Why many Mpix camera is better for street genre

the users would simply blend in

Who wants to blend in? I get as many interesting shots by standing out from the crowd, plus I feel less like a sheep. :)

I use a dslr and a phone, depending on what I'm carrying at the time and what I'm trying to accomplish. Works for me. Other stuff works for others. Do it your way.

Smartphones might be OK-ish in some situations but.... see those bokeh artifacts on the borders (link below)? And this is the latest "Apple Phone" (tested by dpreview).

The colors are dull and "muddy" due to tiny pixels and bad color depth. The bolts and paint aren't reproduced in fine details.

Link

Nick I agree, eye recognition is not always perfect, but can be turned off. EOS 5DSR (paired with newest 35/1.4 L ii) is not bad either.

I would think that many practitioners of this genre are likely now using smartphones. I would think that the current generation (this years) phones (in either Android or IOS flavors) would do quite well and the users would simply blend in with the rest of the smartphone toting / using crowd.

There is still another problem - a smartphone delivers a cheaply-looking trash, enough for online representation, so users have to embellish their works by faux-keh, HDR, etc. etc, making their shots looking garish and even more cheaply-looking.

Future cameras will utilize artificial intellligence to recogniize women, kids, athletes performing tricks in the photos, etc. due to data bases. But sensor development will slow down in the nearestt future. As I noted in another post Lumix LX-3 sensor was very good though narrow DR - 13 years ago. Maybe there will be revolution and newer types of senser will appear.

Then, of course, there's all the lower end photography that thinks it's higher end photography because it's got the right size pixels and the right bokeh. I don't know what in the world we do about such a way of assessing photos.

Sweeping generalizations, such as "smartphone delivers a cheaply-looking trash" tell me that I'm dealing with more bias than discernment.

tell me that I'm dealing with more bias than discernment.

1. Color depth

2. Details

3. Gradations betweeb dark and white

4. Organic bokeh (expensive lenses with relatively small count of elements can do).

5. 3D pop, leaded glass, etc (Yannick Khong knows)

6. Dynamic range

Shall I continue?

If someone has ear for music he/she clearly detects the difference between 30-dollar speaker/128 Kbit music and 5000-dollar speaker/loseless (FLAC) music.

If someone has taste for tech side of photography of he/she is tetrachromat (trichromat)...... oh.... I gave the link of the sample.

I do say clearly obvious things.

Wow! Ruslan

Way to suck the spirit & soul out of street photography ....

a good street photographer is not going to be held back by a ‘lesser’ camera. Their photos will not be trash or lower end.

Why not both...

You will be less endangered, but you will never be another Robert Doisneau or Brassai.

Who? What did I miss?

1. Color depth

2. Details

3. Gradations betweeb dark and white

4. Organic bokeh (expensive lenses with relatively small count of elements can do).

5. 3D pop, leaded glass, etc (Yannick Khong knows)

6. Dynamic range

Shall I continue?

If someone has ear for music he/she clearly detects the difference between 30-dollar speaker/128 Kbit music and 5000-dollar speaker/loseless (FLAC) music.

 

If someone has taste for tech side of photography of he/she is tetrachromat (trichromat)...... oh.... I gave the link of the sample.

 

I do say clearly obvious things.

It guess it depends on what floats your boat. For some, photography is about gear ownership and debating technical aspects. For others it's about making photographs on the street.

For me...compelling "street" photographs are the result of a photographer's life experiences, education, curiosity, imagination, ability to see, ability to assess supporting context and light, recognizing the power of gesture, understanding when/how to hide information, being comfortable around and able to connect with (not necessarily physically) people, being empathic, and on and on.

Viewing a good street photograph stimulates my imagination, releasing/conjuring a supporting narrative, and ideally evoking an emotional response. What gear was used matters little to me.

It guess it depends on what floats your boat.

I guess it depends...

It’s the age old impressionist argument.

Conveyance of feeling/ mood rather than intricate detail.

Black & White vs. Color.

Emotional vs. Rational

Both have their place.

Even a mixture of the two.

Life is big enough for both.

I enjoy both.

Who? What did I miss?

Read book about masters of street photography, if you hate street photography (as you once noticed), don't give advice on it at all.

Real street photographer should not be afraid of shooting children or people, if you could not take a photo (being afraid of aggression) you would not be able to show anything but stone sculptures in the yard. Read about Brassai and how and where he could take his photos. This it what you missed in my previous post. ("Don't shoot children!!!" - This is utter bull sh*t! ) But one must be cautious with low sratum people (riff-raff, as Rodney Smith called them). Really, this is where one should be careful.

There is a genre close to street, a street genre portrait. I won't show it here because PN does not permit to delete posts, and I don't want it to hang here forever.

My initial post was that new tech can help break paradigms and purust's principles not to crop heavily. When all is done well and correctly, [uSER=10955656]@Ludmilla[/uSER] , nobody will know wth what gear and FL it was taken, everyone will be looking at the subject. And, BTW 24-35 mm paradigm is not so correct. Fred Herzog used longer FLs.

For me...compelling "street" photographs are the result of a photographer's life experiences, education, curiosity, imagination, ability to see, ability to assess supporting context and light, recognizing the power of gesture, understanding when/how to hide information, being comfortable around and able to connect with (not necessarily physically) people, being empathic, and on and on.

Agreed, who disputed this?

