Joel Meyerowitz: phones killed the sexiness of the street

Link - Photography legend Joel Meyerowitz: phones killed the sexiness of the street

I have no pony in this race, but thought people here might be interested.

thought people here might be intersested.

Yup! Thanks.

This is ironic in spades:

"Of his street images, my favourite depicts a Frenchman who has fallen outside a Paris Métro station one day in 1967... Everybody is looking at the fallen man, the chic young woman descending the station steps, the delivery guy pushing boxes on a trolley, a cyclist swivelling to get a better look at a stranger’s misfortune. A worker in overalls even steps over the prone man, carrying a hammer that takes on sinister import. “Those [censored by me],” laughs Meyerowitz. “Not one of them helps him up.”

Did Meyerowitz help? Maybe after he got his photo.

It is interesting, I am actually reading his book now. He recommends to get one zoom and stick with it, his choice Nikon 28-300.

Annie Leibovitz recommending to chose one prime for starters, Steve McCurry using primes , guess everybody has own preferences.

Oh please, more longing for the good old days and sense-deadening nostalgia. If he can’t find excitement and connections to shoot on the street anymore, then it’s a little easy and convenient to blame cell phones. Just try harder, dammit, and spare me your excuses. Sounds like Mr. M is just a little old and jaded. The world is changing. Shoot something new and stop looking for the same old thing.

Reminds me of some of my fellow sexagenarians who claim they’re invisible to younger people who have supposedly taken over San Francisco. They still can’t get over the fact that heads no longer turn as they walk down the street, which they got very used to in the eighties. Start relating in a different way and you’ll stop feeling invisible.

And to Joel, look at the street for what it is instead of for what it was and figure out something compelling to say with your camera about it. It’s still very much alive. Or, retire to the beach. Your call.

This is just another sensational article from the cash strapped, eu loving, clinton worshipping guardian. Read the following and work out how the sub came up with the title of the article

Today, what entranced Joel Meyerowitz about the street is all but dead. “Nobody’s looking at each other. Everybody’s glued to their phones.” But street photography still exists? “It’s thriving but not in the way I used to do it. The best street photographers now show humans dwarfed by ad billboards. The street has lost its savour.”

The best street photographers now show humans dwarfed by ad billboards. The street has lost its savour.

I’d say something more along the lines of, The laziest so-called street photographers show humans dwarfed by billboards. I’d also say, once is ok and enough. Dozens of these get old quickly. The street hasn’t lost its savour, though.

A better example than easy-to-grab billboard juxtaposition photos would have been pics of people using their cell phones. :)

I thought that the idea of street photography was to document life on the streets. And try to get a well composed and interesting picture. I am drawn to the street photography of great photographers of the past just because they did preserve images of the past. While I did a lot of street photography in the 60s and 70s, today I confine myself mostly to what could be called bar and coffee shop photography. More difficult to be discreet when stationary compared with moving about on the street.

As already noted above by others, the behavior and dress of people is different. Proportionally a lot more old people on the street than in the 50s and 60s. And men didn’t cover their ears like women when wearing a knitted stocking caps. It’s changes that makes street photography interesting.

Oh please, more longing for the good old days and sense-deadening nostalgia. If he can’t find excitement and connections to shoot on the street anymore, then it’s a little easy and convenient to blame cell phones. Just try harder, dammit, and spare me your excuses. Sounds like Mr. M is just a little old and jaded. The world is changing. Shoot something new and stop looking for the same old thing.

 

Reminds me of some of my fellow sexagenarians who claim they’re invisible to younger people who have supposedly taken over San Francisco. They still can’t get over the fact that heads no longer turn as they walk down the street, which they got very used to in the eighties. Start relating in a different way and you’ll stop feeling invisible.

 

And to Joel, look at the street for what it is instead of for what it was and figure out something compelling to say with your camera about it. It’s still very much alive. Or, retire to the beach. Your call.

I've been mulling over this thread for a day, thinking about what Meyerowitz said and relating that to my personal observations. And was ready to post a response, along the line of him having a good whine and making sad excuses. But damn, after reading Fred's post, there's not a thing I can add.

It's rare to find (mostly) young people on the street who don't have their faces attached to their phones. It's a bit of a challenge to keep it out of street scenes.

It's definitely more pervasive with phones today, but there used to be a phenomenon called reading the newspaper that had people in public burying their heads. New York City subways at rush hour and a whole bunch of park benches were veritable feasts of heads buried in All The News That Was Fit to Print. :)

By the way, skateboarders, bicyclists, and people playing sports on the street can be counted on not to have their faces attached to phones, with exceptions of course. And I still do find a lot of everyday people on the streets not using their phones. Actually, I think today's cars might be harder to work with than cell phones in people's hands. I look at older street photos and the design and variability of cars back then gave street photos something extra which I don't think today's cars do. Even in the future, I doubt we'll look back at today's everyday cars and feel the same way we do about cars of the 40s, 50s and 60s.

