Jump to content

Street Shoting With Leica


Recommended Posts

I've just published two articles on street phtography on my site.

 

<p>

 

The first piece covers street shooting tools and techniques (Leica)and the second is the beginnings of a portfolio shoot at a country fair's Midway.

 

<p>

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/street.htm

 

<p>

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/midway.htm

 

<p>

 

Equipment used includes M6 with Tri-Elmar and 35mm f/1.4 Summilux ASPH, and also the remarkable new Voigtlander 12mm f/5.6 Heliar.

 

<p>

 

Finally, there is a new brief review of the M Lens Carrier about half way down the page at...

 

<p>

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/leica_m6.htm

 

<p>

 

Michael Reichmann

www.luminous-landscape.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack,

 

<p>

 

Thanks.

 

<p>

 

Yes, he was not amused. As I wrote on my "The Midway"

commentary, "... as I took my second or third frame in quick

succession, concentrating on the fellow with the tiger on his back,

one of these players looked over at me with a piercing gaze. It was

the last frame I took. I smiled, turned, and walked away."

 

<p>

 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me that the risks and legal stuff involved in this day and

age delegate this type of photography only to those folks who have a

real strong desire for street shooting. I must be way too timid

and/or not that much of a people person, as I avoid taking photos of

people I don't know and in places I was not invited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to go shooting at a local fair in south Georgia, only one time

did one of the carnys give me a stern warning about not taking his

photo, I did any way as he turned to walk away but alas it was more

of a revenge shot than one of usable quality. My choice of weapon at

the time was an R4s and 50 Summicron. One of these days I'll get

around to putting them up on some webpages....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael,<br>

Interesting and informative article and solid photos. It's

interesting to read the prespectives of other people who actually

<I>do</I> street/candid photography.<P>

Andrew,<br>

I think the risks of street photography are profoundly overstated on

the web. The only "problems" that I've encountered when actually

shooting were a few people who asked that I not take their photos (I

honored their request even though it was legal for me to photograph

them). I've had some people ask me about what I was doing. I've had

a lot of people ask me to take their photo. I'm not saying it's an

entirely risk-free activity, but neither is crossing the street.<P>

I've been subjected to more insults, accusations, and snide

insinuations from a few (very vocal) self-righteous cyber-critics than

I have in the real world shooting thousands of people over hundreds of

hours.<P>

Of course, you're not under any obligation to do the kind of

photography you're not comfortable with, but please don't base your

views of street photography solely on what you hear on the internet

(especially since many of the people doing the most talking have

actually <I>done</I> very little of what they're talking about).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I second Mike's comments, above, and would add that I have had some

very nice experiences while street shooting. Some people are eager to

have their photos taken, while some others seem to be indifferent, and

only once in a great while does anyone seem miffed, but never enough

to bother me. I've even had moments of true collaboration in which

the subject responded to the camera with something wonderful. Most

recently it was a young woman in Hyde Park (London) with an

interesting tee shirt...As we passed each other, I asked to take a

picture, she kept walking but spun around and struck a funny pose as I

spun around and shot. The whole thing took two seconds (really!) but

was a nice moment (and a nice shot -- I've got to get a scanner and

post it!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Reichmann is actually an old time news and street photog!

Cool!!

 

<p>

 

If you did not read that far, Michael hits the Leica mystique thing

on the head-very credible, coming from someone whose credentials are

revealed, by his pictures, to be impeccable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the issue of concerns about street shooting, I'll simply add that

from the mid-60's to the late 70's I made my living as a documentary

photographer. I probably exposed some 7-10,000 rolls of film during

that time, much of it at freedom marches, anti-war demonstations and

the like, and on the gritty streets of major cities.

 

<p>

 

In all that time and over all those frames I never once was

physically threatened or felt in danger. Sure, occasionally someone

would say "F... off, don't take my picture...", but that's it.

 

<p>

 

These days I primarily work as a landscape and nature photographer. I

feel much more threatened by bears, scorpions and snakes when out in

the wild than I ever did by my fellow human beings in cities. :-)

 

<p>

 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last night on Egg: The Art Show on PBS, there was an interesting film

on the working methods of 4 photographers, including the NYC street

photographer Bruce Gilden. The filmmaker followed him as he snapped on

NYC streets. He is incredibly confrontational, suddenly sticking his

camera in the face of someone approaching and clicking, usually with a

wideangle lens and flash. Literally "in your face." The reactions of

his subjects range from bemusement to shock, and he seems to get away

with it by keeping up a good-natured chatter while he's at it. You can

see a bit at the pbs.org website.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seems to be a distrust of the telephoto approach to street

photography. Personally I find the 75/80/90mm to be very useful for

candid portraits "in the street". They will tend to be head and

shoulders, or waist up type of shots but they seem to be perfectly

valid as shots and do not involve quite the "in your face" style that

using a 35mm lens entails. Also, I thought Michael's comment that

carrying two bodies with different lenses was a good idea contrasted

with one of the purported advantages of Ms in that they do not look

big and "professional" as he states earlier. Anyone with two cameras

around their neck is very noticeable.

