Street Photography Techniques

<p>Brad, that story's a hoot... <br>

I had one woman say exactly the same..excuse me did you just take a photo of me..when I told her I did, she asked "why?". My lie that she was standing in nice light and the framing looked like it would make an interesting photo did not impress her. She told me "you are a freak" and I replied, wow, how did you know? and we both parted company..the truth is the shot occured in the corner of my eye as I was walking down the street, I literally reacted swiveled and shot I haven't got a clue why....</p>

<p><img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1385/1349644917_3e8e4ff25b_o.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>I'm probably the last person who should post in this thread. I haven't done any street type photography for years and all that I have done was in college. There isn't any in my portfolio here because none of the stuff I did back then is digitized. I was always really nervous about shooting in the street. I never had any problems, but for some reason it made me nervous. The fact that I almost always shoot alone might have contributed to that. I think that when you are starting out in this type of photography nervousness is normal. Anyway, one thing that worked for me was to shoot other stuff like buildings or other interesting non-human subjects and if I saw a unique human moment I just swung around and shot it, moving on to something else right after. It seemed that if people saw me just shooting other stuff they didn't worry about me as much. Back then all I had was a Pentax K1000 and a 50mm lens. I always used Tmax. It seems to me that these days you might run into more trouble by trying to be sneaky and hiding what you are doing. Get really good with your camera so that you hardly have to think about operating it to get the results you want. The next time you get that nervousness in your stomach about shooting just go for it. Think technical not emotional and shoot. As long as you are respectful and within the law it will probably be just fine. </p>

<p>Katherine</p>

<p>One of my tactics - pretend to ignore people in the frame... 28mm or wider recommended for this. Take a series of shots; make your subjects think you might actually be shooting smth. else - just the street, just the background, something in the distance...</p>

<p><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/8416391-lg.jpg" alt="" /></p>

 

<p>Adam, most people aren't aware of shooters. The same while driving a car and not thinking of motorcyclists. And how you feel, at the end seen with your camera, is the same as being seen with your motorbike. So feel free, you have to! Hiding and behaving suspiciously is dangerous in both cases. Feel free, just by doing it. And being seen, most people don't react at all. Your victems even often will feel themselves a kind of honered, are astonished, smile or just continue their way and behaviour. However, one has to love them! And one has to fall in love with "street." Camera and kind of optics are personal. I do love my older AF 70-210. f 4.0 (a very practical range!)<br>

My goal? Good light, a better background and.. to be sculptured or painted people. Haha, that's why I shoot, it's going faster. And with that lens I can shoot from just three feet..! I did try a wide angle, however one has to get so very, very close.. I felt unpleasant. Used to it, I'm sure I would love it and absolutely would need a newer type. Not shy and tall, I'm constantly observing and reacting in a rather intuitive way. Feeling for the moment often is said. The nicest moments? Haha, children in buggy's do always notice you! Grandpa Olaf.</p><div></div>

<p>Hey Barry...being called a freak isn't all bad huh? I get called that all the time at work and I have to admit it's true and I have to go on to explain how I come from a long line of freaks, bastards, and heels and therefore I really can't do much about it (even if I wanted to which I don't lol!).</p>

<p>Ed Lusthoff mentioned his experience of downtown LA. In the last two months I've taken more pics downtown that I ever have the previous years. There are certainly areas where just turing the corner with even a relic of a camera like my F2 around the neck seems to send people in a panic. I'm not even carrying a gadget bag but everyone stares at you and as soon as you raise the camera to your eye many people scurry away. A couple streets around LA and 8th (know as the toy district I believe) was a great area. Packed narrow sidewalks and alley ways that led to bigger open area swap meet type settings. However every street had at least one B&W LAPD squad car parked along the curb and at least one pair of bike patrol cops, the ones in the purple shirts. As if this wasn't enough, occasionaly one will see a sign informing people that the area is being recorded by video cameras. All I could of was that this area must be where many of the counterfit goods are sold. Otherwise it must be a hotbed of other crimes. Whatever the case, it is a odd experience since people in other parts of LA don't care or don't notice if they happen to be in front of ones camera.</p>

