"Street" photography.

<p >I’ve seen some remarkable “street” photography on this website (if that’s the right name for it). And I have some questions regarding the subject:</p>

<p >a. Given that it is usually preferable for the photographer to go unnoticed, how do you remain inconspicuous while taking pictures of others in public?</p>

<p >b. What is the best equipment for doing this kind of photography, granted that you don’t want to produce second rate photos (i.e. no point and shoot cams).</p>

<p >c. How do you focus for on the spot events when you can hardly afford to aim the camera at your subjects.</p>

<p >d. I highly esteem this kind of work as a pertinent commentary on human life: however, there seems to be a thin line between this kind of work and a sense of voyeurism, of inappropriate intrusion into other people’s lives: how can the two be distinguished?</p>

<p>The best equipment for street photography is big balls.</p>

<p>Can I say that?</p>

<p>A rangefinder with a wide angle lens is great. Like a 28mm or so. Fast to focus, quite shutter, unobtrusive, easy to see "around" the camera. And of course, they take great pictures. I find most people in public don't pay much attention to what you are doing with the camera. Public does mean public, you know? Stand around pointing your camera here and there - then press the shutter when you have what you want. Most people don't know when you pres the shutter. I also take hip shots without looking. Just focus on infinity, set the right exposure and shoot. Surprising what shows up on film.</p>

<p>Andrew....what's wrong with p/s cameras...? Unless you want everything you shoot to potentially a print larger than, say, 11x14.......then what can't you do with a G11, or an SX10IS?</p>

<p>Both of these have an articulated viewing screen which is of considerable help in shooting candids...Regards, Robert.</p><div></div>

<p>If you're like me and don't have big balls, just be up-front and ask people if you can photograph them. Explain what you're doing and why you're doing it. Present a card. If your motives are honest and virtuous, I think there are many people who will let you snap away. Taking this approach, the hard part is getting people not to pose. I tend to take LOTS of shots of any given person -- enough to get them past the posing stage, and then into the "ignoring me" stage, but not so many as to wander into the "please go away / you're annoying me" stage.</p>

<p>I agree with Bob. There's nothing wrong with a compact camera. I'm not willing to call a G11 a P&S, any more than I'm willing to call my 40D or 5D a P&S. Any of these cameras will work in full manual or full auto modes. The only substantive differences are the formats and the viewfinders.</p>

<p>Ah Sarah.....a big advantage you have is that you are an attractive <em>woman</em>. Men are much more suspect in such situations and it is often feared that the motives of men are ah....less pure....than those of women.....regards, Bob...</p><div></div>

<p>I just act like I belong there doing what I'm doing...because, actually I do belong there doing what I'm doing. And you know what...99% of the people out there buy into it. Admittedly, it took me a long time to get to that point, but once I did, the amount of times someone says something to me about it has reduced drastically. I've even overheard conversations where people wondered what newspaper or magazine I was working for. Believe me.....it is none....altho I wouldn't mind being able to do that at all.</p>

<p>I use any camera that I choose to take out that day, and I have everything from P&S film cams to 2 1/4 TLRs and P&S digitals to DSLRs</p>

<p>I usually zone focus.....i pick the focus distance, give a f-stop that covers a few feet before and past that point, and I put myself there or wait for the subject to get there. I also am ready at a moments notice to adjust the focussing manually at any time I need to.</p>

<p>Your 4th question doesn't even enter into my equation of street shooting.</p>

<p>Leo sez the best equipment for street photography is big balls. I guess that just about rules out any woman photographers! Well I guess that's not true. I'm sure a few "she-males" have done some street photography.</p>

Street photography takes quick thinking and timing . It's like you are trying to prove a point by what you see out there on the streets. it involves your mind, your skills, your way of thinking and your camera. It could be humurous, it could be sarcastic, sad, tragic, or it could have have a deeper meaning, it all depends...

 

Street photography is not always about the asthetics, or whether a picture is perfectly exposed, cropped or photoshopped. Rather, it is the 'meaning' behind the picture that is most important. The best equipment I would say is a camera with a very quiet shutter and a 50mm lens. Leicas are great at this but how many people can afford a Leica !

 

In my opinion, If you have to resort to long telephoto lenses, or zooms then you are cheating, that is not street photography, although a short zoom is acceptable. How to remain inconspicuous is up to you, that's why they call it street photography. There are usually no rules, other than what I stated before. Street photography is not for everybody...

