Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => Discussing Photographic Styles => Topic started by: 32BT on September 30, 2017, 10:29:44 am
-
Is spontaneity an essential ingredient in streetphotography?
I'm a great proponent of ambiguity in streetphotography, or at least a twist in thinking or perception, so i believe that to be an essential ingredient, but i'm currently wondering whether true streetphotography also (necessarily) requires spontaneity.
-
Is spontaneity an essential ingredient in streetphotography?
I'm a great proponent of ambiguity in streetphotography, or at least a twist in thinking or perception, so i believe that to be an essential ingredient, but i'm currently wondering whether true streetphotography also (necessarily) requires spontaneity.
Seems you're just trying to find problems for yourself. It's in the street - it can be whatever you want it to be. If HC-B was or was not street - it's arguable - he did find locations and wait like a wild beast (or domestic cat) for his prey to walk into frame; other times, he just danced his way around the place and caught it on the hop, as it were. I take all this in good faith from what I've read or heard him say on screen; he may have been given to romaticising much as anyone else, though.
Be like Nike.
Rob
-
Essential? No.
Many a famous shot has been staged.
-
Essential? No.
Many a famous shot has been staged.
It happened a lot with flags and poles... as for dying Spanish soldiers, the jury is still out, and Capa's too long gone to clarify.
That's the thing about war photography: you can do it in the landscape, in the sea and even in the street! Struck me that's much like taking a leak.
There's an amusing swamp pop rock number that goes something like this:
"I couldn't resist
Had to take a piss
Down on Bourbon Street.
It hurt like hell
When they put me in jail
Down on Bourbon Street
Who dat, who dat
Who dat told on me?"
All of life is in music! As, of course, in photography.
-
Oscar, I think Rob nailed it. What is street photography? As I said in "On Street Photography (http://www.russ-lewis.com/essays/OnStreetPhotography.html)" I don't think you can define it in words, but people like Cartier-Bresson, Winogrand and Frank defined it by example. Essentially it's photography that captures relationships between people, and between people and their artifacts. I'd also add that a majority of street photography isn't made on a street, in spite of Jackie Higgins's The World Atlas of Street Photography, which tells us a picture of a street is street photography.
I'm not sure what you mean by "spontaneity" when you apply the word to street photography. How about an example? I think the reaction of a good street photographer always is spontaneous. Even when, as Rob points out, a photographer lies in wait, the actual shot is a spontaneous reaction to something in front of him. You don't "set up" a street shot. I suspect Paulo is referring to Doisneau's Le Baiser de L'Hotel de Ville which quite obviously is posed, and once the paid poseurs discovered that the picture was making money they sued Doisneau (unsuccessfully) for an extra payment.
-
...referring to Doisneau's Le Baiser de L'Hotel de Ville which quite obviously is posed, and once the paid poseurs discovered that the picture was making money they sued Doisneau (unsuccessfully) for an extra payment.
Actually the story is more amusing. A woman who claimed to have been in the photo sued for payment, supposing that the photo was unstaged. It was then that Doisneau revealed that it was staged, and revealed the identity of his friends who had posed. There was an article on the woman in the photo, who I think is still alive and has a signed original print... she's quite happy with that :)
-
Yeah, I think you're right, Graham. It's been a long time since I read the story. In any case, it's a nice shot but I never could understand why it got worldwide attention.
-
Right image, right time, luck... there are a lot of other "baiser" photos that are no wher near as famous.
(And be careful about whether you say that as a verb or a noun, ça change tout ;D )
-
Right image, right time, luck... there are a lot of other "baiser" photos that are no wher near as famous.
(And be careful about whether you say that as a verb or a noun, ça change tout ;D )
Quite right on both counts. I even have a few "baisers" I shot myself.
-
Wasn't it Avendon claimed you can't "perform" and photograph at the same time? Well, I assume he was looking at things from the male perspective, but Newton and Bailey both used ceiling mirrors to cast doubt on that theory... Personally, I'd find a ceiling mirror very worrisome indeed: what if it fell? I could get hurt!
Rob
-
Rob, you'll want to stay out of Southeast Asia.