<p>Good shots Barry. You and the Jadtec woman had quite the thing going there for a fleeting moment. I wonder how our momentary encounters with people would look from an aerial view. Like ants stopping and touching, then moving on. Or a dog sticking nose in the grass at certain contact smell points. An aerial movie of street photographers paths in real time might be somewhat interesting. Each would be different.</p>

<p>"Did you just take a photo of me?" I must have heard that at least a half dozen times in 2008.</p>

<p>Let me just add here that I do not prescribe to the recommendation that a wide angle lens needs to be used.</p>

<p>This comes from the old days of rangefinder where accurate framing is a problem. Hence one has to shoot something and crop later hoping the subject's head will be inside the frame.</p>

<p>You can use any lens you want for street portraits. Even very fast lenses, if focus and framing can be achieved (depends on the camera).</p>

<p>There are no special photography techniques for street. If something captures your interest as you look around and you can capture it. That is that. Nothing more nothing less.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>"This comes from the old days of rangefinder where accurate framing is a problem. Hence one has to shoot something and crop later hoping the subject's head will be inside the frame."<br>

whilst i agree vivek that you can use whatever lens you please this statement is missing some relevant info... like large dof, perspective etc.</p>

<p>I found with my SLR's I always got strange and angry expressions if I didn't ask before taking a shot. I was using one of those flip LCD screens on my old Canon g3 and got excelent photos without drawing attention. Sometimes I would even put the lens under my underarm and photograph from reverse. using the flipped LCD to frame. I don't know what newer camera's have this feature, but it works great!</p>

<p>Back in the 60's and 70's it was common to use wide angle lenses (24 or 35mm) good depth of field and great for quick shots. I tried using a series of lenses like most but always seem to end up with my 24mm.<br>

Can always crop if needed. Most of your street shots are point and shoot for it changes so fast. The most accomodating lens is the forgiving wide angle.<br>

The other choice to consider is a range finder.</p>

<p>Theres another dimes worth,,,,,</p>

<p>With respect to the kind of camera to use, I personally found that <em>I'm the one</em> that's more sensitive to the noise (mirror slap/film advance) than the people out in the street. Often times, people are so preoccupied with whatever they're doing to notice the split second a camera is lifted up & the shutter pressed. I've seen people wander with a DSLR the same way one would with an M6 and get fantastic photos. So overall, I think the photog's approach carries more weight than the type of camera used. <br>

*This doesn't mean to say that using a digital p&s with next to no sound doesn't have its benefits - of course it does - you can't beat its near silent operation when silence is a must (church services and the like)*<br>

SP is much more subjective in its methods/techniques & interpretation than some other types of photography such as landscape, fashion, etc... Wide or normal? Are tele lenses okay? To ask for permission or not? What about portraits in the street - is that <em>street</em> ? Just go out and shoot & you'll soon discover you own way...</p>

<p>Vivek, in addition to greater depth of field, the reason for wider lenses for SP and photojournalism (see James Nachtwey who uses an slr and many others as example) is that they require the photographer to be closer to the subject. This shows up in the photograph and translates to placing the viewer in the scene where the photographer was. Back away with a telephoto and space in the photo is compressed. The viewer feels a distance and remoteness. I'm not saying you can't use longer lenses and I've seen some successful street photos done with something like a 90mm, but it's a rarer bird.</p>

<p>Similar to many of the comments. Know your camera and lens. Do some trial shots to decide what is acceptably sharp for you given a certain min and max distance. Use a prime lens and get the DoF tables for it (or use an online calculator to work them out). Learn and know then religiously, try them, don't trust the numbers, they will be optimistic!</p>

