What is the point....?

<p>Ward, I didn't say (or imply) anything about your photos. I didn't want other people to get the impression that only "decisive moment" photos are welcome here, so I noted that that was <strong>not</strong> an "official" photo.net or forum definition.</p>

<p><em>On the other hand, there's a difference between "quiet and meditative" and "boring and unengaging."</em></p>

<p>Sorry, Mike. After my image was the example given for this whole discussion of boring and unengaging photographs, I took your statement personally.</p>

<p>The photo net policy is obviously that anyone can post anything, with all the usual exceptions. By photo net, I was speaking of the community, not the policy book.</p>

<p>Ward, don't take it personal. First of all I don't see that many "decisive" moments uploaded here, secondly the concept of "decisive moment" is more often than not misunderstood anyway. As far as definitions are concerned Mike has given you a workable one. Point is it's near impossible to give an exact definition of what street photography covers. Also people tend to forget that there is a D attached to the S&D forum which creates even more room for interpretation.</p>

<p>As for the rest, it's sheer impossible to upload a photo that isn't "boring and unengaging" to some.<br>

Just keep uploading your photo's.</p>

<p>We're all on a path. Some of us are at the beginning, some at the finish line, some are resting on the sidelines. We don't see the same way.</p>

<p>I think the point is...Why doesn't everyone just go out and take some photographs. Like Brouk Leze says, "We're all on a path." I would venture to insert "different" path. To me, it's interesting in itself to see what others do. And we learn from it all. I think David's question is valid--at a certain point, I would like to see his attempts at street.</p>

<p>Well this thread has tempted me to go out tomorrow and try some street. That in itself is a good thing. Or not. Depending on your view of the result. I promise to shoot lots of people doing nothing from behind and with meaningless expressions on their ass..<br>

I think David should do the same.</p>

<p>

 

<p>Ward, you're going to let one guy's opinion of one of your photos get under your hide that much? You've got an idea about what you're doing.... Let it go and keep shooting. </p>

 

</p>

<p>

 

<p>This is also the Documentary forum. Ever look at some of Walker Evans street scenes? People walking on the street- not much more to it than that. Not that I'm comparing anyone here to him, but I think this idea that people need to take a certain approach is kind of self-centered, especially when the judgement is hardly passed down from a Robert Frank, Friedlander, Nachtway, Salgado, or Joseph Koudelka. What these threads come out to is what individual people from different stages of development and talent think they want to show. The forum belongs to all of these people. We could always start a juried group, but if you want that it's on flickr.</p>

 

</p>

<p>"What is the point....?"</p>

<p>Dunno... Is it just something to do...? A way for some folk to deal with wife-free, weekend boredom...? A compulsive desire to engage in middle-aged, middle-class voyeurism...? The fantasy/hope of one's B&W sidewalk snaps being seen as "special", by someone, somewhere...? A bizarre wish to contribute to a genre that's been stuck in a run-of-the-mill, cliche-ridden rut since the Sixties...? Just a bit of a laugh...? Art...?</p>

<p>Dunno... Depends who's taking the pictures, I guess.</p>

<p>Decisive Moment??? What the heck is that? Decisive moment is a term used by HCB to describe a method of how he would arrive at shooting the shots he wanted to. It worked for him but that doesn't mean it will work for everyone. It's ok to be inspired by and to admire the work of others, but to try to attempt to create similar work or to look for such elements in the work of others is crazy. We all have exactly what we need in each of us to create the work that is important to us. This is paramount. Our work is our own and even if nobody else gets it, we know why we do this and we must find comfort in that. To try to use techniques that worked for others is pointless because our work then is no longer our own, it's not authentic. Even Robert Frank said once there is no Decisive moment, that he does all he can to make the moment happen.</p>

<p>There's <a href="../street-documentary-photography-forum/00T4ew">another current thread</a> in this forum, and if you don't see some stuff you like in there, stuff that you "get"-- there's just no talking to you.</p>

<p>It's about being on the street, man... Being on the edge... It's about walking the kerbstone of life, man... It's about getting the pictures that matter, man...</p>

<p>It's about old people. Walking. With hats. It's about pigeons. Flapping. With their wings. It's about people in cafes. Drinking coffee. Out of cups. It's about chicks. Being looked at. By other people. It's about dogs. Park benches. Shops. It's about random members of the public casually walking past each other. In the street. With eyes and faces and clothes. You just don't see that shit every day, man...</p>

<p>Most of all it's about greyscale conversions, man... And increasing the contrast a little bit. With a mouse.</p>

<p><em>"Most of all it's about greyscale conversions, man... And increasing the contrast a little bit. With a mouse"</em></p>

<p>You've fallen a bit behind it seems Paul. Most don't even know what a greyscale conversion or a mouse is anymore.</p>