-
Rob, you'll want to stay out of Southeast Asia.
Russ, I very much do not want a return, but with two exceptions: for the prawns and Chinese Chablis. Surprisingly good!
Rob
-
Don't forget the pepper or chili crab !
You can thank the Aussies for the wine.
-
Russ, I very much do not want a return, but with two exceptions: for the prawns and Chinese Chablis. Surprisingly good!
Rob
Rob, When I moved into my trailer for my year in Udon Thani I found that my predecessor had affixed a huge mirror to the ceiling in my room. I got it down ASAP since I realized it would be wonderful shrapnel in an attack. But ceiling mirrors were de rigueur in massage parlors.
-
These days, I'd differentiate between candid (or even staged) photos of human interaction, juxtaposition, etc., and "street photography" as it has come to be practiced by the unwashed masses of digital photographers out doing their best imitation of some kind of photo-ninja thing.
As for spontaneity, well, I think that might be part of the definition of having "awareness" to how the world unfolds in front of your lens.
Rand
-
As for spontaneity, well, I think that might be part of the definition of having "awareness" to how the world unfolds in front of your lens.
I think the ambiguity of the original question was whether the spontaneity was in the subjects or the photographer.
It seems to me that unless someone knows they are being watched, pretty much everything they do is spontaneous, so there is then the question of whether the photographer recognises that something interesting is happening...
-
Generally, there is a splitsecond between you becoming aware of a scene, and the scene becoming aware of you. Pictures from the first half of that splitsecond tend to be better pictures.
A staged streetphotograph seems like a contradiction in terms, although i suppose one could make a case that it is like a literary device: this is a scene that could happen here, as opposed to: this is a scene that did happen here.
However, streetphotography as a genre should clearly have some constraints as to what is included and what is excluded. There should be a story, maybe even an intent, and clearly, the story may well be entirely fiction, as long as it is congruous fiction and congruous intent. Yet, the more i think about it, the story almost universally depicts a spontaneous moment or scene.
-
Oscar: http://www.russ-lewis.com/essays/OnStreetPhotography.html
-
For me the core of my point here seems to reside in the word "contrived".
"Contrived" is an interesting word, as it clearly represents a very subtle but very real difference. A difference we apparently recognise in enough situations that we reserved a word for it. It's that subtle difference between truthful spontaneity and... staged(?) spontaneity. (The latter probably a contradiction). It is therefore clear, that people can recognise the difference, and likely can recognise that difference in photographs as well.
Perhaps one could posit that streetphotography can never be contrived. And yes, that probably concerns the photographer just as much as the scene being photographed.
-
I agree with you 100% Oscar. I also agree that it's obvious on the face of it that Le Baiser de L'Hotel de Ville is posed. That's not the only posed "street shot" Doisneau did, and it's not difficult to see that they're posed. I'd expand on my views about street, but I've already expanded in "On Street Photography."
I keep pointing to my own post of "On Street Photography," forgetting that people on LuLa have access to the LuLa version, which also includes pictures: https://luminous-landscape.com/on-street-photography/
-
Yes, Russ, but what would you make of Gregory Crewdson's images, specifically something like untitled, 2006 (https://www.gagosian.com/__data/b685064d0a89b3e2d9ef19a7e4314d1b.jpg) relative to your musings?
-
Hi Oscar. I love Crewdson's stuff. It has absolutely nothing to do with street, but it has a lot to do with poetry.
-
Hi Oscar. I love Crewdson's stuff. It has absolutely nothing to do with street, but it has a lot to do with poetry.
Right, but it's odd. That particularly picture clearly isn't streetgenre, but it does depict humans and the interaction with their artifacts. It's absolutely zeitgeistgenau in the sense that it represents an era correctly. It's recognisable USA. And it is art, at least in a poetic sense.
But yet it isn't street, and the itchy part is: why not?
I did see a docu with the making of this image, and it is clear that he primarily acted as a director. He didn't even handle the camera himself. In the docu he did liken his images to scenes from non-existent movies.
-
But yet it isn't street, and the itchy part is: why not?
