Violence in Ecuador

[D Fuller]

...
[Ivo]
“Street photography changed enormously the last decades, because society became more complex and the human behavior/ social environments are in continuous change as well.”

[RSL]
“Although good street photography is a powerful art form, it’s also a way of recording what people really are like and for those after us, a way of learning what we were like. It seems to me that besides the satisfaction it can give you, those two facts alone make it worthwhile.”

Ivo’s right. Social environments are in continuous change. They change one way, and then they change back again. Britain went from Elizabethan loose morality to puckered-lipped Victorianism. The reverse of that sequence is taking place in America right now. We’re moving away from early fundamentalism to an anything-goes society. Once our people feel the full effect of that change, we’ll move back the other way. And street photography, if it’s done right, will capture those changes. It’s not, as Ivo suggests, that street photography changes. Were it to change in accordance with “human behavior / social environments” it wouldn’t be able to record the changes in those things. In the end, unless the confusing name misleads its intended practitioners (the commonality of which LuLa has demonstrated), street photography is the constant.

I see real changes in street photography that originate with the subjects, not the photographer. And that, perhaps, make both Ivo and RSL “right”.

A big social change in the past two decades is people’s camera-consciousness. In HCB’s time, a photographer at an event was a rarity (relatively) and people largely ignored them. So a sailor could be photographed kissing a nurse seemingly unaware of the photographer’s presence. That wouldn’t happen today. With the ubiquity of cameras comes camera-consciousness. Everyone is camera-aware. So one of the things that street photography will record, if done right in RSL’s terms, is that camera-consciousness. I’d argue that Ivo’s photos in the OP are an example of that.

I’d argue that “street portraiture” is something different that involves direction by the photographer, not just camera-awareness on the part of the subject. The guy who does the “Humans of New York” series is doing street portraits. Ivo is not.

[KLaban]

Camera-consciousness in action.



;-)

[RSL]

Ivo, Let’s get right into it. You say:

“Theoretically, I’m with you about how a fixed window shows the world in change. But, practically, opening that window a bit more gives ‘more’ view of the world. And here is the paradigm shift. Change the set of rules reposition your window and give another look to the same world.

“Now, I have posted the series under Street because I believe it is street. The ambiguity of the scene and the strange atmosphere, as Slobodan accurately described, the friendly soft character of the peoples, almost the family excursion level, makes it a registration of what is happening on a Saturday in A European capital town.”

As usual, you talk in generalities without getting down to the nuts and bolts. You talk about a “paradigm shift” and “opening that window a bit more,” but you never define or illustrate what you mean by a “paradigm shift,” You talk about a “fixed window,” and opening that window, but you never attempt to define what you think is included in that “window” or what’s excluded. To you, “window” means something. To me, and I suspect to most, “window” in this context is meaningless. And as soon as I ask for an example to define what you mean you go defensive and try to bypass the question with insults. I was in politics for eight years. Insults don’t bother me, but they don’t help your case.

Your “belief” that what you posted is street will be laughed out of town by anyone familiar with the genre. There’s nothing ambiguous about the scene, nor is there anything strange about the atmosphere. It’s a demonstration, as you say, of what’s happening in a European capital town. In other words, your pictures are photojournalism, if that. They’re not pictures of people interacting with other people or with their environment without being aware they’re being photographed. They’re posing! That’s a long way from street.

Yes, I know that Europe has gone crazy – even HCB’s France – and has decided, absurdly, that you have an expectation of privacy when you’re out in a crowd. That’s one of those changes that will change back later on. You seem to think it’ll happen in the United States. All I can say is: don’t hold your breath.

But I don’t intend to get into an argument about what’s street and what’s not, Ivo. You can shoot away to your heart’s content and believe what you’re shooting is street. Be my guest. I’d really rather not be in conflict with you, Ivo. I think you’re a perfectly competent “professional” photographer, just like most of the ones who’s work I see in small town shop windows. I don’t think you’re a photojournalist or a street photographer. Enjoy what you do but don’t pontificate about things out of your reach.

[RSL]

A big social change in the past two decades is people’s camera-consciousness. In HCB’s time, a photographer at an event was a rarity (relatively) and people largely ignored them. So a sailor could be photographed kissing a nurse seemingly unaware of the photographer’s presence. That wouldn’t happen today. With the ubiquity of cameras comes camera-consciousness. Everyone is camera-aware. So one of the things that street photography will record, if done right in RSL’s terms, is that camera-consciousness. I’d argue that Ivo’s photos in the OP are an example of that.