 

<p>

 

I think that you can take good street shots with any camera actually,

there is a fine line betweeen taking the shot "in stealth" and taking

it "in full view". The M is great for taking the shot when the

subject is unaware of it (small and quiet)- a real candid shot, but I

am not convinced that when taking a shot in full view "with the

subject's approval" (which seems to be the macho street photog's

method) it makes much difference whether you have an M or and R or a

Nikon as the tool.

 

<p>

 

This is no dig at Michael - I admire his website and photos. I do take

street shots, but mine are less likely to be taken with the 35mm or

wider lens (unless in a large crowd) - the 50 and 80/90 are more

useful to me here. I happen to think that Americans are very sensitive

to photography and issues of invasion of "personal space". My

experience is that Europeans (particularly in the Mediterranean) are

less worried about photographers.

Robin Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only time I've been taken to task is when I was shooting kids in

a playground. In retrospect it was a very bad idea, and I understand

the concerns of the father who confronted me. I was able to defuse

the situation by going back the next day armed with a camera club

membership card, and a small portfolio of the essay I was working

on. I found him, and we arrived at a mutual understanding - he of

the fact that I was "legit", and I of his concerns.

 

<p>

 

I found out that if you're in a dodgy situation, having evidence of

legitimacy (membership in a photographically-related organization)

and 4x6 samples of some good work tucked into your camera bag goes a

long way in public relations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being somewhat anal and very much a control freak in most of the

aspects of my life, street shooting offers me a release from the well

planned task. I use a zone focused, wide-angle and a single M

body "palmed" and shot mostly blind. After all of the cookie cutter

wedding and "grip and grin" shots, street shooting has no

quantifiable probability of success. When a shot works, this makes

it that much more satisfying. I do have many older blocks of work

from when I used a telephoto and voyeuristically stood out of the

action looking in, but nothing is as "alive" as a shot where every

thing is happening from inches of the lens. You are immersed in

life, not passively observing it.

 

<p>

 

To me the best thing of working this way is that it is not until the

film is developed that you see what you captured. I spend more time

looking at prints from street shooting sessions shot this way than

many other types of photography. Unlike the finely tweaked

compositions of considered photography, there are often many

surprises on the film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Al

 

<p>

 

I guess I object to the word "voyeuristic". It implies somehow this is

bad or poor. I prefer the word "candid". After all people react

totally differently whether they think they are being observed or not.

Sometimes you might feel that the photographer should be involved

with the subject, sometimes not. You look to me to be doing the same

thing when you take shots when the camera is effectively concealed.

There is little difference in philosophy. Your shots will be from a

lower angle and with a wider lens, compared to say a shot taken with a

50 or 90mm and so have a different look - but the principle is the

same.

Robin Smith
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robin,

 

<p>

 

No offense was intended. The look (to me) is not bad or poor...just

different. The wide angle shots seem to have more layers of things,

near, mid and long range, which to me add context to the main candid

subject. having done both types of shooting, I would choose to use

the wide-angle lens. There are however times when I still use the

long lens, stand back technique, but the resulting shots look kind of

sterile to me.

 

<p>

 

I guess that rather than voyeuristic, I should have used detached.

Even when trying to remain unnoticed, stepping into the center of a

scene with a wide-angle takes a certain boldness that shows up in the

photo. But to be honest, I would never let anyone see my trash can

after burning several rolls of film. The "hit and miss" ratio is

heavily weighted towards the "miss", which make the winners that much

more of a pay-off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robin (and others):

 

<p>

 

I think rangefinders do have one small advantage even when someone

knows you're taking their picture. I've mentioned it before, but it

seems appropriate to this thread as well.

 

<p>

 

An SLR, with its centered viewfinder, hides most of the photographer's

face, and especially the expressive parts (eyes, mouth, forehead

muscles). Your subject can't 'read' the nonverbal cues that tell them

you are trustworthy and friendly (or not). The rangefinder with its

corner viewfinder and lens off to one side, (at least for right-eyed

photographers) leaves 80% of the face visible to the subject, including

the expressive bits, and allows for a more open interchange between

photographer and subject.

 

<p>

 

It's a small thing, but it can have a big impact depending on the

situtation. I know that I can get very close to complete strangers with

an RF and not get the startled, suspicious reaction that I used to with

an SLR. And I've photographed lots of strange kids, in situations

similar to the one described above, and never been challenged by a

parent/adult, because I can make eye contact with them and let them see

who I am and what I'm about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if my comments came off as some kind of judgement about this

type of photography. I actually respect those who have the ability

to do this without feeling self conscious about invading peoples

space. After I though about it some, I realized that several times

people have taken pictures of my family while we were out in public,

and did it in a good natured way that I didn't find offensive. I

guess I need to loosen up some!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

I've shot on the NYC streets with SLRs and with rangefinders as well, and I am much more often challenged with an SLR. As a matter of fact, I have never been challenged with a Leica. Either they don't notice I am shooting or they think I'm a famous photographer!

 

Rob

 

P.S. Don't take a camera if you go to Jamaica. Matter of fact, don't even go there at all. That crappy country has nothing going for it but hostility. Jamaicans are especially nasty to photographers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...