But, again, I think a good photographer will work with what she's got and figure out a compelling story to tell . . .

So here's a shot I grabbed through the windshield while driving in Meyerowitz's NYC. There's plenty going on in the street. By the way it's with a cell phone. So what? But the participants are not using cell phones. There's plenty going on in the street if you look. I don't even find street shooting comfortable as I'm nervous as hell. I always think I'm intruding. Here're some more.

Street

Seems odd that Meyerowitz can't figure out what happened to the world that "made" him--or seemingly adapt to the one around him now.

But then there's always teaching...

Joel Meyerowitz's masterclass - Masters Of Photography

"Those were the days which will never end"

But the world moves on for ever and a day.

I somewhat enjoy Meyerowitz talking about other photographer's work; he's very enthusiastic about that. As an image maker, at least on the street, I find him not that compelling. Especially when it comes to explaining your photographs or captioning/titling them to tell the viewer what it's about- that's usually bush league stuff. I don't want to know what was happening with the guy down on the street with people all around; if the photo has any power at all it's for the viewer to imagine. Explaining the context kills it.

And dude, there are very few cell phones on skid row and in much of downtown LA as just one example. No excuses.

Fred, if you read the article, it looks like he has gone or "retired" to the country. : )

Fred, if you read the article, it looks like he has gone or "retired" to the country. : )

Ray, I did read the article. My suggestion that he retire to the country was a tongue-in-cheek acknowledgment that he already done that.

Yes, the world has changed. Crap like that happens when you are not looking. Phonies with their brains in their hands wander zombie-like everywhere--thumbs twitching.

Yet there is always something to see. Street photography does not necessarily need a person in an image--it is about the fabric and interaction of people with it. We often leave compelling artifacts and insignia's behind us in our wake. If one cannot find anything of merit, then regardless of the means to capture the image (not really relevant, is it?) it's time to move on and try something different.

Having moved past the 60 mark, I find less and less tolerance for the stupid and pretentious. Silly me, I thought that Meyerowitz had died or run out of gas years ago. Now he just seems bitter and sad. Oh well.

Phonies with their brains in their hands wander zombie-like everywhere--thumbs twitching.

Meyerowitz seems bitter and sad, you say? :rolleyes:

Meyorowitz was presumably pressed to say something as there is his new photo book to promote. So he grumbled a bit, but only a little. It is in one paragraph out of many. Everyone feels some nostalgia for past time (unless they were a nightmare for them), so I don't take what he says as really profound or reflecting badly on him. The majority of the article is him talking about his past shots and life. Perfectly reasonable given his new book. It's the kind of comment that many of us might have said, or might say when we reach 80, and it is true (faces buried in phones). This is undoubtedly a change from 20 years ago, no question: whether it is a good or bad thing is another issue. Excessive parsing of a simple response in this kind of interview is usually not warranted.

He certainly did not sound bitter and sad to me. In fact he seems to be having a great life.

Mobile phones have had a dramatic impact on how people interact with the world and with each other. There's no doubt about that. And I think it is completely OK to miss the things that you enjoyed from your past that are no longer here, - as long as that doesn't get in the way of enjoying what is here now.

I'm just old enough to know that tomorrow I'll miss what I've got now and I'm trying to live accordingly. At the same time, tomorrow will bring its own pleasures.

What Tom just said.

I read the article and I read the posts....and I'm not sure if we're reading the same article. Author seems to be making a critical point about how society has changed along with urban interactions....smartphones being either a symptom or cause....that's for a different forum. I really don't see anything here about how street / urban photography has changed in terms of gear.

There's street photography that forces itself to be artsy, but ends up being grainy, monochrome, boring, poorly composed and self important when it's barely more than nothing, and then there's street photography that tries to be a documentary with neutral intentions. The former needs to die, and the later we don't have enough of.

I really don't see anything here about how street / urban photography has changed in terms of gear.

He didn't say, and I didn't either, that he thinks street photography has changed due to gear. He said street photography has changed because cell phone use on the street causes a kind of human interaction he thinks is different enough from past eras that the author claims renders the street "all but dead" photographically.

The fact is, either Joel or the author is just plain wrong, if you read the words below. People DO still look at each other. Phones have changed things but they haven't caused people never to look at each other. And he's wrong that the street "has lost its savour." It still has plenty of savour. It's in some ways very different than it used to be and in some ways very much the same.

From the article:

The image is an absorbing network of gazes and furtive glances. “In the 60s and 70s you could look at my street photographs and trace lines from the eyes of people connecting with other people’s eyes, setting up these force fields. ”

 

Today, what entranced Joel Meyerowitz about the street is all but dead. “Nobody’s looking at each other. Everybody’s glued to their phones.” But street photography still exists? “It’s thriving but not in the way I used to do it. The best street photographers now show humans dwarfed by ad billboards. The street has lost its savour.”