Hi D, Check my essay "On Street Photography." Only one of those pictures was shot with film. You're right. People have become very camera-conscious. I'd count that an advantage for street photography. Everybody's carrying a camera or a cell phone, so seeing a camera doesn't make anyone back off. There are plenty of cases where I can stand there and shoot a picture of somebody who's looking straight at me. Doesn't shake them up. They're not even sure I'm shooting. Bottom line: I think street photography has been given a real lift by digital cameras. I especially love shooting in St. Augustine, Florida. Everybody in sight has a camera and everybody's snapping away. It's a great place for street photography.

[Ivo_B]

Ivo, Let’s get right into it. You say:

“Theoretically, I’m with you about how a fixed window shows the world in change. But, practically, opening that window a bit more gives ‘more’ view of the world. And here is the paradigm shift. Change the set of rules reposition your window and give another look to the same world.

“Now, I have posted the series under Street because I believe it is street. The ambiguity of the scene and the strange atmosphere, as Slobodan accurately described, the friendly soft character of the peoples, almost the family excursion level, makes it a registration of what is happening on a Saturday in A European capital town.”

As usual, you talk in generalities without getting down to the nuts and bolts. You talk about a “paradigm shift” and “opening that window a bit more,” but you never define or illustrate what you mean by a “paradigm shift,” You talk about a “fixed window,” and opening that window, but you never attempt to define what you think is included in that “window” or what’s excluded. To you, “window” means something. To me, and I suspect to most, “window” in this context is meaningless. And as soon as I ask for an example to define what you mean you go defensive and try to bypass the question with insults. I was in politics for eight years. Insults don’t bother me, but they don’t help your case.

Your “belief” that what you posted is street will be laughed out of town by anyone familiar with the genre. There’s nothing ambiguous about the scene, nor is there anything strange about the atmosphere. It’s a demonstration, as you say, of what’s happening in a European capital town. In other words, your pictures are photojournalism, if that. They’re not pictures of people interacting with other people or with their environment without being aware they’re being photographed. They’re posing! That’s a long way from street.

Yes, I know that Europe has gone crazy – even HCB’s France – and has decided, absurdly, that you have an expectation of privacy when you’re out in a crowd. That’s one of those changes that will change back later on. You seem to think it’ll happen in the United States. All I can say is: don’t hold your breath.

But I don’t intend to get into an argument about what’s street and what’s not, Ivo. You can shoot away to your heart’s content and believe what you’re shooting is street. Be my guest. I’d really rather not be in conflict with you , Ivo. I think you’re a perfectly competent “professional” photographer, just like most of the ones who’s work I see in small town shop windows. I don’t think you’re a photojournalist or a street photographer. Enjoy what you do but don’t pontificate about things out of your reach.

Again, I was stupid enough to believe that a normal conversation with you is possible. Your reply is peppered with contempt and under cover insult. You should be ashamed.

This ends my attempt to talk with you.

[Ivo_B]

I see real changes in street photography that originate with the subjects, not the photographer. And that, perhaps, make both Ivo and RSL “right”.

A big social change in the past two decades is people’s camera-consciousness. In HCB’s time, a photographer at an event was a rarity (relatively) and people largely ignored them. So a sailor could be photographed kissing a nurse seemingly unaware of the photographer’s presence. That wouldn’t happen today. With the ubiquity of cameras comes camera-consciousness. Everyone is camera-aware. So one of the things that street photography will record, if done right in RSL’s terms, is that camera-consciousness. I’d argue that Ivo’s photos in the OP are an example of that.

I’d argue that “street portraiture” is something different that involves direction by the photographer, not just camera-awareness on the part of the subject. The guy who does the “Humans of New York” series is doing street portraits. Ivo is not.

Thanks for your valuable  input, camera awareness is effectively one of the game changers

[RSL]

Again, I was stupid enough to believe that a normal conversation with you is possible. Your reply is peppered with contempt and under cover insult. You should be ashamed.

This ends my attempt to talk with you.

Whatever, Ivo.

[PeterAit]

I thought that "whatever" was the mating call of the American teenager. Looks like I was wrong.

[Rob C]

I thought that "whatever" was the mating call of the American teenager. Looks like I was wrong.

Interesting; I thought where mating calls were concerned, it was more likely to be whoever.

:-)

[RSL]

Or whomever, Rob. I just ran back through this whole thread. I can't even believe I bothered with it as long as I did. Wow!

[Rob C]

Or whomever, Rob. I just ran back through this whole thread. I can't even believe I bothered with it as long as I did. Wow!

That's the function of the Internet: keep us oldies active, at least with our fingertips, if not our minds.

