Before/After

[fotografya]

While shooting in crowded streets, and as working the whole scene instead of a particular subject, do you prefer to

examine the entire field of view first, or just shoot and crop after then? Especially in spontaneous scenes... Which

one do you prefer? or how often do you point and shoot in street? MF

[johncrosley]

I have previously written (In my comments in reply to others) about strong disdain about a photographer who went to scenes with a Rollei, took photos of scenes then scanned those scenes in the darkroom and made likely crops from those scenes (usually sports), for a local newspaper. She was denominated a photographer, but frankly she couldn't recognize a scene if it was unfolding in front of her. I had a hard time calling her a 'photographer'.

 

I NEVER point my camera at a scene unless I intend to take a photo of that scene and NOT crop that scene later, unless my camera's focal power will not bring in all the scene because I am too far away and a slight crop is needed while I work my way closer, the scene has great photographic merit, AND I cannot change to a higher power lens in time.

 

In my considered opinion (others may vary), you really won't develop very good photographic skills if you just 'point and shoot' when you see a scene. That does not mean that like many news photographers you aren't perfectly justified in using a wide angle and when you get in the thick of things to just hit the shutter and take everything in and examine your captures later as so many do -- that's slightly a different sort of capture. You just then don't have an opportunity to frame, but you do know what it is you're taking. For a more distant shot, you should be framing those shots, or you're probably not much of a photographer and you certainly won't be learning many skills outside of how to crop in the (digital maybe) darkroom.

 

Taking street photos depends in a large part on being able to anticipate actions and reactions of individuals, and if you cannot do that, you won't get your capture -- everything from when a kiss is going to take place to when someone spontaneously is going to kick someone (maybe for fun or for real). You just can't shoot a scene and develop necessary instincts about how individuals will behave -- you have to get a gut instinct and even become prescient about how they will react so you can 'read' them and know (sometimes before they do) what their next move will be, so you can be ready to take that telling photograph.

 

That doesn't mean that I know every attitude my subjects will take, but it applies to a very significant number of them, and if they're in a group of messing around with each other, very often the look I am after (or something even better) will emerge when I train and focus with my camera.

 

It is necessary also to use depth of field, etc. when making captures and to choose one's subject, unless one is shooting with infinite depth of field. so your method of scanning a scene with a point and shoot capture simply fails with me -- there is no chance to emphasize one subject by narrowing depth of field and focuing on one subject isolating the others through the choice of a large aperture.

 

That being said I do 'examine the entire field of view first' in any case, for likely captures, if I understand your question (did I misunderstand it?)

 

I hope this helps.

 

John (Crosley)

[fotografya]

I think you studied much on this (as seen in your beautiful portfolio of street scenes) , and it seems that your sophisticated look into photography will help me to improve my technique. Besides, I mentioned point and shoot technique (if it is a technique) in the taste of seeing something that you didn't realise during the shot but later. This was my point of destination. Thanks so much for a wealthy reply. MF

[peteradownunder]

There are different takes on Street - even when there is some agreement about attitudinal things..when it comes to technique - well one enters a rather boring aspect of the situation. Every genre has its rules and maybe Street is different because there are no rules..so just get a camera and a lens - and groove it to your own toon baby.

[roger krueger]

I'm mostly about really close and really wide. To avoid getting beat that mostly means hip/strap shots. I've developed a

pretty thorough feel for what my lens will take in, but I still crop a lot afterwords. Finding/nailing the moment seems a full-

time job, better to clear your mind of that which can be accomplished later.

 

But in the end, it's all about what kind of pictures you want to take, and chosing a path that works for you personally to get

there. If you don't know what you want no technique in the world will get it for you.

[wenti duo]

I am quite surprised that people are often preferably snobbish about framing but not timing. To me, there is not a

fundamental difference between shooting 5 pictures of one scene and choose the best, and shooting a larger area

and crop. After all, it is all about choosing after the shot. The right moment is equally important as the right scene.

 

For example, the great photo of John Crosley "The Spontaneous Bobby Kennedy Assassination Street Funeral". If

the mouth of the woman sitting in the front was closed, the picture would not be as impressive as it is now. If John

captures it by accident, I will admire him less, because the image is a result of his luck but not his skill. If he shot

more than one photos and selected this one, I also admire him less, because the opening mouth is clearly not what

he had planned. If he anticipated that the women was about to open her mouth and thought that it would be a great

photo and just gave it one shot. Then, it will be great.

 

I might sound ridiculous. But this is exactly the sort of comments that try to frame people's mind. When I realised

what I have treasured is not much better than what others have treasured, I did learn to appreciate luck as well as

skills. It should be the photographers themselves to decide how they want to create and what to present to the

audience. Having said this, I do not deny that photographers should try hard to sharpen their skills and improve their

senses, as good luck seem to come more frequently when skills are improved.

 

From the viewers' perspective, how a photographer gets the result should not be something that bothers the

audience. A great image is a great image. When we go to a photo gallery, we enjoy the final images, how the photos

originally looked when it was first shot is not part of the show.