Because there is a street in it.

[Ivo_B]

 

Aldi by Ivo Bogaerts, on Flickr

[RSL]

Yes, Ivo, I knew that's what you think street photography is: something with a street in it.

[Martin Kristiansen]

Hahaha. Even I don’t think that’s street. But good one.

[Ivo_B]

Hahaha. Even I don’t think that’s street. But good one.

 

[RSL]

Well it's probably not unreasonable to have a picture of a street in a segment titled "Street Showcase," but I don't think that was the intention on the part of LuLa management.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Maybe we need another section called "Classic Street Showcase," moderated by Russ.

Or better yet, a whole set of them: "100% Classic Street," "90% Classic Street," ... "10% Classic Street."   

[fredjeang2]

Well it's probably not unreasonable to have a picture of a street in a segment titled "Street Showcase," but I don't think that was the intention on the part of LuLa management.

I have a lot of respect and certain admiration for Russ. One of the very few (early in this forum) street photographer and defensor.
Street photography is no joke, In fact, it is by far the most difficult genre of photography to be mastered.
There is nothing more demanding than street photography and photo reportage. All other genre are way easiest to acheive decent results.
Street does not forgive. Or you got the shot, or you do not. No other chance, no tricks, no excuses.

It is extremely difficult to adquire the technical skills and being able to put them into practice in a non controled environment when you got 1 second to get it right.
It is long to adquire the 6th sens that brings luck, this luck that is being allowed to happen. One has to learn how collaborate with luck. It's not easy.
It is an art to know how to deal with people and situations, some of which potencially dangerous or tricky.

If one can reasonably expect relatively fast and motivating results with landscapes or a gorgeous looking girl in high-heels with strobes, it takes way longuer practice to get good street keepers.
When I was working as an assistant in the high-end fashion, it is so controled, that it is virtually impossible not to get results.
I can assure you that where I worked in the past, you take 80% of any photo amateur of LuLa in the same environment and you got the Vogue cover. I'm not exagerating. The only reason this one has the Vogue cover and not you and me is because of relashionship skills, not shooting skills (it's a bit more complex in fact). In Street and reportage, this is impossible. There is no safety net.
Put people in the streets or in a war zone, or in a plane with politics...(it is difficult to deal with powerfull people. It takes time not to be intimidated, learn how to be discrete but present)
Sure some remember who is he
Maybe this pic looks easy.

Street has something to do with predation mixed with art. Nothing is under your control but you must be controling the situation.
A lot of patience is required, a great deal of observation and reflexes but also inner vision. Not only the subject but the surroundings. Not only the viewfinder frame but the psychological frame.
Most of what people present as street, are not such or of very low quality. It is not because they are bad as photographers, it is because they flirt with the most difficult genre in photography
and the level dramatically decreases.
Actually, you can check some really skilled professionals in this forum in their respective genre, when they have a blog with their street shots, they do not reflect the excellence their pro works possess.
Suddenly, they look rookies. That's because street is way far more difficult in all aspects.
It's no accident why in Europe, the street photography masters are the most respected and valued.

I have the greatest respect for street photographers.

PS. Actually, Rob, a former fashion photographer, has potential in this genre.

[Ivophoto]

The ‘friction’ in this section is not about street photography as such. It is about how it is paternalized by the gate keeper.

You make very true statements in your reply about the poor quality of street photography found all over places, I can not agree more. Your post makes sense from begin to end. No discussion.

It is not because a picture technically is in the boundary of the so called definitions it is excellent or good. It is against this kind of navel gazing I react.

The whole situation in this section started with statements that only a street scene was worth raising a camera and photographers with other insights are dismissed as undereducated, blind or at least unwilling.

The denial of the post 1970 exegesis in photography is irritating and it is getting a bit of a caricature to see how  contemporary (and I use the literal meaning of the word) photography is considered as rubbish and how very poor street photography is hailed just because it is an attempt to comply with some kind of definitions.

There is much more out there than hunting with a camera.

