Public Housing, NYC

[Mark Nadler]

Comments welcomed.

mark

[francois]

I love the general geometry with vertical and diagonal lines. B&W processing is also appropriate here.
Well seen.

[Mark Nadler]

Thanks, francois.  Even though the structure in front of the public housing is not organically part of it, it felt to me that it belonged.  I had a grandmother and an uncle that lived in
public housing in NYC.  I visited them often and I developed a certain sense of what it meant to live there.

mark

[RSL]

Mark, Why do you think this is street photography?

[Mark Nadler]

I think my last statement to francois explains why I believe it is street photography.  I hope this image conveys an aspect of the human condition.  Material culture can convey more about us than images of us.  RSL, I hope this addresses your question.

mark

[RSL]

I see. Have you ever been exposed to the work of Henri Cartier-Bresson, Garry Winogrand, or Robert Frank? These are three of the people who defined street photography. You might want to look them up.

[Mark Nadler]

RSL, It would be useful if you told me why you think my image does not fall into the genre of street photography.  I assume that is what is behind your original question to me.   

mark 

[RSL]

Hi Mark, If you check the references I gave you you'll see why it doesn't fall into the street genre. You might also want to check the reposts of my best street. Street photography has nothing to do with streets.

[Mark Nadler]

RSL, tell me if I am wrong but I sense if I had a human in the image then you would not have asked me to explain why I think my image of public housing falls into the genre of "street photography."   I am not in the camp that limits street photography to images that contain humans.  During the high point of the Covid epidemic someone produced an image of a major street in Manhattan, NYC with no people present.  I thought it was a great example of street photography.  Whatever goal anyone imagines that street photography is supposed to pursue I can conceive of images that satisfy that goal without people in it excluding goals that are worded explicitly as "street photography shows humans ..."   In art "thous shall nots" have proven barren. 

Mark

[RSL]

As I said, street photography has nothing at all to do with streets. I’m not going to argue with you, Mark, and I don’t care what “camp” you’re in. If you want to see what defines the genre, read the work of the originators I listed above. You also should add Robert Frank to that list. There are many others, but I’m too busy to list them here. Several are listed here: http://www.russ-lewis.com/essays/OnStreetPhotography.pdf. What you need at the moment is research.

Russ Lewis

[MattBurt]

I like the image, however it gets categorized. Mindful composition.

[Mark Nadler]

MattBurt, thank you for saving me from the precipice of art classification ambiguity.

mark

[RSL]

Why not call it "Wildlife?" That would be equally accurate.

[rabanito]

In Europe you may  miss the HCBs now, Many things have changed anyway since.
But on the other hand you are protected against wannabes "Bruce Gildens" and similar and even from the originals.
If you would sit HCB and such an individual at the same "Street Photography" table, well... then IMHO the category StPh makes no sense at all.
I prefer to miss the pics of HCB and Robert Frank and not see my mother published in an awkward situation provoked by some so-called "artist" while she was shopping.
Some sense of decency seems to have been lost in this "anything goes" philosophy.

Just my humble opinion

[RSL]

Hi Rab,

From https://luminous-landscape.com/on-street-photography/

"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. Seems to me that besides the satisfaction it can give you, those two things alone make it worthwhile."

[rabanito]

Hi Rab,

From https://luminous-landscape.com/on-street-photography/

"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. Seems to me that besides the satisfaction it can give you, those two things alone make it worthwhile."

Russ:
While it's not explicitly mentioned here, I read in another post of yours (Restposts...)
"I sometimes hear arguments about why I shouldn’t do street photography. The most common complaint is that street photography interferes with people’s privacy. But someone in a public place has no expectation of privacy and United States law recognizes that fact. It’s shocking to think that nowadays Cartier-Bresson might be sued in France for publishing “Behind the Gare St. Lazare.”

I've been following that thread the whole time and probably got it mixed up now. Sorry.
But anyway it's a statement of yours as well and I didn't it think improper to answer/comment to that.

Be assured that I've read all your articles here and also learned a lot from them 

[RSL]

Hi Rab, None of this is a problem. We can disagree without having disagreement turn into anger. The quote you posted came from the final written post as I finished my favorite street sequence.

I agree that street can become obnoxious when a photographer sets out to capture the embarrassing side of life. Some people do that. I've always tried to avoid it.