Is street photography fast becoming a thing of the past?

[ray .]

<i>I can't believe how negative this is getting.</i><p>You said that right. Starting with the moderator.. I sometimes wonder

why he even moderates a forum called 'Street... '

[ray .]

Painting is dead too. May as well all commit ourselves to the insane asylum.

[tonmestrom]

Orville, although this thread obviously wasn't started with me me or my photography in mind I wanna thank you for some good and sound advice. Actually I did two gallery exhibitions in the last few years, although not only street, but then again I do some other stuff as well. You're right it's worth it. I merely questioned a trend.

[tonmestrom]

Ray,

 

I'm a born optimist, don't let it get to you. Negativism can either be questioned or simply dismissed as being irrelevant. Why not try the latter, I often do. As far as the insane asylum is concerned you just have to switch the TV on. We're already living there ;-)

[tonmestrom]

Before I forget, and before any misunderstandings occur, I'm not French. Actually I live in the Netherlands. I do spend a lot of time in Paris though.

[Spearhead]

<i>I can't believe how negative this is getting.</i><P>It's not "negative," it's realistic. It's based on experience, observation, and a wide variety of other sources. <p><i>You said that right. Starting with the moderator.</i>Apparently some people find something that doesn't agree with their views is a problem. <p><i>I sometimes wonder why he even moderates a forum called 'Street... '</i><P>Comments about moderation have never been allowed on the forums, but I guess attention to this is missing.

[sam_motskin]

We talk about street photography but do we all mean the same. Can we define what street photography is and

what makes a good street photograph apart from obvious technical elements like composition?

[Brad_]

>>> Can we define what street photography is and what makes a good street photograph apart from obvious technical elements

like composition?

 

Difficult...

 

For some, it's merely any picture with a street and a person (that the viewer would likely have no interest in caring about).

 

For others, it's a lot more. Perhaps an image that portrays an interesting slice of the energy/rhythm found on the street - a situation that

helps release narrative to the viewer, and technically where there is some care for the elements being well-integrated.

[Paul Lewis1664881697]

I don't consider myself a "street photographer", and I cringe a bit now when I hear the term because I think it has become a refuse bin for a lot of unskilled and undedicated "photographers" that have populated the internet over the past five years or so. Shooting "street" photos is not an excuse to ignore the technical aspects of photography. I think it's important to engage your subject, and not to produce work that appears cowardly or sneaky.

[orvillerobertson]

Ray, I agree and disagree. The tone is definitely negative and symptomic of one who has accepted defeat and believes

others should too. It is a valid point of view but is not the only point of view, thank goodness. The public venues for street

photography are the internet, magazines, books, museums, galleries, etc. Some are commercial, some are non-

commercial. The non-commercial ones are often more receptive to work by lesser known street photographers. However,

you would be surprised how many commercial venues are open to our little thing as well. You might not get some glitzy

show, but you might sell images through them or be referred to curators or editors seeking street photography. You should,

in effect, sew the seeds with your work. I've been amazed how often I've been contacted by a perfect stranger because of

recommendations from someone I had assumed showed little interest in my work. The point is that you can better choose to

focus on those who inspire rather than those who constrict. I have learned to ignore the negative and associate with the

positive. But enough of this childish back-and-forth nonsense, the way forward is that street photography is as alive as how

you see it. For me it's the definition of who I am and what I believe.

[ilkka_nissila]

I think street photography has its place in the history of photography. However, most people I know pretty much think that

photographing strangers on the street is a kind of stalking and think that its practitioners are weird and doing something

unethical.

 

I think to be interesting to most people, a photograph has to be more than abstract shapes and strangers - there has to be

a more literal meaning. Otherwise it's just art for art's sake.

[michael s.]

Paul wrote:<p>

 

<< ... <i>I don't consider myself a "street photographer", and I cringe a bit now when I hear the term because I

think it has become a refuse bin for a lot of unskilled and undedicated "photographers" that have populated the

internet ... </i>>><p>

 

Paul and I operating along the same line ... but we're about 180 degrees apart and still headed in opposite

directions. <p>

 

I'm unskilled (glaringly so, when compared to those I regard as skilled), and not dedicated (when compared to

those who really get out there regularly to shoot). <p>

 

And I have only a beginner's grasp of the technical aspects of photography. That's not a boast, but it's a fact.<p>

 

Seldom do I engage my subjects. Few are even aware they're in my photo.<p>

 

But these differences are only the preliminaries. My being out shooting on the street along with more skilled,

more experienced, more accomplished shooters -- and then 'talking' to them here -- has given me a chance to learn

(i)by doing, (ii)by experimenting and posting, and (iii)by listening when I'm fortunate to have one of the more

experienced shooters offer comments and criticism. <p>

 

Realistically, without the internet, and sites like this and flickr (and others), I'd be shooting in a

comparative vacuum. Perhaps somebody at a camera club would show up on the same night I've chosen to come, have

an interest in street shooting, want to spend time with a newcomer ....<p>

 

Odds of that happening, much less happening regularly, are pretty slim. So I'll proudly and defiantly take my

place in the "refuse bin." In fact, I like it here. :-)

[ted_springer]

Ton,

 

I think you've touched on something here that's more about where we are as a civilization.