<p>Well, I'm glad we sorted that out...</p>

<p>Pub.</p>

<p><quote>You need to read more..many of the greatest artists and photographers, didn't let other's opinion of their work stop them from their chosen path, but many were totally anxious, frustrated and obsessed about lack of either critical or monetary acceptance for their work, and sometimes from the over expectations of adulation when successful.<quote>Maybe I do. Maybe.<br>

Barry, Barry, Barry; you're being glib! Here's my suggestion: take your Leica - remove the lens first, beat yourself repeatedly in the head, while repeating: "My art is my art and no one can say what my art is."</p>

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>It's about being on the street, man... Being on the edge... It's about walking the kerbstone of life, man... It's about getting the pictures that matter, man...<br>

It's about old people. Walking. With hats. It's about pigeons. Flapping. With their wings. It's about people in cafes. Drinking coffee. Out of cups. It's about chicks. Being looked at. By other people. It's about dogs. Park benches. Shops. It's about random members of the public casually walking past each other. In the street. With eyes and faces and clothes. You just don't see that shit every day, man...<br>

Most of all it's about greyscale conversions, man... And increasing the contrast a little bit. With a mouse.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Paul, you gave me my laugh of the day.</p>

<p>Thanks.</p>

 

<p>One of the more engaging discussions I've come across on PN. Like many, I do not take David to be a troll...my approach to discussion boards in general is that if a post is not blatantly "trollish", take it at face value. Regardless, it has generated a worthwhile discussion.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >David: I would think you are drawn to street photography on some level or you would not be frustrated by "not getting it" or feeling that your attempts at it are not worth posting.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Some personal thoughts...which first have to be accompanied by the obligatory: "I am not an expert or brilliant practitioner of any photographic genre...this is just my humble contribution to David's post and the general discussion of it."</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I primarily take photographs, and view photographs, much more with my gut than with my head. At least that is my initial approach. As a Journalism undergrad many years ago, I recall one professor telling us to use the "Fire and Ice" approach to our writing. Write in a flame of fervor and feeling, but edit what you have written with cold objectivity. The same could be applied to photography.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Objectivity implies rules and following rules (or guidelines) is a double-edged sword. What are some of the rules or guidelines for street photography? Get close (no telephoto lenses). Immerse yourself and therefore the viewer) in the immediacy of the moment. Be nice, and smile, but be fearless. Blend in...feel that you belong there, taking photographs. Capture from the front, not the back Just get out there and do it, do it, do it. Like basic rules of composition, important to know and understand. But like all rules, they can, on occasion, be effectively broken.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >But the "rules" don't help you "get" street photography. Do opinions help? Meaning the opinions of those who have come to be regarded as highly knowledgeable on the subject...whether that be John Szarkowski or Michael David Murphy? I think that is certainly a valid starting point...with the caveat that you keep an open mind, keep what makes sense, and put the rest in your back pocket, even that with which you disagree, to review at a later time.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Viewing street photography. Those whose work is admired. Why is it admired? Here I think it is important to ask "Is this photographer's photograph worth noting for its historical value, or its lasting value?" A highly subjective process, likely to lead to some heated discussion. Two examples, Winogrand and Ishimoto.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Winogrand's Untitled (woman with ice cream cone):</p>

<p > </p>

<p ><a href="http://www.mocp.org/collections/permanent/uploads/Winogrand1982_64_85.jpg">http://www.mocp.org/collections/permanent/uploads/Winogrand1982_64_85.jpg</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >Ishimoto's Chicago 1959/61 (blowing newspapers):</p>

<p > </p>

<p ><a href="http://www.stephendaitergallery.com/dynamic/images/detail/Yasuhiro_Ishimoto_Untitled_steps_of_The_Art_Institute_of_Chicago_1278_67.jpg">http://www.stephendaitergallery.com/dynamic/images/detail/Yasuhiro_Ishimoto_Untitled_steps_of_The_Art_Institute_of_Chicago_1278_67.jpg</a></p>