First, let me say that labels suck. If you can perfectly stage a street photo so that no one ever knows, I really don't care (supposing you aren't using it for political lobbying).
However, I think the difference between Crewdson and "Street" is much as the difference between fictional cinema (which can be true to an era and place) and documentary.
Crewdson is a sort of Twin Peaks vision of rural USA.
Of course it gets complicated when documentaries include opinions of experts who may not be, who present evidence that is falsified. Or when fictional cinema adopts techniques of documentary film-making: Woody Allen's "Husbands and Wives." There are people who think that Spinal tap is a real documentary :)
-
That reminds me of Slobodan's post here (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=117837.0).
I have no problem with that being streetgenre, especially if a local recognises the general quirkiness, but they do appear to be composites.
-
Re. spontaneity, I tend to think in terms of observed as compared with constructed photos. Crewdson trades in the latter. He’s indeed less photographer and more director. IMO he oughta go the Tom Ford route and make a proper film. Maybe a film of short & silent vignettes, the cinema version of a photobook.
I have no problem at all with constructed photos, whether made in camera or post-composited, so long as their creators aren’t passing them off as click-and-done observed moments.
-Dave-
-
The problem with many constructed photos, imho, is that they are so badly constructed.
For nudes in particular, very often it looks as though the model isn't aware of the narrative she has been inserted into... or she is tacitly refusing to participate in the photographer's fantasy, or she is a bad actor. The blame for the first two I'd put at the feet of the photographer, and the third parhaps also, if the direction is vague.
Crewdson is clearly a good director, brings good stories and uses good actors...
-
"The Kiss" worked for me before I dug it was contrived. It still does.
Is that kiss any lesser a kiss than one that's faked in the back of the car or in a bedroom? Unless you are told, specifically and most cruelly, that your received kisses were ever faked, where's the harm? Love, and almost every other emotional buzz depends on an act of faith: truth can ruin everything and reduce it to the banal, carnal relationship of one animal with another... Without faith and romance there is very little but mechanics and hydrostatics.
Robert Frank's Americans could have been a total fake - I really could not care less: his photographs show a world, real or imagined, that I would otherwise have never seen for myself. I go to the movies (well, I used to go to the movies) expecting not a newsreel but an entertainment or, better yet, an opening of yet another eye onto this world we inhabit. You can never have too many eyes - especially if you are about to be snapped from behind. (Snapped, as in having your picture taken, not one of your straps pulled.)
Unless it's about legality, evidence etc. enjoy a snap for what it is: face value counts most.
It's the same with fashion magazines and pin-ups, too: everybody and his/her maiden aunt - well, perhaps not she - understands that things are seldom what they seem. It's a part of being aware and alive.
Speaking of being alive and aware: if you thought you'd seen everything when comparing the physicality of the young St Obama when he took office, and the elder statesman that eventually retired, today's incumbent of the padded Oval is faring no better. I watched as he signed yet another worthless piece of paper this morning, and would you believe it, he's losing his hair! Soon, he'll be just like yours truly! Except richer, redder and more heavy.
See where envy gets one?
;-)
Rob
-
You've got a point, Rob, as you usually have, but I think the difference is that what Doisneau and Crewdson are doing is either fiction in Doisneau's case or poetry in Crewdson's case. Street, on the other hand, really is a branch of reportage. But you're right: naming something isn't the same thing as being touched by it or enjoying it. Which, by the way, is a significant problem with what we call "education." Education teaches you the names of things, but it can't teach you the poetry of things.
-
Rob, I think all photographs are a blend of real and imagined. There’s no hard line in this context between true and faked, or (as I prefer because the words are both less loaded and IMO more accurate) between observed and constructed. I prefer to know when posing is involved, and especially when compositing is involved, while accepting that knowing isn’t always possible. Knowing doesn’t spoil photos for me any more than knowing a film is a work of fiction prevents me from getting caught up in it. The Kiss is an engaging, evocative photo even when you know how it was made. Temporary suspension of disbelief is IMO an essential part of engaging with creative works. With emphasis on temporary.
