religious cult operating here.  Get used to it ...
Logged

RedwoodGuy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #37 on: February 05, 2013, 12:09:21 PM »

Bicycle.
Logged

RedwoodGuy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #38 on: February 05, 2013, 12:22:36 PM »

Umbrellas
Logged

RedwoodGuy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
Re: Love Real Street
« Reply #39 on: February 05, 2013, 01:02:47 PM »

@ Not Paris

I enjoyed browsing this photograph for the mixing of two stories, one told by the bar characters, the other told by the woman looking at the photographer who is lurking behind the hedge! It makes a kind of inside/outside thought process. The characters have some character. I only find the canvas top odd looking and I am not sure why. It seems like it is outlined in black? Minor point. A humorous photograph.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 13   Go Up