[orvillerobertson]

Michael, you're a fsat learner then. I love seeing your work here. By the way, I used to belong to several camera and color slide

clubs way back in the late 70s (old fart that I be). They were fun at the time. It's weird that nowadays I get approached by so

many photographers who are absolutely terror-stricken by street photograpgy yet really love the idea of doing it one day. I was

approached the other day by this young guy who asked me about my M5. Usually I am not receptive at all to those "nice

camera!" comments. He quickly explained that he somehow knew I was a street photographer. I wound up pointing him

towards a few street photography web sites.

[thomas_sullivan]

well, I'm hardly an expert in noticing trends or the latest items, but I agree that the larger Manhattan based galleries tend to not represent any street photographers except the established "Masters". But in the lower rent districts of Brooklyn there seems to be more "new photographer" representation. Powerhouse Books for one...although they are primarily a book publisher, they have exhibitions continously. Is this because the rent is lower and it's able to be backed up by book sales, where as the higher rent areas in Manhattan need to actually sell out the limitted edition prints at higher prices, so the risk level has to have established masters work. I don't know, but I think that is at least and very probably answer.

 

I mean Grand Central Terminal has what is basically a Street Photography on going exhibit hanging in the food court area for the past couple years. They're not selling the stuff, but the fact they hang it, says someone relatively "high up" still has an interest in it.And again, it is the Master's work.

 

I work in a large camera retailer....and I'm talking to customers about what the shoot all the time. Although the ones that make a living off of photography tend to do travel, events, and weddings, etc......most of the serious amateurs are telling me they do street. We swap cards and indeed, there are a lot of photography enthuisists doing street. I'm not really sure, and this is more impression, that even the Masters in their own day made money off of street. The few I've actually read bio's on made money off of grants, books, fashion, portraiture, and actual documentary. Their street photographs came into being "art" either very late in their life or after they were dead....

 

...anyhow, as some say above, I don't really care. I love shooting street. And as for it getting harder to do, I am actually finding it easier to do. I believe that it's more my own attitude towards shootin people on the streets, than theirs. I fully support the thought that if you act like you're suppose to be doing it, your subject assumes that also.

 

back on the subject of books again...I think this is where present day street photographers should place their efforts. You know longer have to go to the big publishing houses to get one published. The Blurbs...and I forget the other's at the moment....are starting to get their acts together. Some of the latest Blurb books I've seen are much better than they use to be......don't know if that is Blurb's doing, or the photographers books I've seen know how to calibrate there work to Blurb's way of doing things. I don't know what Powerhouse Books charges....but there is that small publishing house thing that seems to be on the rise also. Tinyvices (google it) has just started what they call TV Books....again, don't know what they charge, but this arena of book publishing is starting to pick up

[joan_s.]

I love street photography, although it's not an easy genre! I'm blessed with living in a place where I just need to walk out the front door to have 1 000 000 cool photo opportunities and I'm trying to take advantage of it as best I can. I'm hoping to branch out into documentary photography at some stage, but street is a good place to learn IMO :)

[tonmestrom]

Paul, thanks for your comment. But as I'm sure you know generalisations are just that while they only seldomly add

anything relevant to a discussion. Still, your comment caught my interest mainly because of your remark about

ignoring (supposedly so) technical aspects. It got me visiting your site and amongst other things what I've found there

is this: "...and believe that when the shutter is released, the act of image creation is complete"

It's a valid approach of course but it surprised me because from a personal point of view I find that to be two

conflicting arguments. Once I was trained and applied for many years the Zone system. One of the things you get

out of that workflowwise is a Basic Printing Time. That's where you stop and most of us go on to produce the best

print possible, technically as well as aesthatically because one is, or rather should be, the basis for the other. Like I

said I'm not putting a qualification on this but I would be most interested in why you choose to work like this. Is it

only a purist thing or are there other considerations?

[tonmestrom]

Ilkka, there is a lot more to street photography than shooting strangers on the street although public perception may be otherwise.

 

Michael, I agree with Orville, very much so in fact.

 

Ted, you may be right although it wasn't intentional

 

Thomas, thanks for your extensive comment. It may well be that at least part of the difference lies in being able to work in a metropolis like NYC or SF (I'm sometimes envious of that). I live in a city of only 45.000 inhabitants so mostly I have to go look for it elsewhere and luckily I'm in a position to do that. Personally I don't care either because photographically speaking I can do whatever I like while I have been lucky enough to exhibit some of my work. I'm glad that you guys have a platform at hand that seems to be a bit more open to street work.