[RSL]

I'm not sure who you think the "gatekeeper" is Evo, but so far we've seen a ton of stuff in this segment that's as close to street photography as my nautilus was to landscape photography. I'd say that if there's a gatekeeper he's not doing much of a job. All that the practitioners of your "post 1970 exegesis" have demonstrated about street photography is that they know where the shutter button is located. Perhaps that's the navel gazing you're talking about.

Please give us a direct quote to support your contention that this section started with statements that only street was worth raising a camera, etc., etc., etc. I've looked for something to support that idea. I can't find it.

Yes, there's much more out there than street photography, which is what I think you meant by "hunting with a camera," and most of the posters here on LuLa shoot plenty of that other stuff, but we don't post it in Street Showcase. So I don't understand what you were implying with your final sentence. Would you elaborate please?

[Ivophoto]

. Would you elaborate please?

Sure Russ,

Jean makes the link to predation. And I tend to agree street photography is a kind of predation, a hunt. And I say: there are other ways to photograph human behavior than photographically hunting or predation. There are other ways to document human relationships with each other and with the environment or how humankind put a stamp on this planet.
And thinking that this way of non hunting photography is less or easier or of an inferior kind is a mistake.
If you would take a closer look to the simplicity of some photographs you would find a much more complex hidden background in a visual language probably not obviously understood.

And for the rest of your query, read back your posts, please.

Kind regards

Ivo

[RSL]

Well, first of all, Ivo, ALL photography is predation -- a hunt. You have a camera in your hand or on a tripod and you're after a subject. Unless you're doing studio photography it's not like painting, where the subject is in your head, trying to get out onto the canvas.

So how about telling me about these other ways to photograph human behavior or human relationships, etc. What are these "other ways?" If you're talking about posing your subject then you're talking about photographing your own idea of human behavior and human relationships rather than the real -- out there -- thing. That's what good street photography is: the real, unposed thing. It has nothing to do with difficulty, but in street photography something posed definitely is inferior to the real thing because it doesn't tell a true story. Anyone with eyes to see can tell the difference. Ambiguity also helps, and it's damned hard to fake that.

And this statement: "If you would take a closer look to the simplicity of some photographs you would find a much more complex hidden background in a visual language probably not obviously understood." Why are you making that kind of vague pronouncement? Photography deals with pictures. Give me a link to a visual example of what you're trying to say.

And finally, to say "read back your posts" sort of ducks the question, don't you think? Give me an actual quote to support your earlier contention that this section started with statements that only street was worth raising a camera.

[Ivophoto]

Well, first of all, Ivo, ALL photography is predation -

It is not, Russ.

If you are open to change your premise, we can explore how I see it. If you can not, even just for the exercise, it doesn’t make sense to even try to understand each other.

O, I’m not going to dig in your posts to expose you to your previous expressions. But maybe, for your comfort, let’s forget about it and drag a line here and see if we can understand each other’s viewpoint in abstraction of rhetorics from the past.

[RSL]

It is not, Russ.

Really? Please explain why you think shooting pictures with a camera is not a hunt -- or as you put it, "predation?" Whether you're out there with a camera or in here -- in the studio -- with a camera, you're after a subject.

If you are open to change your premise, we can explore how I see it. If you can not, even just for the exercise, it doesn’t make sense to even try to understand each other.

What premise is that, Evo?

O, I’m not going to dig in your posts to expose you to your previous expressions. But maybe, for your comfort, let’s forget about it and drag a line here and see if we can understand each other’s viewpoint in abstraction of rhetorics from the past.

In other words, you can't come up with a quote that supports your earlier contention that this section started with the idea that street is the only reason to raise a camera.

Sorry, Evo. What I see is bluster and sentiment rather than facts.

[Ivo_B]

Really? Please explain why you think shooting pictures with a camera is not a hunt -- or as you put it, "predation?" Whether you're out there with a camera or in here -- in the studio -- with a camera, you're after a subject.

What premise is that, Evo?

