Why drive to find a shot...I say walk

As a green horn slowly shedding my horns i have come to realize the

biggest block to photography. The block that is, is the perfect shot

or should i say the means by which we search. I can recall countless

times of driving around gawking, burning time and daylight to find

thae picture that will shout ...SHOOT ME!!! And i am willing to bet

many others have done the same. The truth is, it is rare that we

indeed find the that shot. To break myself of the habit i have begun

to release myself from tunnel vision while going towards my car.

Stop, Breathe, look around, there is so much right under our noses.

Yes, i'm sayin near your house, or on that same old street that you

believe doesn't even exist. Take the time and you can turn that

street into a street that people will see for the first time with a

different view. If i ever become a teacher of photography, i'll

promise them a trip to New York ...and then miss the exit and drive

into a Junk yard. New York is a photo waiting to happen, a junkyard

is jungle ready to be made. You can take the long drive i'll take

the backdoor and find so much more.

 

Any interesting stories about jewels you've taken on foot ...share

them and your thoughts. Thanks<div></div>

Daniel, my response is trivial I'm afraid: as I don't own, or have access to, a car, just about all of my photos were obtained walking from my residence at that time (including walking from my hotel if I was away on a trip). But I get your point, and I heartily agree! Depression (of the photographic kind) would have overtaken me by now if I thought that I needed to <i>drive</i> somewhere to get a worthwhile shot...

heh... this is stating the obvious. What do you think street shooters for generations have been doing?

Driving? To find a shot? Huh, strange idea

 

If you really have something against walking, i suggest you a cheap used bike. You can always stop, drop the bike and take the shot -takes 3 seconds or less and it keeps you fit.

If you're saying thatit's easier to see a good photographic

opportunity from on foot rather than via drive-by scouting I'd have

to agree. However if you're trying to extend this to say that you'd

get better photographs without using a car, that's just nonsense.

Not only can a car get me to locations I couldn't even think of

going to without one, it can also get me there at the right time of

day , and with the right equipment accessible to me.

 

For most people, photographing within walking distance of

home will lose its charm over time . I understand that not

everyone has a car or wants to drive, and that there may be ways

that they can enjoy photography anyway. But that's a long way

from saying that it's an advantage.

First off I have to say that David said it well as to the here or there for an image capture:)<p>

 

Daniel wrote<p>

 

<i>As a green horn slowly shedding my horns i have come to realize the biggest block to photography. The block that is, is the perfect shot or should i say the means by which we search.</i><p>

 

A lot of your answer is in your premise and question.<p>

 

<i>I can recall countless times of driving around gawking, burning time and daylight to find thae picture that will shout ...SHOOT ME!!!</i><p>

 

As a suggestion, before you drive or walk about, have a preconceived notion in your head as to what your wanting to convey on that particular day as opposed to hoping something falls into your camera. Second, choose a different time of day; morning, evening or night and drag around a monopod/ballhead combo or tripod with ballhead.<p>

 

<p>And i am willing to bet many others have done the same. The truth is, it is rare that we indeed find the that shot. To break myself of the habit i have begun to release myself from tunnel vision while going towards my car. Stop, Breathe, look around, there is so much right under our noses.</i><p>

 

Again. Stop and think about what you're doing before getting in the vehicle. I've climbed into my vehicle thrice over the last week or so for the purpose of image capture. The first two times I came back after only a few minutes as I hadn't a clue what I was about on either of the first two outings. Yesterday I knew my shot was in the fogbank on yonder hilltops, many miles away. I haven't processed the images yet but they're safely stored on the CF card and will be processed later today after the day job has been attended to. Only one scene, fleetingly presented itself to me when up on the ridgeline forty-five minutes later. It presented itself just long enough for a half-dozen images or so and then the light was gone for eternity. Will the image work? Time will tell. Maybe not as I wasn't happy with the composition or the fleeting nature of the light but time waits for no one so the problems I experienced are universal in nature. Such is life.<p>

 

<i>Yes, i'm sayin near your house, or on that same old street that you believe doesn't even exist. Take the time and you can turn that street into a street that people will see for the first time with a different view. If i ever become a teacher of photography, i'll promise them a trip to New York ...and then miss the exit and drive into a Junk yard. New York is a photo waiting to happen, a junkyard is jungle ready to be made. You can take the long drive i'll take the backdoor and find so much more.</i><p>

 

Your above is very romantic but flawed. How? Driving to a junkyard, via a deception is not photographing outside your backdoor or wandering your neighborhood:) It will present new opportunities but it isn't walking about your neighborhood.<p>

 

Oh! And yes you can wander your neighborhood but a couple of points; what happens if you're in a lilly-white neighborhood that's all squeaky clean and without character and secondly, what happens when you've burned yourself out on the neighborhood, do you just become repetitious?<p>

 

To keep with the flavor of your thread and request, here's an image that was capture just down the street, two blocks away when I was on food stealthily trolling the neighborhood for an image capture or two.<p><div></div>

Well, cars are surely the greatest mistake to make. Motorbikes give some advantage, they are a bit easier to be parked wereever you like. Walking is sometimes boring, so if you have to travel to find some subject consider a bicycle, it even helps to carry a moderate amount of gear.

I suppose it depends on where you live. My backyard is a huge park, but it's not the

gigantic photographic wonderland you might expect it to be. I love my car for finding

shots. I use it mostly to hold gear and to get me to and near places that I then walk

around, but I'm not going to hike 25 miles along a major road to get to a spot when I

could drive. Do I miss some street shots on the way? Yep. Do I actually end up GETTING

THERE instead of turning back an hour later? Yup. Do I have a tripod when otherwise all

I'd have might be my monopod? You bet. Is it worth $2.35/gallon in fuel instead of

$2.29/taco in food? Yes.