-Dave-
-
+1
-
I think that a good street photograph has the ability to prompt you into looking at reality in an unexpected way. It allows us to see the world with a different set of eyes, and to perceive the beauty in things that we normally take for granted. Spontaneity may not be that important.
-
Hi Eolo, you might want to check https://luminous-landscape.com/on-street-photography/. Love to see some of your work.
-
Hi Eolo, you might want to check https://luminous-landscape.com/on-street-photography/. Love to see some of your work.
Very nice article. Enjoyed and bookmarked. Will put it in my Street Photography references i give to my students during my Leica Akademie Workshops ;)
In 2011 I assisted Mr.Elliott Erwitt while he was shooting the June month of the 2012 Lavazza Calendar :) I remember that while he was working on it, he was still shooting street photography every day !
Thanks for sharing.
Eolo
-
A selection of images made on and of the streets of Essaouira, Morocco. (http://www.keithlaban.co.uk/essaouiralifeinthemedina.html)
Street Photography? Who decides?
-
A selection of images made on and of the streets of Essaouira, Morocco. (http://www.keithlaban.co.uk/essaouiralifeinthemedina.html)
Street Photography? Who decides?
Lovely photos, great use of color. IMO Mediterranean street is as street as any other kind of street. :)
-Dave-
-
Lovely photos, great use of color. IMO Mediterranean street is as street as any other kind of street. :)
-Dave-
Thanks Dave.
But at times I have to wonder, is colour street as street as monochrome street? :)
-
Thanks Dave.
But at times I have to wonder, is colour street as street as monochrome street? :)
;D Not touching that one.
The attached is just a snap, not taken by me but by my then girlfriend Juli (using my camera), but it is a Mediterranean color street snap. Kodachrome, 64 by the look of it, late summer 1983.
-Dave-
-
;D Not touching that one.
The attached is just a snap, not taken by me but by my then girlfriend Juli (using my camera), but it is a Mediterranean color street snap. Kodachrome, 64 by the look of it, late summer 1983.
-Dave-
Certainly has the look of Kodachrome and North Africa. Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Libya, Egypt?
-
Thanks Dave.
But at times I have to wonder, is colour street as street as monochrome street? :)
That one is instantly brought into play by looking at Slobodan's linked Russian photographer.
It used to be said that colour made war photography step from chaos and pain into art and beauty. (Well, something to that effect.) I tend to agree with the sentiment, and would add the thought that perhaps only black/white, with its unavoidable, automatic/mechanical move from "reality" into fantasy can really work as street, because if you retain the colours, somehow, you, as viewer, can't quite throw the suspicion that the photograph is, really, just a snap of what is in front of the camera - whatever is happening there. If you show in black/white, it subliminally suggests a sense of intent behind the photographers's finger, that he saw something rare which it is now up to you to try to decipher as well, even if the picture really contains nothing beyond the obvious.
This is a phenomenon that I believe has only come to be since digital, for the simple reason that every shot now offers the possibilty of colour or not. Thus, the snapper is faced with choices he didn't have to face before, which meant that as he almost invariably used b/w film for news, the added layer of artistic intent wasn't strongly there. One could argue whether HC-B's name would have meant much today had he worked in colour all his life.
On the other hand, Leiter's name was made (apart from his fashion work reputation) by using colour to show not so much people, as city scenery and the signs/traces of people: traffic, barber's poles, windows, mirrors, lights and so on. Yes, he also did a lot of black/white work, but to me, that seems to be more a form of snapping away at his friends and immediate circle, even though a lot of the pictures would appear to show strangers within geometric shapes of city structures.
Perhaps one could make a case for claiming that HC-B, Klein represent a sort of street reality, whereas Leiter and Hass are exponents of street as photographic painting. Some of the other "names" associated with the street genre strike me as mere wannabe artists who, yes, carved great reputations, but gave precious little for it in return. I'm not sure where I'd put Robert Frank: he has this immense reputation for street and reportage, but in reality, he seems to have made that seminal book and then switched completely sideways into other projects with little to do with the same genre. I think he really had a greater interest in film, much as did Warhol - but with all that mind-bending stuff floating around, who could ever be certain, and probably least of all, those denizens of the Factory circle.