<p>For example my Mamiya 80mm lens at f8 with focus set to 3m will be sharp from ~2m to over 4m, set to 5m will be sharp enough for a subject between 4m and 8m, set to 10m focus will be good between 5.5m to well over 50m. What that means is within 1cm of movement of my focus ring and the instant response of my rangefinder, I just aim and shoot, pre-judging the distance very roughly. I don't actually focus on anything. I believe the term snapshot is a proper photographic term this type of shot is where the term came from. Now of course a snapshot is just sneered at, so it's meaning has changed somewhat.</p>

<p>It's also how I capture pictures of my kids, with a manual focus camera!</p>

<p>btw. I enjoyed this thread, something useful shared and a lot of contribution instead of bickering about how sensors work or film vs digital. Merry Christmas everyone!</p><div></div>

<p>Unfortunately its a symptom of the times we live in, I would say most of the population are sad, brainwashed individuals who beleive anyone with a Camera must be a Terrorist or child molester! Sure its a real problem, but people should get some perspective on reality, more people are killed on the roads every year, and by drug/drink related problems then by any Terrorist acts. Iv got more chance of been killed by a Piano falling from the sky then any Terrorist plot! We had a case here recently in Hull City, North East of England, where a photographer had his camera confiscated by the Police "For taking photos of sensitive buildings" thats a laugh sensitive buildings in Hull. Everyone is Paranoid and Brainwashed, its also pretty ironic considering the amount of CCTV cameras all over our Cities. I was taking some images on Brooklyn Bridge once, I was scanning the area through my viewfinder, when a woman came riding across on her bike, waving her arms and trying to cover her face, shouting at me and going crazy!! I thought what a silly woman, I had no intention of taking one of her I wanted some wide angle shots of Lower manhattan from the bridge, showing parts of the bridge also. And this was pre 9/11 !</p>

<p>Here's a trick that works for me (Bruce Gilden taught me this one). Use high ISO (I shoot film so it's Tri-X pushed to 1250), a wide lens (I use a 28) and a tiny aperture (f22). This give you enough depth of field that you can ignore focusing issues. Set your focus to manual.<br>

Why? Because now you can point the camera and click instantly without having to wait for the AF to lock in, and you can do hip shots when you don't want your subject to even see you raise the camera to your eye. If your camera has a removable finder (like my F3) you can even compose while holding the camera at waist level.</p>

<p>Here's an example:<br>

http://www.photo.net/photo/6554288<br>

Up close, 28mm lens, hip shot, f22, Tri-X at 1250 souped in Diafine.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=1706357">Jon Butterwick</a> , Dec 24, 2008; 09:11 a.m.</p>

 

<p>"This comes from the old days of rangefinder where accurate framing is a problem. Hence one has to shoot something and crop later hoping the subject's head will be inside the frame."<br /> whilst i agree vivek that you can use whatever lens you please this statement is missing some relevant info... like large dof, perspective etc.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>You did not read what I posted. Please re-read it again.<br>

Ray, Sure large DOF, etc, etc. That is what some used (may be many use). My point is that there is no strict dogma when it comes street photography. Don't tell me you can't use a fisheye or a macro lens and heavens forbid Infrared or Ultraviolet techniques. Street isn't confined to anything and isn't contricted by any definition.</p>

<p>John, that's a truly awesome photo.<br>

Tip my hat.</p>

<p>Interesting read here, but I noticed one thing. Not one mention of a model release. How many of these types of photos are being shown without the consent of the subjects?<br>

Just curious.</p>

<p>Vivek, I didn't say what you're implying I said, read it again. Your original statement is inaccurate- that wide angle lenses are used because of lack of precision in framing. That may be true in a very small percentage of cases, but otherwise, no. And feel free to prove me wrong, but long lenses, fisheye, infrared, etc, are for the most part novelties, in some cases tools of necessity, but otherwise rarely used effectively for the reasons I stated.</p>

<p>I dare say that long lenses, specifically, are used maybe 90% of the time either because closer physical access is not possible, or because the photographer is simply afraid of being physically close to the subject area.</p>

<p>How many family photos or photos of friends are shot from a distance with a long lens? ... Something to think about. ;)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>How many of these types of photos are being shown without the consent of the subjects?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I imagine most. Not needed for this kind of non-commercial use.</p>

