S&D PUB one.

[edgar_vargas]

<p>I know it's not Sunday anymore, at least where I am, but it's still Sunday somewhere so I'm going to post anyways. </p>

<p>I've enjoyed reading everyone's thoughts and statements on what street/documentary photography means to them. For me, it's hard to explain why, despite really enjoying macro/abstract/nature photography I shoot street the most, so I will try to demonstrate via some examples.</p>

<p>The pictures below were shot during my first actual "street" outing. I'm normally shy and, for at least the first hour or so, was scared of taking pictures of people for fear that they'd get angry or upset or who knows what. That is, until I stumbled upon this scene. Of all the people around me, no one had more of a story to tell than the Old Man standing at the corner, observing what appeared to be two gay young men dancing in the street. This is a very liberal town, so most people would find nothing wrong with this. However, the man seemed furious at what he saw, but it seemed that he was mostly angry out of confusion, not so much out of homophobia or general bigotry. As the dancing continued, though, he suddenly became ecstatic to the point that I was worried he might try to join in on the fun or have some sort of heart attack. It was like he finally, after many years of emptiness, found some joy in his life. If anyone's seen the movie, he reminds me a lot of the main character in "Up", granted this was taken before I saw that movie.</p>

<p>Every time I browse through these particular shots I can't seem to keep from zooming in on his face. His expressions speak volumes to me, and this is why I continue to shoot, as I hunger to understand humanity for what it is, not for what it's portrayed as.</p><div></div>

[edgar_vargas]

<p>#2</p><div></div>

[edgar_vargas]

<p>#3</p><div></div>

[edgar_vargas]

<p>Grand Finale</p><div></div>

[wayne_naughton]

<p><em><strong>....Did Atget ever make such a statement? i don't recall but it would seem a perfectly natural fit if he had.....</strong> </em> Actually he did (well, according to wiki he did....grin) I think Atget considered himself as nothing more than a 'stock' (in modern terms) photographer providing "documents for artists." (his words) It was others that introduced him to the salon, I guess if it wasn't for the rather obsessive activities of Berenice Abbott he would never have achieved the sort of international recognition that he has today.</p>

<p>Josh, you're right to pick me up on the degree of editing in picture #1, but in my defence all i was trying to do was to remove some weaknesses in the original, it really didn't print up too well to be quite honest.</p>

<p>When i say that I record what I see, it's just that....."what I see"....nothing more, nothing less..... I'm a watcher, a voyeur if you like, I have no ego, no artifice anymore, I'm just a little fat middleaged nondescript who likes to drink coffee, smoke cigarettes and watch what passes by me..... and take an occasional photograph. that's all.</p>

<p>I'll post one more picture if I may and maybe this one contains the most perfect mix of fact and metaphor as I've ever been able to achieve. I'll give you a bit of a clue, for a guy that is living rough the crease of his trousers was palpably military......</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

[tonmestrom]

<blockquote>

<p>I'm just a little fat middleaged nondescript who likes to drink coffee, smoke cigarettes and watch what passes by me..... and take an occasional photograph</p>

</blockquote>

<p>sounds just like me. That is if you leave the little out.</p>

<p>Edgar, I'm also quite shy by nature although people nowadays would find it hard to believe that. It's something that never goes away completely although by now I feel pretty much at home in any environment. It doesn't have to be a handicap.<br>

Great you decided to come by.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p><strong>I'm hoping that we won't limit these discussions to the weekend and, though they start on Fridays, I look forward to continuing the thoughts throughout the week.</strong></p>

<p><strong>Edgar--</strong></p>

<p>It's great that you've contributed a series. I often find myself wanting more than one photo to capture an evolving expression or task that I'm creating or documenting.</p>

<p>I also appreciate the story you've told along with your photos. It brings up an interesting subject for me. Did you want me, the viewer, to fill in my own story and were you just providing your written context as background information? When I look at your four photos, I am mostly tuned into the focusing in on the man, your subject, within the crowd, and the change of his expression. I wouldn't have thought he was observing anything in particular and wouldn't, of course, have known about the dancing guys he was watching. I'm curious if you made a conscious decision not to include in any of them what he was watching? If it was a decision, was it an aesthetic/photographic one or a more practical one, perhaps not being able to get the right angle or the danger of situating yourself in the street?</p>

<p>____________________________________</p>

<blockquote>

<p>And yes i then went to help the little girl but not until after i was finished with my precious pictures. after all i was a street photographer... my attitude and priorities have changed. --Josh</p>

<p>I am careful in taking pictures of the poverty stricken because I do not want to be exploitive. --DS</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Both Josh and DS have brought ethics into the mix, which I think is a really significant aspect of many kinds of photography. I have an aversion to exploitation similar to DS's.</p>

<p>I have wondered if street and documentary have more ethical considerations than other genres. It's likely, mostly because of the often public nature of S&D. I'm mindful that aesthetics and ethics are often separate areas and there are many lines separating them. But I think there are overlaps and ties as well. What is the photographer's or the artist's <em>responsibility</em>, if any?</p>