If there's a growing problem with Internet access, I think it is that it creates so much visibility of pictures that one is driven into being selective or going crazy: the choice is ours to make. With that choice comes the inevitability and hoped-for safety of the personal pigeonhole.
Rob
-
A selection of images made on and of the streets of Essaouira, Morocco. (http://www.keithlaban.co.uk/essaouiralifeinthemedina.html)
Street Photography? Who decides?
Or who cares? In the sense, who cares if we label photos as "street" or not? Those are excellent photos and the "intent" that Rob C discusses manifests in other ways, particularly the careful framing. Have you noticed how few snapshots have the verticals neither vertical, nor deliberately not vertical?
Sometimes, what is interesting is the colour, sometimes it is the geometry and shadows, sometimes it is facial expressions. I find B&W tends to be better for the last two, although there are obviously some forms that just disappear if reduced to B&W. Colour seems to work less well for strong dynamic range, and it often makes a complete mess of faces.
There is the risk that one starts to define "street" as "would HC-B" hve taken it?" Hence the snobbish insistence on short primes, or even on range-finders. Henri lui-même said he would have loved to use a 90mm more, but the dof wasn't sufficient: and if he'd had auto-focus? There are things you can do with a 450mm lens that can't be done with a 50mm... but it was an option that C-B didn't have during the time he was working. Sieff published at least one "street" photo with what might have been a 400mm Nikon...
Of course there are things that you can do with a short prime that you can't do with a long zoom... like being discrete, for example. Although it's an interesting exercise to try to not be noticed while using a big lens, and it's a skill.
-
Or who cares? In the sense, who cares if we label photos as "street" or not?
Indeed, and my original draft read "Street Photography? Who decides? Who gives a frigging damn?".
But then the new, softer, caring Keith Laban came to the fore, smacked the back of my hand and advised me to avoid anything that could be deemed inflammatory.
-
...If there's a growing problem with Internet access, I think it is that it creates so much visibility of pictures that one is driven into being selective or going crazy...
Rob, it's a problem I've largely managed to side-step in the virtual and real worlds. I'm just not that much of a looker ;-)
-
A selection of images made on and of the streets of Essaouira, Morocco. (http://www.keithlaban.co.uk/essaouiralifeinthemedina.html)
Street Photography? Who decides?
Nice images. One thing I noticed is most of the subjects have their backs to the camera...walking away. Is that your style or is something else at play here?
-
+1. Wondered the same thing.
-
Nice images. One thing I noticed is most of the subjects have their backs to the camera...walking away. Is that your style or is something else at play here?
I love Morocco and the people. There is just so much to excite and inspire any image maker. Three hours from London but a world apart.
That said it is without exception the most frustrating country I've ever worked in. Most Moroccans I've met are warm and hospitable but have a hatred of cameras and of being photographed. The mere sight of a camera being raised to the eye will cause offence. Of course there are exceptions, there are people, ethnic groups, tribes who invite tourists into their homes and communities and who will pose for photographs. Many children will pose for baksheesh, but these situations hold little interest for me.
I love shooting in the streets, combining the distinctive architecture and the colourful people. I tend not to capture recognisable faces as I know this causes offence and I'm not there to offend. I do value the ambiguity of the unrecognisable. I realise my desire not to cause offence is at odds with making images surreptitiously, but hey, I'm a hypocrite, I'm weak and cannot help myself.
There are other countries and cultures that offer equally exciting and inspiring opportunities for the photographer without the same level of risk of causing offence.
Flights booked.
-
This is a phenomenon that I believe has only come to be since digital, for the simple reason that every shot now offers the possibilty of colour or not. Thus, the snapper is faced with choices he didn't have to face before, which meant that as he almost invariably used b/w film for news, the added layer of artistic intent wasn't strongly there. One could argue whether HC-B's name would have meant much today had he worked in colour all his life.
Actually, ever since the color negative that choice was there, use the colorneg in the enlarger with graded bw paper, even pop a colorfilter in between if desired. In fact, one could argue that this would have been the "correct" way of capture for purposes of archivability in similar fashion that we should all be using raw capture today.
