Street work: How to go about it.

[des adams]

Not street work, think of it as transgression. Go out there and lust. Bataille, an old street metaphysician says, *transgression does not deny the taboo but transcends it and completes it*. Plus like Skinny McGee says bunny suits, he means like they wear at playboy, few will bother you in one of those, and the heels will give you interesting perspectives. As ever Travis always raps the G spot. After a time like Kenny says you may start talking to yourself and lose yourself among all these versions of yourself you see hanging out. Of course none of this will help you.

[thomas_sullivan]

hmmmm....thanks Michael....forgot I wrote that....heh

 

but it still feels like that, except for one thing. I personally feel that I belong out there...and I think that get's presented to others. I have actually overheard conversations about me that indicate this conclusion......"nah, he works for somebody"....stuff like that (and no, I don't work for somebody)........I guess that is what I show to people these days......that it is something I am suppose to be doing. So, yeah, your own attitude certainly has a lot to do with how people accept your running around with a cam pointing it in every body's face.

[andrew_hull]

Go out and try it yourself. Find what YOU like. Otherwise, we'll end up with 100000 wanna be HCB's all shooting the same inane stuff in the same way (M3, check....35mm lens...check....Tri-X...check.....D-76...check). See what you like and find something unique. It's tough, but it's what makes the best photography.

 

And IMHO, the stealth approach is a sign of the photographer not truly engaging in his subject matter and the environment.

[ray .]

Al, I like your work. Your response to the question got me

curious.

[summitar]

Street shooting may not be illegal, but it can be an unpleasant invasion of privacy. When I was in Viet Nam 40 years ago, I used to photograph (don't want to say shoot in this context) anything and everything I saw on the streets of Saigon. In fact, most of the time when you pulled out a camera, the residents would jump up and pose. I think our western? concept of personal space is uncomfortable with some aspects of photography. I have examined how people who are strangers seat themselves in say a restaurant. The first one sits anywhere. The second, all else being equal, sits as far as comfortable from the first person. The third person sits where he maximize the distance from the first two, and so on. We, speaking as an American, like to maintain an invisible shield around us.

[terry_rory]

I understand what you are saying Kerry but if all photographers from all times had respected privacy in the way you describe, then we would now have a photographic legacy of nothing but posed shots or shots where the photographer had to ask permission first.

 

Photographic history would be much poorer for it.

[mike dixon]

<i>Street shooting may not be illegal, but it can be an unpleasant invasion of privacy.</i><P>

I don't think you're very clear on the definition of privacy. Streets aren't private. Public places aren't private. In fact, "public" and "private" are generally considered to be antonyms.

[robert_m_johnson]

"We, speaking as an American, like to maintain an invisible shield around us."

 

We, as Street Photographers like to explore and push on those boundaries.

[mike dixon]

<i>We, speaking as an American, like to maintain an invisible shield around us.</i><P>

Hey, I'm just taking a photo of your invisible shield . . .

[des adams]

Ray, my work?! I only ever do a little light dusting. Thank you, you are very kind. I took a look at your gallery here and web page and would like to return the compliment. Good stuff.

[yeffe]

"Stealth is unnecessary, but the belief it is is a common beginner's mistake. Some street

photographers, like Bruce Gilden and Martin Parr, use flash. Hardly innocuous."

 

"Leicas are unnecessary. Street photography can be done with any camera, even 6x7s and

LF."

 

I've made great street photos (whatever they are, let's not get into Galella again) with

disarming rigs like a Rollie TLR and a Graphlex 3.14 x 4 1/4. 35mm cameras pose a

disadvantage in that they cover the face of the photographer, and appear more

technologically efficient.

 

"This website has a Street Photography forum, if you didn't know."

 

"I'd also like to engage in such a quest, but, if you ask that question on the Street Froum,

duck! cuz the fan is turning."

 

What he said.<div></div>

[summitar]

It is considered impolite to stare at someone, even in a public place. A photograph is like a neverending stare. Would you want some stranger to come within say 10 feet of you and take a picture of you without asking permission? I wouldn't. I know that our world is enriched by good street photography, especially that of the past which remembers a time we either forgot or never knew. I like street photography, but I am still uncomfortable invading someone else's space. Am I the only one that feels that way? There is a fine line between visually taking in all about you to maintain situation awareness and tracking an object. Tracking implies hostile intent. I am harking back to the 11 years I recently retired from in which I was an engineer involved in designing and testing the ability of an advanced fighter plane to perform detection, identification, tracking, and targetting objects within a lethal distance. I am too old and frail (rheumatoid arthritis) now to get engaged with someone taking offense at my closeup photography. I guess I would attempt to disguise my efforts as just an attempt to take in the whole scene as opposed to focussing close in to some small group.