<p>So I guess the International Association of Street Photographers has ruled that using a telephoto lens in street photography is "cheating". Hmmmmm.</p>

<p>I could never do what <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=IRBARi09je8&feature=related">this guy does</a>, or would want to, but it seems to produce the kind of raw "authenticity" people value in street photographs. I don't. I don't like their predatory vibe. But yeah, if you want to get in people's faces with a wide angle lens, for that ambushed look, attitude is more important than any camera.</p>

<p>It doesn't necessarily take big balls, courage or a surreptitious approach. Occasionally some photographers will mention their physical appearance or size, but I'm not sure that's a factor either. I'm not convinced that a big guy with a camera is getting by with being physically intimidating any more than a good looking petite gal with a camera is getting by on looks alone.</p>

<p>One of the first candid photographers I met as a kid was an older guy who'd been brain damaged by illness or injury. At the time I was living in an odd little place with fewer than 2,000 full time residents but a summer tourist population of around 10,000. He was harmless, friendly, kinda confused and mostly walked around with an old box camera around his neck mooching cigarettes and after striking up an acquaintance he'd say "Take er pitcher?" Everyone said "Sure," even the tourists. I don't know if he even had film in his camera. If he did, he may have been a true artist and nobody ever knew it.</p>

<p>I don't know what the secret sauce is. For me it's enjoying the crowd, empathy, humor and luck. I don't usually try to be sneaky about it. I just see something that appeals to me, take a snapshot and hope it turns out in focus and reasonably well exposed. Most of my snapshots are crap, but one or two keepers out of 100 is okay by me.</p>

<p>As for equipment, I haven't noticed any significant differences in how people respond to me whether I'm using a bulky, loud D2H or F3HP with MD-4 motor drive, little Olympus 35 RC or a TLR. If anything, funky older cameras like TLRs and folders make people laugh. Suits me. I'm not looking for the unguarded moment or to capture the natives undisturbed in their natural environment. I'm often more interested in how they respond to a candid photograph.</p>

<p>I've been taking snapshots in the street for 30 years and can't recall anyone getting upset, or even questioning what I am doing. That includes big cities and small towns too. I have a feeling that those who haven't done it IMAGINE that people will be upset, but they aren't. As someone above said, you belong there right along with everyone else.<br>

No, I wouldn't shove a wide angle lens in anyone's face. A wide lens is easier to zone focus, and it grabs a nice BIG slice of life. The tele lens produces pictures that look like a tele lens - they really lack intimacy IMO. Obviously, everyone should use whatever they like. I'm just expressing personal preference. For my eye a wide view looks sharper than a tele view.<br>

Also, I think you should LOOK like you are in the business of taking pictures. Don't skulk, don't hide behind anything, don't shrink.</p>

 

I second what Thomas Sullivan said about being comfortable with what you're doing. I've used Leica rangefinders, medium-format SLRs, and digital DSLRS, and people's reactions are generally same: most don't pay any attention to what I'm doing, and the ones who do are usually just curious.<P>

 

<i>d. I highly esteem this kind of work as a pertinent commentary on human life: however, there seems to be a thin line between this kind of work and a sense of voyeurism, of inappropriate intrusion into other people’s lives: how can the two be distinguished?</i><P>

 

How you choose to portray your subjects will determine whether your work is inappropriate or not. The voyeuristic element will always be there.

<p>I agree with many of those who have posted higher up on the thread - the secret is just to take pictures. If you are confident and comfortable doing that, people leave you alone most of the time.</p>

<p>However, I have been approached numerous times by people who were interested in the fact that I was taking pictures on the street. Some were just curious, some want to pose and some were worried that I had taken their picture. I will happily show them what I have been taking on the screen - if they like something, I will e-mail them a .jpg, if they are concerned that they are in the frame I will delete the picture on the spot. I have never had anyone react with aggression - people taking pictures are just part of the wallpaper today.</p>

<p>Equipment? Yes, you need a camera. Aside from that, well, you need a camera you are comfortable with, be it a 2 kilogram full frame monster, a traditional leica range finder, consumer dsl or p&s... Lens choice is, in my opinion, purely personal. Different photographers see the world differently and react differently.</p>

<p>The intimacy of a wide angle lens on a leica is what made street photography a unique genre IMO, but that was undoubtedly due, in part, to the fact that at one time there would have been no other way to capture street action because of slow film speeds.</p>

<p>Technology has advanced though and today you can do a lot with a very long telephoto on the street (think man standing down a tank in Tiananmen Square). For me, the problem with a very long lens is seeing a situation far enough in advance to get a picture. But, for street portraits, a good 100mm prime lens is fabulous.</p>

<p>It is a very old cliché, but, photographers make pictures, cameras just record them. To add another cliché to the mix, cameras are just tools - a photographer will be able to get a shot with almost any sort of camera. Equipment choice is about personal choice (unless you are a working pro, of course). Having said that, a 'war photographer' I am vaguely acquainted with carries Olympus E-420s much of the time ('entry level' 4/3s camera most technophiles sneer at), his opinion is that the lack of image stabilisation gives sharper, more detailed images than almost any other digital camera he has used. His photo bag contains Leicas, Hasselblads, Nikons and entry level dslrs from Olympus. They are all just tools.</p>