 

Myriam, good for you!

[tonmestrom]

Note to all,

 

I started this thread with some questions and the reactions to that have been manifold. Thanks all of you. If there has been some perceived negativism I don't feel responsible. The question is a valid one. The value of street photography (if not photography as a whole) I think has diminished. Not because of lack of quality but because of a change in culture, hence the low exposure that I perceive and that at least some of you acknowledge. I can only hope that on your side of the pond the impact of that is indeed not as profound as it seems to be here. Maybe Thomas is right and a new way can be found via the Blurbs of this world. One can only hope so because I firmly believe street photography as a phenomena is very important from a social as much as from a cultural point of view.

 

Contrary to some I keep finding work, here and in galleries, that on occasion is bite the back of your hand beautiful and it's something I very much enjoy.

 

Lastly, "Comments about moderation have never been allowed on the forums, but I guess attention to this is missing" I for one am aware of this but I see nothing wrong in taking as generously as is given.

 

Have a nice sunday, all of you

[scott_koring1]

I don't know about other photographers, but I am thinking of giving up street photography secondary to the negative response I am getting from subjects and law enforcement. At a recent agricultural fair in my area I was confronted by a police officer for the second time in 6 weeks. I was a lone male with a camera and this time it made me a child molester, or someone thought and complained. I have to give this officer credit though. He knew the law and when he understood the situation his final words were "there's nothing wrong with taking pictures" and we parted on good terms. As opposed to the previous encounter with a city policeman here who threatened to cite me for harassment and still has me looking over my shoulder when I go downtown. Heck I'm even leaving my camera at home more often after that encounter. As I said in an earlier post about that encounter specifically, I've been doing street photography for something like 20 years and this is the first time I've ever had trouble. Now after the second encounter it just leaves me wondering if it is wort it.

[debraj]

Well...one of the problems is that street photography is an art form that does not have any commercial value and therefore I guess it is difficult for many photographers to keep pursuing the art form. Those who pursue the art form would have to perhaps live with the fact the fact that they would have less commercial success than glamour or wild life photographers.

 

It is also possible that street photographers are not able to capture the changing realities of the street - how it is reflecting globalisation, how flyovers and fast cars are destroying street life...in short, sometimes I feel that the street photographers need to take a look at their shots and ask the question as to whether the contemporary times are getting reflected in their photography or not.

[joe_gallo]

Aside from all of the statements about the "difficulty" of street photography (artistically, culturally, legally, etc.) I think possibly the greatest challenge is combating a type of sameness that has killed public life. I've mentioned this to plenty of local Boston photographers about appearances... where everyone seems to present themselves to the public in a similar mode of dress. I was going to say "style" but there really are few people I see on the streets who have cultivated a sense of style. Aesthetically speaking, plain clothing, ugly cars (especially SUVs and mini-vans that kill the background of pictures) pose a different kind of challenge. I wasn't cognizant of these obstacles when I first started shooting...

 

The only real control over the environment we have is to exercise patience. Wait for the van to pass by, wait for some "photogenic" background figures enter the scene... This is also part of the fun. It's like watching baseball... bottom of the 9th, 2 outs, loaded bases, full count... It's the anticipation of being able to pull of the shot you want while the world goes about it's haphazard business... all within seconds. And when you get home and see the lousy picture you've "anticipated"... so what? It's not exactly about results all the time. It's about training your mind and cultivating your instincts and developing a type of self control that hopefully begins to find its way into your pictures...

 

Debraj: The only way you can catch the "changing realities of the street" is over time. One of our Boston mavens has been shooting for over 20 years and has said that part of street photography's charm or import is the nostalgia factor.

 

Also, the street photographer as "serious amateur" has a noble ring to it and I think that describes the attitude even HCB savored (I think Bresson said something to that effect...).

 

The End

[alex_p._schorsch]

If a van is ugly, exploit its ugliness. The size and trappings of SUV say a lot about the American character.

[Paul Lewis1664881697]

My comments before weren't directed to anyone that would be on this site... because if someone is spending the time reading here and learning, that person is obviously dedicating him or herself to photography. I think there are a great number of street photographers that produce amazing work. It's not the fault of these people that new photographers that use the term aren't as hard-working at they are.

 

Ton, to answer your question, my preference to not digitally manipulate photos is my own choice and not some manifesto. I feel that it is my responsibility to do the best I can to photograph something properly and with honesty. If I messed up, better luck next time!

[raddatzphoto]

I feel Scott is on to something. Artform of harvesting jewels of insight from public is associated today with invasion of

privacy. The passion considered by Moms and "authorities" as a possible slippery slope towards perversion. Defending my

right to BE there with a camera increasingly becoming a noisy distraction to the music.