[yeffe]

"It is considered impolite to stare at someone, even in a public place. A photograph is like

a neverending stare. Would you want some stranger to come within say 10 feet of you and

take a picture of you without asking permission? I wouldn't."

 

I guess you've got to be either thick-skinned or saintly to do this kind of work. True, the

public space is up for image-making grabs. But many behaviors in public are legally

permissable but still considered impolite. My answer to any questions about my motives

are answered truthfully with the following: I'm testing the film and camera.

[summitar]

Actually, I did recently experiment in "potentially street" photography in kind of a stealthy and cowardly way. I was sitting on bench in a public park with many people strolling by. I had my canon a620 with me and it has one of those twisty, rotating viewing screens. So I placed the camera on the bench next to me, with the screen arranged so I could see it, and pre-set the stage. As people strolled by, I could snap the photo with little chance that they would recognize what I was doing. In the accompanying photo, only the pug was on to me.<div></div>

[fjords]

sounds like most are prisoners of their own preconcieved cultural concepts.

[yeffe]

"Cowardly" is a rather harsh self-judgement for what you did here, Kerry. You probably

could have gotten this shot without stealth.

 

I recall my then-teenage son asking for a photo after getting dressed up for a date. I

started shooting as he was taking his position and he got really sore at me. He wanted

control over his pose. I figured it was his problem, but lots of people feel entitled to that

control. We dress, apply makeup, get plastic surgery, all to project a consumer-driven

social impression. Looking for gaps in taht image is a lot of what I'm after. It can be seen

as a form of hostility by subjects*

 

Rather than cowardly, maybe call it gutsy.

 

*those subjected to the photographer's aims and techniques, indicating loss of control.

[summitar]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought the essence of street photography, for the most part, is that the subject is not aware of being photographed, and therefore not reacting to the camera.

[terry_rory]

If the reaction to the camera makes the picture work that is good. Anything that makes the picture work is good.

[fjords]

<Yeah! nothing worse than those pics on welfare> lazy emulsions

[Allen Herbert]

Hold camera, press shutter...there, how easy is that.

 

If you think too much about it you will eventually disappear up your own arse.<div></div>

[lutz]

Usually there are three moments when to snap a fleeting street shot: a) *before* the subject is aware of being photographed - aka the "snatch"- b) *after* the subject has become aware of being photographed - aka the (more often than once too much posed) "contract" shot - and, in between the two, c) the very moment the subject notices the photographer aiming. In the shot below the latter was the keeper, while I tried all three. <p>For me, there's nothing wrong with trying to get the "snatch" shot if you are ready to face the reaction it provokes.

 

 

 

<p><center><img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/4164667-lg.jpg"></center>

[des adams]

And if you do find yourself doing what Allen Herbert suggests in his second sentence do stay calm enough to make the snap. Could be a winner. Good image Lutz.

[sprouty]

<I>"Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought the essence of street photography, for the most part, is that the subject is not aware of being photographed, and therefore not reacting to the camera."</I>

<P>

Actually that concept is only one of many that SP incorporates. There are entire bodies of work that play off the interaction of the subject and the photographer.

<P>

One of the greatest images ever captured on film is by Weegee (Arthur Fellig). It is a shot of a crowd and a girl surrounding a drowning victim (sorry can't seem to find an link to the image, but the title is Drowning Victim, and it's shown on page 340 of Bystander). The strength of the image lies in the pose and expression she gives to the camera as soon as she recognizes she is being photographed...all the while kneeling over the dead body of her boyfriend.

<P>

One other more thing, while I would never knowingly make a person uncomfortable, and certainly never stalk anyone, I'm also not embarrassed by my curiosity of people. It is a natural human trait.

<P>

-Stephen

[thomas_sullivan]

<br><br><a href="http://www.ubugallery.com/phpwcms/download.php?id=661059,186,1"><u>Weegee - Drowning Victim, Page 6 bottom right</u></a>....it's a PDF, so make sure you have Adobe Reader loaded<br><br>

[Brad_]

<I>... I was either told to read "Bystander," personally bashed, or my question was

deleted. I think you know what I mean.</I><P>

 

Todd, you have had "issues" with street photograpy on the S&D forum <a href="http://

www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=002KLh"><B>going back six years.

</b></a><P>

 

Maybe it's time to just go out into downtown San Jose or San Francisco and take some pix,

rather than creating even more drama and stirring up the pot for another six. While

everyone else has moved ahead developing their eye and improving their photography, it

seems you would rather debate what SP is or isn't and the underlying ethics. Six years is

sure a lot of wheel spinning...