<p>Do I have a point? Yep. Just go out and take pictures.</p>

<p>If you are not comfortable jamming your camera into someone's face first time out, start by taking streetscapes, do that for a while and your eye will start to sharpen and pretty soon you will relax and start to have fun... sooner than you think, your own 'style' will start to emerge and you wont worry any more.</p>

<p>Unless you are trying to feed a family with your camera, it <em>is </em>supposed to be fun after all...</p>

<p> </p>

<p>As an amateur of the genre I can say that as you see here there are many approaches. You can start by feeling comfortable, and if not use those baseball big balls. You can photograph people disregarding their post reaction or ask permission beforehand. You can use a very small camera and believe no one is aware, or use a big camera and pretend you are not using it at all, just carring it. You can put your camera aside and pick the heavy instruments of the workers at the asphalt. You can select specific spots and ambush the victyms or walk around. There is out there even a great Spanish young street photographer who many times points the camera to the subject untill she/he is aware and then captures the reaction, which many times is just great.<br>

You can do whatever you like, the street is free, although many times you can not end with the image you wanted . For myself I would choose having my mental toolbox full of all methods and use each instrument according to the situation.</p>

<p>FWIW...I'm 5'7" and fluctuate between 130-140lbs , Asian male. Sure, if something ugly comes up and I can't talk/reason my way out of it, I can run faster than bugs bunny...But 99% of the time, the scariest part is in the photographer's own imagination. And I usually don't talk to my subjects.</p>

<p> </p>

I like hanging around in an area. Blending in by being in plain sight; and projecting that you belong as Tom mentioned up

above. That's done by being open when you shoot, rather than sneaking around, doing hipshots, etc. The later invites

suspicion and trouble. People respond to your attitude. Honesty and openness = respect and no problems. Even shooting

in sketchy areas where other people tell me to keep my camera hidden.

 

Many times I engage strangers in conversation and ultimately portraits. I also carry around a bunch of 4x6 prints to give back

to people if expect to see them again. Am now in the process of making very inexpensive handmade photobooks that I

give to people in exchange for portraits - it's an ice breaker that opens doors and promotes trust.

 

Compared to the above, camera type is sooo unimportant. Whatever you have works fine.

<p>The matter about people's reaction to being photographed in the streets <em><strong>is mainly in our own head</strong></em>. No issue of balls/no balls.<br /> <br /> Most of the times people <em>don't care</em>.<br /> <br /> I photograph on streets, with a large Nikon F5 (<em>just because I am very comfortable with it</em>), sometimes with a tiny 50mm, sometimes with a huge 28-70 f2.8 zoom. Until now nobody complained. Once a security guard said he could not be photographed - but I was not photographing him and said so. No further issue.<br /> <br /> Photographing - with a masked tiny Leica or with a huge medium format - just means <em>photographing</em>. There is no point about it. People see it. There's hardly a way to <em>pretend </em>to be doing something different.<br /> <br /> I believe it's just a matter of avoiding that our own <em>inhibitions </em>impede our capability to <em>see</em>, <em>compose </em>and <em>press the shutter</em>.<br /> <br /> <em>Politeness </em>is in most cases the way out of negative reactions.<br /> <br /> On a renown video website there is a documentary on Garry Winogrand taking pictures on the street. He just kept his camera up and photographed, photographed, photographed. At an incredible <em><strong>speed</strong></em>.<br /> <br /> I think that's just it.<br /> <br /> I don't quite understand question © and in relation to question (d) of course there could be some kind of intrusion, but it is perceived as such less often than we think.</p>

I think you have to be close to get a good street photograph. Has anyone noticed how dogs are really interested in other dogs? People are like that too. People are interested in people above all, so if it's a boring photograph of people you've taken, maybe they're too far away. Thing is I'm too shy to approach strangers to take their picture. Should I "grow some balls" or is it "all in my head"?

<p><strong>Leo Papandreou</strong></p>

<p>just practice.<br /> You are not the first one to feel like this. <strong>:-)</strong></p>

<p>Wow! Lots of insightful comments! Some going well beyond street photography, and some going beyond photography itself and touching on human life in general. Very interesting and educational. Thanks everyone!</p>

>>> Some going well beyond street photography, and some going beyond photography itself and touching on human life in

general.

 

For me, shooting on the street and touching on human life are inseparable. It's much more than merely taking photos of

people walking down the sidewalk That's what keeps me doing it.

<p>Hi, Andrew! Joel Meyerowitz, one of the best, answers many of your original questions in <a href=" video</a>. Hope it's useful--best of luck.</p>