<p > </p>

<p >In brief, I find Winogrand's photo to be of historical value, Ishimoto's of lasting value. This is a highly subjective opinion, I know. It is also unfair (to those for whom Winogrand is sacrosanct) because I could probably choose different photos from each that would reverse the historical vs lasting determination. In the case of these particular photos, I think Winogrand's, if it was posted on PN today by an unknown photographer, would not excite much interest. I think Ishimoto's resonates in a way that stands the test of time. Winogrand's photo conforms to much of what is considered conventional wisdom regarding street photography. Ishimoto's photograph does not.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >What does this signify? (As if anyone is going to delve this deep into a post that has gone way beyond the length I'd originally intended...). Much and little. Much that is cliche, little that is new. In short, I believe it is important to understand the conventions, the respected authorities, and the bodies of work...but equally important to guard against being slavishly ensnared by them.</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I sometimes look upon street photography as a stage upon which some sort of drama is going to be performed. I don't know what that drama (or comedy) will be comprised of, but I assume that with people crossing that stage, something will occur. Sometimes it will be interesting, sometimes it won't be. In that regard, the first thing I look for is "the set". (This is not something I consciously decided to start doing..it is a realization I have come to when I analyze where, and how, I take street photographs. I do not claim that there is anything unique about this. A landscape photographer, after all, is also looking for "a set" to capture. No doubt someone, somewhere, has already said something similar.) The set is usually a street, a corner, or a vantage point, that I find interesting. It can also be a particular type of light that attracts me. There are times when, due to time constraints, I cannot hang around a particular "set" long enough to capture an interesting human element, or a human element at all. In those cases I end up with a shot of a street or building that some might argue is a "cityscape" and not "street photography". It would be a valid assessment. But the distinction does not matter to me because I am shooting for a feeling that I get from a particular area in a particular light. If interesting "actors" come into the set I have chosen, so much the better (sometimes...and sometimes the lack of a human element is more conducive to the feeling I'm trying to capture). This approach is a lot more static than the "walk around the streets and shoot interesting people and moments" method. (Though I have done that too.) But then, I do not set out to be, or think of myself as, a street photographer. Some of my shots fall into that category because I am very fond of photographing urban settings. I spend more time viewing street photography, and looking for examples of it that resonate, than trying to "be" a street photographer. Does that make sense? Perhaps not. Perhaps I'm just a poorly articulating windbag who happens to be an "accidental street photographer".</p>

<p > </p>

<p >Thanks for the thought provoking discussion. </p>

 

<p>"Barry, Barry, Barry; you're being glib! Here's my suggestion: take your Leica - remove the lens first, beat yourself repeatedly in the head, while repeating: "My art is my art and no one can say what my art is."<br>

Then I'd have to take it out of the glass collector's case. Prozac doesn't mar the finish. What do you drink that makes you so tough? :)</p>

 

<p>Anyone do the photo thing around here....</p><div></div>

<p>Such a lot of talk....is it because many confuse street photography with photo journalism? One does not have to record images of beauty but rather of interest...The unusual. Human interest recorded. An invitation to join and participate in whats going on. Its about being part of the activity, and at the ease of the subjects photographed.<br>

To do this discreetly and without changing peoples behaviour, yet still being close in, makes for one of the biggest challenges in candid photography. The greats of the past used many techniques. One was to walk quickly past a subject and as they are getting used to you being there, walk away to one side whilst turning and grabbing an image..... is a good one.<br>

And its not exclusively about people. Unusual scenes, architecture, streetscapes...all done to spontaneously create interesting images. Don't confuse them with beautiful ones....This is the point.</p>

<p>Loads of photos on this forum are as boring as hell..... too many Henri groupies...you know the film Leica B/W lost souls trying to find what bog Henri crapped in.</p>

<p>Then you have i want to be , never will be, a mory copy grainy plonker...... close up ,walk pass;, take a banal photo,....with a little black cam;, just in case they might get you... so you don't have to wet your knickers .</p>

<p>:)</p>

<p>Steve, a good piece you wrote, just a shame it will go largely unnoticed.</p>

<p><em>"...because I am shooting for a feeling that I get from a particular area in a particular light"</em></p>

<p>don't we all<em><br /> </em></p>

<p>I noticed Steve's post, and enjoyed it, as I've enjoyed a few others ! I'm very attracted to street photography, and have only tried it a couple of times so far. So reading posts from people who articulate any thing about the actual experience of street shooting is something I can dine on !!<br>

Street is hard. Period. I do think it would be a heck of a lot easier for me if I can go buy a klingon cloaking device and become invisible. To me that is more than half the obstacle, because to capture the 'magic-split-second', it seems you pretty much have to have the camera at least up in your face, or real close to it, almost the whole time you're out there shooting. And that scares people away.<br>

I have really enjoyed this thread, there are some very smart and articulate people on this forum, and reading this thread has helped to crystalize my ideas about street photography a little more. I'm grateful for that, and hope this thread lasts longer. :-)</p>

 

<p>Tom -- thanks. I didn't entirely speak into the void if you and floyd noticed. And like floyd, this thread has helped crystalize some of my thoughts on street photography, and photography in general. What more can be asked from a discussion than to be stimulated by the thoughts of others, and better understand one's own approach? Definitely invigorated me, and makes me want to be a more active participant in these forums.</p>

<p>that is always a good thing. Given the most recent threads more people have picked up on that.</p>