-
Actually, ever since the color negative that choice was there, use the colorneg in the enlarger with graded bw paper, even pop a colorfilter in between if desired. In fact, one could argue that this would have been the "correct" way of capture for purposes of archivability in similar fashion that we should all be using raw capture today.
There's a problem with that idea: the use of colour neg as dual purpose was something few pros that I knew ever did. We were too interested in making colour transparencies and/or black and white prints. I think surprisingly few commercial photographers used colour negative material at all. Almost all magazine work, stuff intended for publication and not a sideboard or mantlepiece, meant tranny or b/w film. This is not to knock the purveyors of wedding and baby colour snaps - some made big bucks - but just to illustrate that pro photography was most definitely split into two quite different worlds: the high street; the commercial operators.
I did producer 40"x 60" colour prints (printing farmed out) for clothing manufacturers' fashion shows around the world, but that produced three big problems: I shot on tranny so the client could see his product in its best colours and with least grain, and I prayed he didn't insist on projecting it; then the printers were supposed to make large internegs and prints from those, creating new opporunities for cock-ups; the third problem being that as whenever a process has to be farmed out, you end up losing ultimate control. And colour printing is an art: I know; I used to do a lot of it when I was an employee. The great difficulty one faced when farming stuff out was this: every printing lab has a built-in cost factor which dictates how much the printer will charge. If you insist on more than the number of filtration changes he has guessed will produce a "commercially acceptable" print when he drew up his print price list, you either overrun your own budget or he throws your work back in your face.
As for longevity: I think colour neg never enjoyed a good reputation for that! All film had its problems: Kodachrome was reputed to be the most stable both before and after pocessing, with the colours lasting much longer than any others if you stored the film properly and didn't expose it to a light box too often. Apparently, Ektachrome worked the other way: it didn't last as long, but it did survive light boxes better. However, all film needed great care before you even used it, and certainly after you processed it if you wanted it to last.
Of course, I'm writing about a world that has changed beyond belief since my time in the industry. I really don't know which films have survived digital - I still have a freezer drawer full of stuff that I shall never use... and I know the Kodachromes I have can't be processed...
That said, I still have original film negatives and trannies that seem to have survived well enough over the decades.
-
I have too, Rob. I scanned some of my Kodachromes from 1953 and 54 about five years ago, and they'd survived fairly well. The Ektachromes from that period are just plain gone.
-
Certainly has the look of Kodachrome and North Africa. Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, Libya, Egypt?
Israel. Jerusalem, at one of the entrances (“gates”) to the Arab quarter. We often bought breakfast baguettes from a vendor there. :)
-Dave-
-
My dad’s Kodachromes, from c. 1956 forward, are all in great shape. The ‘60s & ‘70s Ektachromes: blecchh!
-Dave-
-
Actually, ever since the color negative that choice was there, use the colorneg in the enlarger with graded bw paper, even pop a colorfilter in between if desired. In fact, one could argue that this would have been the "correct" way of capture for purposes of archivability in similar fashion that we should all be using raw capture today.
Is that true? The sensitivity of multigrade paper was still concentrated at the blue end of the spectrum, given that we still used greenish-orange safe-lights. Properly printing B&W from colour negs would have required panchro paper, no?
On the other hand, during the transition period where I was shooting film and scanning the negs, I discovered that regular colour neg was just as good to scan to colour as the chromogenic Ilford XP2... for which the developer kits were getting difficult to obtain.
-
Is that true? The sensitivity of multigrade paper was still concentrated at the blue end of the spectrum, given that we still used greenish-orange safe-lights. Properly printing B&W from colour negs would have required panchro paper, no?
On the other hand, during the transition period where I was shooting film and scanning the negs, I discovered that regular colour neg was just as good to scan to colour as the chromogenic Ilford XP2... for which the developer kits were getting difficult to obtain.
http://wwwca.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/g27/g27.pdf
Rob
-
regular colour neg was just as good to scan to colour
Ouups, should have been "just as good to scan to B&W"