[uSER=10955656]@Ludmilla[/uSER] , what photobooks/albums on street photography do you have? Did you attend any workshops? Did you have any serious mentoring (online and offline)? Do you have publications? Your most beloved maitres of the genre? How did you fare in international contests (if participated)?

Why do you profess purist's approach?

Agreed, who disputed this?

You did, when you made it about pixels and bokeh.

“smartphone delivers a cheaply-looking trash” —Ruslan

This ignores all the street photos made with cell phones that have the qualities Brad mentions and aren’t cheap-looking trash.

How did you fare in international contests

Ahh, yes, international contests, the all-important arbiter of taste and validity in photography.

Why would this list of credentials you ask about matter to you? Why not just assess what’s said? Same with photos ... why give the brand name and pixel count weight over the content and character of the photo?

As for international contests, I came second in a Wet T-shirt competition in Benidorm

I demand pics as proof :eek:

Wet T-shirt competition in Benidorm

Hmmm... Google told me nothing but a single FB link with drunken party with wet t-shirts. This is not a serious photo contest.

I also base my opinion on what I see in books and I am not a novice. I was a finalist on Viewbug site. And I was published in National Geographic (though none of my works was street genre, and the link was given to Paul Ron here 13 months ago by his request).

"Megapixels may help" - this was my meassage. Most ppl here did not understand the message.

I love the quality whatever and wherever it be (sound, clothing and fabrics, steel finishing, etc). I hate second-rate consumer products, strong over and under exposing, watercolor & strong sharpening effect and digital artifacts, narrow DR).... The content and character come first, then go huge Mp count if the creator want to crop and exhibit his works in galleries.

Regarding bad tech quality of smarphones - I gave a link above which was made by wizards of tech team on viewbug at ISO 100 (!). The shot has serious issues, artifacts and may be named technical trash (compared to new APS-C cameras let alone FF ones).

Everyone may use what he/she wants!

So.....smartphones are enough for amateurs but they will not be enough in some places (Chicago in twilight, overcast) the streets are dark. Their quality is not always good for large prints. Some users are trying to boost and embellish smarphone-made shots and it is often seen online...

Yikes!

Let's stop debating. I think I am telling to a concrete wall.

Your street photos are rubbish so I don’t know why you feel qualified to talk about the genre in the first place.

 

=> In a kiosk

But I bet it has a lot of pixels!

Hmmm... Google told me nothing but a single FB link with drunken party with wet t-shirts. This is not a serious photo contest.

I also base my opinion on what I see in books and I am not a novice. I was a finalist on Viewbug site. And I was published in National Geographic (though none of my works was street genre, and the link was given to Paul Ron here 13 months ago by his request).

"Megapixels may help" - this was my meassage. Most ppl here did not understand the message.

 

I love the quality whatever and wherever it be (sound, clothing and fabrics, steel finishing, etc). I hate second-rate consumer products, strong over and under exposing, watercolor & strong sharpening effect and digital artifacts, narrow DR).... The content and character come first, then go huge Mp count if the creator want to crop and exhibit his works in galleries.

 

Regarding bad tech quality of smarphones - I gave a link above which was made by wizards of tech team on viewbug at ISO 100 (!). The shot has serious issues, artifacts and may be named technical trash (compared to new APS-C cameras let alone FF ones).

 

Everyone may use what he/she wants!

So.....smartphones are enough for amateurs but they will not be enough in some places (Chicago in twilight, overcast) the streets are dark. Their quality is not always good for large prints. Some users are trying to boost and embellish smarphone-made shots and it is often seen online...

 

 

Yikes!

Let's stop debating. I think I am telling to a concrete wall.

You are telling a concrete wall what, exactly? As far as I can see, this thread has no point at all, except perhaps to annoy Canon customers.

Most ppl here did not understand the message.

We do understand your message. And we DISAGREE with it.

Your message is quite clear, summed up in this ...

Smartphone delivers a cheaply-looking trash

Don’t underestimate yourself. You communicate clearly and are understood easily. You’ve said it in several different ways and in many different threads.

So, just to be ultra clear: “smartphone delivers a cheaply-looking trash” DOES NOT translate to “megapixels can help.”

if you mean the latter, say the latter and don’t troll us with the former.

many out of focus

Those are the ones you should be paying attention to ... ART! :p

When someone shows me pictures of their dog I'm forced to look at one decent photo and ten awful photos

Can I borrow your control group? That’s a better rate of return than mine gets! ;)

Although I don't care for street photography as a genre, I've been around long enough to recognize the equipment and technique required. While you have more ability to crop with a 40-50 MP camera, the speed of operation is paramount, especially focusing. A high frame rate can be useful too. I find that a short burst (3-6 frames) is more likely to capture the best expressions and positions in a dynamic situation than a single, supposedly well-timed frame. Not surprisingly, the first shot is often the best one, but you get something useable nearly every time you press the shutter.

Unless you are shooting landscapes and architecture, 24 MP is more than enough, and will hold up under considerable cropping. That said, I've shot a lot of 24MP landscapes too, many using a Sony A9.

Not surprisingly, the first shot is often the best one, but you get something useable nearly every time you press the shutter.

I actually much prefer NOT to get something usable every time I press the shutter. Reminds me I'm human and not a machine, makes the usable frames more special to me and I think, in the long run, makes my photos better. I speak only for myself, however.

the equipment and technique required

Do you have a link to the "Rulebook of Required Equipment and Technique for Street Photography" by anonymous photographer who doesn't care for the genre? I would consider it precious.