In other words, you can't come up with a quote that supports your earlier contention that this section started with the idea that street is the only reason to raise a camera.

Sorry, Evo. What I see is bluster and sentiment rather than facts.

Ok Ross, I'll try to stick to the content of the discussion.

The subject of a picture is not necessarily a prey and a picture is not necessarily a hunting trophy. A picture can be an observation, it can be documentation, it can be a report, a report can be subjective or objective, full of emotion or emotionless, but in all these forms, it isn't a prey or a trophy, the subject is not hunted, only observed. A picture can be a gift from the subject to the photographer. Even further, with the attitude to hunt with your camera, you have no chance at all to make good portraits.

So what did you want to say about 'all photography' is hunting. A camera is not a gun, it is much more powerful than a gun, not because its precision or stopping power, but because the ability to observe and document in the hands of an observer.

[RSL]

Ok Ross, I'll try to stick to the content of the discussion.

The subject of a picture is not necessarily a prey and a picture is not necessarily a hunting trophy. A picture can be an observation, it can be documentation, it can be a report, a report can be subjective or objective, full of emotion or emotionless, but in all these forms, it isn't a prey or a trophy, the subject is not hunted, only observed. A picture can be a gift from the subject to the photographer. Even further, with the attitude to hunt with your camera, you have no chance at all to make good portraits.

Here's a quote from Ivo_B, earlier in this thread: "Jean makes the link to predation. And I tend to agree street photography is a kind of predation, a hunt."

So it's only street that's "predation?" Why is that? You don't think shooting a scene in landscape is "predation?" With a paintbrush you're only limited to what's inside you. With a camera you're always limited to what's in front of you. So, to take the literal meaning of the word, "predation," (An act of plundering and pillaging and marauding), shooting with a camera always is predation. That's why I always snarl when I'm ready to press the shutter release.

So what did you want to say about 'all photography' is hunting. A camera is not a gun, it is much more powerful than a gun, not because its precision or stopping power, but because the ability to observe and document in the hands of an observer.

Whatever, Ivo. . . But I notice that once again you bypassed the quote you were going to post that shows the segment started with the statement that only street is a reason to raise the camera.

This discussion is getting sillier and sillier, so I think I'm gonna quit while I'm still ahead.

[Ivophoto]

Here's a quote from Ivo_B, earlier in this thread: "Jean makes the link to predation. And I tend to agree street photography is a kind of predation, a hunt."

So it's only street that's "predation?" Why is that? You don't think shooting a scene in landscape is "predation?" With a paintbrush you're only limited to what's inside you. With a camera you're always limited to what's in front of you. So, to take the literal meaning of the word, "predation," (An act of plundering and pillaging and marauding), shooting with a camera always is predation. That's why I always snarl when I'm ready to press the shutter release.

Whatever, Ivo. . . But I notice that once again you bypassed the quote you were going to post that shows the segment started with the statement that only street is a reason to raise the camera.

This discussion is getting sillier and sillier, so I think I'm gonna quit while I'm still ahead.

I’m not in race with you, Russ.

https://youtu.be/BzrI15uw92k

[Telecaster]

This thread is an excellent example of what happens when proselytizing runs up against the refusal to convert.

-Dave-

[Chris Kern]

This thread is an excellent example of what happens when proselytizing runs up against the refusal to convert.

Nicely phrased, and there's certainly some truth in it.  My interpretation is more optimistic: I'd say this thread is an example of what happens when people with widely diverging opinions challenge each other in a reasonably civil manner.  There may have been a few flashes of anger or frustration, but the debate is interesting and thought-provoking.  There's nothing inherently bad about disagreement.  What is it Slobodan says in his signature line?

[Ivophoto]

This thread is an excellent example of what happens when proselytizing runs up against the refusal to convert.

-Dave-

This is not about proselytizing. Not even from far.

On the other hand, I guess street photography is considered as a kind of religion by some.

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

On the other hand, I guess street photography is considered as a kind of religion by some.

Quite true.