But then, I look at the programmes that get advertised during the commercial breaks on Sky News and wonder who in hell watches that rubbish. Those domestic soaps about unattractive people... ye gods! You can experience all that in the street any day of your life without buying a viewing "package" from Sky!

LuLa is a better bet.

Rob

[RSL]

LuLa's a pretty good bet, even with the bullshit that goes down on it. I'm watching PhotoPXL and hoping for the best over there, but it would be hard to break away from LuLa.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... Statler and Waldorf in extreme...

Halloween edition:

[John R]

I see real changes in street photography that originate with the subjects, not the photographer. And that, perhaps, make both Ivo and RSL “right”.

A big social change in the past two decades is people’s camera-consciousness. In HCB’s time, a photographer at an event was a rarity (relatively) and people largely ignored them. So a sailor could be photographed kissing a nurse seemingly unaware of the photographer’s presence. That wouldn’t happen today. With the ubiquity of cameras comes camera-consciousness. Everyone is camera-aware. So one of the things that street photography will record, if done right in RSL’s terms, is that camera-consciousness. I’d argue that Ivo’s photos in the OP are an example of that.

I’d argue that “street portraiture” is something different that involves direction by the photographer, not just camera-awareness on the part of the subject. The guy who does the “Humans of New York” series is doing street portraits. Ivo is not.

Don't know if you read about the photographer who took a picture of two people kissing in a doorway. The guy kissing the girl spotted the photographer and asked if he was taking pictures of them. He said yes and offered to delete the images. He got the living daylights beat out of him and his camera smashed. He refused to press  any charges. That's not a chance I would take, not least because he probably recognized he was acting like a voyeur notwithstanding he was in a public place. Not only are people camera conscious, a growing number simply don't want their picture taken. You can get away with it in a general public setting, but when clearly pointing at people you often risk confrontation. I don't know how Russ does it, because as soon I raise the camera and aim it at someone they often ask if I am taking a photo of them. Not worth the hassle to me.

JR

[RSL]

You've got to do what The Shadow used to do, John. You need to learn to cloud men's minds (and women's too). The most important thing is to be non-threatening. You also need to move quickly, but smoothly. In street, if you have four seconds to make a shot that's a very long time. Usually you have from one to two seconds before the scene has dissolved.

[D Fuller]

Don't know if you read about the photographer who took a picture of two people kissing in a doorway. The guy kissing the girl spotted the photographer and asked if he was taking pictures of them. He said yes and offered to delete the images. He got the living daylights beat out of him and his camera smashed. He refused to press  any charges. That's not a chance I would take, not least because he probably recognized he was acting like a voyeur notwithstanding he was in a public place. Not only are people camera conscious, a growing number simply don't want their picture taken. You can get away with it in a general public setting, but when clearly pointing at people you often risk confrontation. I don't know how Russ does it, because as soon I raise the camera and aim it at someone they often ask if I am taking a photo of them. Not worth the hassle to me.

JR

Yes, I did read about that. It's curious that in a time when most people are giving up privacy to all manner of corporate entities, more people are objecting to the recording of things they consider private actions in public spaces.

[Ivo_B]

Yes, I did read about that. It's curious that in a time when most people are giving up privacy to all manner of corporate entities, more people are objecting to the recording of things they consider private actions in public spaces.

That’s also one of the particular aspects of today’s street photography.
Try to shoot from the hip, concealed or just unasked in a west European city with a high number of Salafist Moslims. If you are something else than a young pretty girl with a cellphone camera, you can get in nasty troubles.

I got in trouble myself on a public market. I was shooting with my GR, even not concealed, somebody asked me to delete all my picture, He was not on one of the pictures, but he found he had to speak for all. Waving with the GDPR, discussions get very cumbersome quickly.

That are social facts that make any theory about street photography practically obsolete.

[Martin Kristiansen]

That’s a European perspective Ivo. But a lot of people seem to think that Street needs to be shot in a first world country portraying mundane boring events otherwise it’s either travel atmospherics or photo journalism. 

[Ivo_B]

That’s a European perspective Ivo. But a lot of people seem to think that Street needs to be shot in a first world country portraying mundane boring events otherwise it’s either travel atmospherics or photo journalism.

I guess we will never get rid of our colonial mentality. 😞

[Ivo_B]

Yes, I did read about that. It's curious that in a time when most people are giving up privacy to all manner of corporate entities, more people are objecting to the recording of things they consider private actions in public spaces.

With good reason. Face recognition and cellphone information together makes a very precise fingerprint.