 

That said, I prefer my bike for random city wandering. I think that it's likely as good as

walking for most subjects and it allows more gear to be carried (strap the tripod to the

bike, not your leg!) It also (like the car) extends your range.

 

I'd be happy to take you on a walking tour of West Green Bay, but I think you'd end up at

Hertz that evening....

First i want to thankyou all for the comments and stories. I wrote the tid bit just for those to rem. the simplicity of photography that we sometimes forget. Many of my best shots were no where close to home ...so yes a car is a great tool. And it is also good to go into a day with a certain shot in mind...whether it be a backlit scene or converging lines ...but again often one must wander and get lost. This forum has been nothing but joy to be in and i thank you all again.

<a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/3829028911/qid=1085352295/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-0596328-3218343?v=glance&s=books&n=507846"> Drive By Shootings </a>

Perhaps combine two forms of transportation: drive your car (or take a bus, train, bike etc) to a certain destination, and then walk (or ride a bike) around there to get your photos :-)

My TRUCK is neccessary in Arizona...and in one case protected me from a dog attack.......

A recent walk....;)...J<div></div>

You're right. The advantage of walking is that the landscape gradually opens up before you. In a car it just flashes past and you think you saw a great shot but when you go back it was just a mental montage of several views in quick succession. And it's better for your health, the environment and the people who repair shoes. As my local shoe-repair man used to say as one left his shop, "Keep walking - it's good for both of us".

<a href="http://www.keithlaban.co.uk">Keith Laban Photography</a><p>Daniel, could "drive" be a metaphor for unknown faraway places and "walk" be a metaphor for the knowledge of your own area? If so I�m all for walking.

Keith wrote<p>

 

<i>Daniel, could "drive" be a metaphor for unknown faraway places and "walk" be a metaphor for the knowledge of your own area? If so I�m all for walking.</i><p>

 

I took "drive" in the same light you did in your above but I am guilty of doing "Drive By's" :)<p>

 

I just had a thought and hence forth will keep a notebook handy in the service vehicle for the purpose of noting locations (no dates), as I drive about daily, to come back to at a later time and point for further exploration when on foot:)<p>

Although I like to travel to far away destinations, I agree. It is my firm belief that there are thousands of perfectly wonderful potential photographs within a few feet of each of us. It is up to us as photographers to discover them and relate them to the rest of the world. Indeed, I�m off to get the mail and re-shoot something I saw in the gutter. :)

I regularly load a camera and walk around my neighborhood, and try to remain receptive and alert. It's a stimulating exercise, even when I shoot little or no film, and sometimes I'm rewarded with an interesting photo. Other times, I'll drive downtown, park, and continue on foot in the same manner. I think that there's an intimacy with one's environment that is lost behind the wheel, but it does extend one's range.<div></div>

Bicycles are a great compromise mode. And if you don't get a keeper picture,you get to see some rainbows & ephemeral things. And clouds,never two alike. Serengeti glasses are for us cyclist cloud watchers and photographers. I might try shooting through a Serengeti one day and see what happens.

Walked over every inch of Cape Ann for these:<div></div>

Seems to me you just do whatever's appropriate to get you there. I'm usually hiking around in the woods around here, or take my bicycle out the road. Other times when I need to get further afield I'll take the truck to a stopping off point and get out and walk from there. Sometimes I've just taken the truck and driven the back roads, in our rural Ontario landscape there's plenty of things to be found right alongside the gravel roads. My priority is not so much HOW I get there, but what IS there and how I can get the shot.

I don't own a car. I wanted to go shooting at Lake Shasta - the bus got me close, but I had to walk a few miles. On the road, I noticed a small bridge off to the side in the bushes, that had been damaged and repaired with plywood. after the bridge was a trail going up into the forest where it disapeared.

 

I followed the trail, and it led to a small graveyard with beautiful Indian pottery and artwork around the graves - I would have never found it had it not been for walking.

As this debate could go on forever, I will do nothing to further it, I will just chime in with my 2 cents worth. The method or transportation used to obtain your images all depends on what images you are trying to obtain. I know that some photographers only see postcards and they are the ones that drive-stop-shoot, drive-stop-shoot ect... But there are those of us who have come to appreciate the smaller things in life. The people out there who do not look for expansive pictures containing all of Mt. Rainier find peace and pictures in the paths leading around the mountain rather than at the scenic overlooks.

I recently took a 4,900 mile road trip stretching from Minnesota to Seatlle and back. In the 4,900 miles in the car I maybe took 5 shots. While on the trail in Rainier I took well over a roll. All that I am trying to say is, Can you only appreciate what the roadside offers can you find an equal balance between getting to new places by car and getting out walking around and really appreciating all that is has to offer? I know I can.

As I gave up driving after a car accident I would also prefer to see "walking versus driving" as contenting oneself with "less" or "more". Basically, I like traveling, by any means, but recently I find myself more and more reluctant to go someplace to photograph. And more and more attracted to simple things I can always find around me ? like some light situations in my home, for example, though this is the most extreme example of my "undemandingness", of course. A few months back I was thinking about going to a certain faraway place for a change, for a couple of weeks, so that I could have a lot of free time and photograph new things (I know this place quite well, though). I even decided to take everything to develop my b/w films in the evenings there so that I wouldn't have to develop all the accumulated stuff on my return home. But now this idea irritates me ? having to deal with new images (not photographic images, but in those in real life), then have a lot of stuff to choose to print from, and the possible disappointment - I don't feel comfortable with it. Or maybe it's some sort of "lazy" period in my life, I don't know:))..