<p>Ray,<br>

I think there is serious misunderstanding going on here. I said that as long as one can capture what fancies their attention around them then that is it. This wide angle/telephoto, personal interaction, don't disturb the environment, etc are very different and conflicting topics that can be argued in many different ways.<br>

If you consider certain things "novelties", well, that is your preference.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Ray . [Frequent poster] [Current POW Recipient] , Dec 24, 2008; 03:05 p.m.<br>

How many family photos or photos of friends are shot from a distance with a long lens? ... Something to think about. ;)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is why canine photo opportunities are so very important for normal or wide angle lenses! :-)</p>

 

<p>Great shot Edward! That is what street shooting is all about! Street shooting is one of my favorite things to do and NYC is truly the ultimate in the US for this IMO. I really envy the OP for his predicament! Many many great ideas and techniques here. I will second many of them and add a few of my thoughts and techniques...28mm and wider lenses can be a good choice to start out with as you can get right up to someone, pointing the camera slightly off to the side of your subject, and get them perfectly in the frame. I used to use this technique all the time and your subject can clearly see that you are shooting at something else and will quickly lose interest.</p>

<p>I still use a variation of this technique with a fast 50mm lens on a Leica M6 and with a little practice, you'll find that it is very easy to become "invisible" with no need to be sneaky and make people nervous at all. Do you ever really notice, or are you distracted by, someone pulling out their cellphone and fiddling with it while walking down the street? Same with a little camera. No one notices. Definitely you should preset your exposure and prefocus with the largest aperture you can, TriX 400 pushed a couple stops to 1600 can get you f/8 - f/11 outside in lowish light or shade and that should be enough DoF to keep you in focus. I used to use this method with a small, manual Nikon SLR and 50mm all the time, and while it was a small package, it doesn't compare with the Leica M in it's small, unobtrusive size and shape. People really just don't notice or pay attention to that little camera, but that certainly doesn't mean it's the only camera you can use. For digital, I use a Canon G10, which is also very small and quiet and can help keep you from being noticed, but isn't nearly as fast or as well suited for street shooting as the M6. Even then, I think the method, while certainly enhanced by the choice of camera, relies more on the photographer learning to be dicreet and unnoticed. Here's how I like to do street "portraits"....</p>

<p>One of my most common street shooting portrait "modes" is to walk down the street, keeping my photog's eye alert for anything up ahead that might look interesting. I wear darkish clothes and I keep my black camera hung over my right shoulder and behind my elbow, so unless someone is really paying attention to me amongst all the other people, no one notices that I have a camera. (Great big professional DLSRs with 24-70 2.8 AF-S VR etc... mounted are at a distinct disadvantage here - at least mount a small, normal to wide prime lens if a DLSR is what you're shooting with.) Then, when I see a potential shot ahead, without changin my pace I will casually bring my camera to hand at about waist level, check settings and approximate focus distance and avoid making any eye contact with my subject-to-be so's not to attract attention from them. When I am the right distance (about 6 to 10 feet), I will slow to a stop, raise my camera to my eye in a direction slightly away from my subject and then gently, smoothly swing in and get my shot.</p>

<p>This method isn't about being in-your-face ballsy (ala Bruce Gilden), and you really don't have to be "sneaky" at all to pull this off. Everything happens much too quickly and too discreetly for the subject to notice what's going on and put on a "camera face". I never try to be sudden or jerky when I do this. Always blend in to the scene. (This won't work when you and your subject are the only two people in the area, by the way.) Always be smooth and quick, but graceful and non-threatening. Lots to be said for body language in these moments. If the subject does happen to notice that they were just photographed, I always give a sincere smile and a "thank you" nod and almost always (or often, anyway) get a smile in return. Sometimes people are flattered that you wanted their photo and the opportunity forms for a few more frames in this moment. 1 second later, I have passed along on my way and it's like nothing ever happened.</p>

<div></div>