<p>Depending on the documentary, I usually feel a responsibility to <em>basically</em> tell the truth, which for me means not fabricating something out of whole cloth, yet I'm comfortable with the knowledge that it is my perspective from which my documentaries are made and the types of documentaries I do are aided by a personal perspective. I don't think that would be the case with all documentaries. I also will purposely try to express certain emotions in my documentaries, hoping to reach my audience in a certain way. Too much of that feels manipulative, but the right balance feels like it enhances the photos and makes them more effective.</p>

<p>Much art and much photography that is both art and not art is concerned with politics, social statement, even revolutionary causes, even revolution within the art world itself. In my mind, you don't go to politics or social statement without ethics coming into play. For that matter, I don't take a portrait without there being ethical considerations, not that I am usually conscious of them in the moment of shooting. But I certainly think about these things. One can exploit the subject of a portrait as well as the homeless or unsuspecting person on the street.</p>

<p>I think there are even ethical considerations in play with landscape and nature photography. How undisturbed do we want to leave certain areas or species? How far will we go to get certain pictures?</p>

<p>I also think the ethics involved in taking the photo is different from what may come across in the photo itself. I think one can be very respectful in the taking of a picture that may still read as exploitive. Likewise, I think one can be somewhat exploitive in the taking of a picture that will read quite sincerely and significantly.</p>

<p>What does exploitation mean for people? Do you concern yourself with it at all?</p>

[inoneeye]

<p>Edit/deleted......Fred and i posted at the same time .... i wanted to read what he had to say then i'll repost what i have.</p>

[inoneeye]

<p>

<p>DS, thanks for pointing me to "Festival of Bom Jesus of Araquari". A very solid thoughtful piece of pj - documentary. Very well written and supported by your photography. I felt i was along side you. Makes me want to travel more.<br />.<br />hi Edgar. ".....fear that they'd get angry or upset or who knows what. That is, until I stumbled upon this scene." That's it you're hooked. You're a street shooter. That moment when the drive to capture the street takes over.<br />I was interested to hear this ".... shot during my first actual "street" outing." I visited your flickr pages. I didn't compare dates (if there are any beyond posted dates) but i saw some interesting style(s) developing. Best illustrated on the last page (pg 5) of your photostream. I look forward to talking more. <br />.<br />Thanks Wayne.</p>

<p>The additional info is helpful. When i read your word 'defence' i was hoping that i had not given you or others the feeling that there was anything to defend. Not my intent. But as i have found out in learning to use the written word for dialogue it is an acquired skill that i need to practice much more. As for your physical description i thought you were describing me. Like Ton i need one minor adjustment, an addition in my case. I have red hair. some.<br />The Reader is an very engaging photograph.</p>

<br>

.<br>

Fred, ethics. long, very long pause for me...... Also in my photography it gives me pause frequently. Having pause in street work greatly impacts the entire process for me. Some bad but some good things to.<br>

As i mentioned i changed as a person, from the days of the Muggia in 4 series. My photography has been impacted. Most notably my street work was the most influenced genre. Frankly I miss the old way. I'd shoot then consider the ethics if i need to. I don't shoot as freely anymore. The change in my shooting has been to some degree one of ethics for me, i accept it. but still I often try to reevaluate and get my ethical bearings. The climate in the street has changed in my experience and requires of me a different outlook than i use to have. Yes, I am older now but i am still quite 'street' as a person. <br>

Exploitation is always a healthy question for me to confront. I recently began posting photos from years ago that in the past i would have given no thought to exploitation of the subject. Now i do- i hold back and find myself trying to get for permission from the subject. Most often i had this conversation with the subject when they agreed to be in front of my camera. But their lives have also changed since then. What was mutually agreeable back then can change over time. <br>

I remember many forceful voices calling Diane Arbus photos exploitive. Those voices often brought up the question of the subjects future. Or even their ability to understand what was being done TO them. I personally never felt that way toward her work but don't take offense at the question.<br>

Exploitation. I have reconciled in it my own fashion - I have lines that i don't cross anymore. but it is always worth revisiting to me. .</p>

[inoneeye]

<p><img src="http://www.withoneeye.com/SDPUB/nothere700.jpg" alt="" /></p>

[ds_meador]

<p>Josh,<br>

Glad you liked the documentary-pj piece. And, I'm glad it gave you a sense of being here. I enjoy Brazil - the people are great. That said, I still don't flash my camera around in certain places. The crime rate is pretty high in the larger cities here.<br>

One aspect of travel is that we often don't think what the local population might consider exploitive. At the Festival of Bom Jesus there were two teenage girls dressed to the social hilt. They saw me with the camera about the same time I saw them so I actually asked if I could take their picture. They said no, then said yes for about $10. Needless to say, I didn't take their picture.<br>

The Brazilian idea of what is public and what is private varies from the North to the South of the country. The cultures are rich and diverse.<br>

I write this mainly to say that it is probably different than in most places within the US or maybe within Europe (especially moving between the former East-West divide). Maybe some folks who travel more in other places can add some insight about cultural differences, or perhaps that might even be a future pub topic.<br>

Again, I'm glad you enjoyed the Bom Jesus piece.<br>

DS Meador</p>

[edgar_vargas]

<p>Ton,<br>

When I thought about how to reply to your comment about being shy, I realized that I am not really shy. More so than anything, I am afraid. Of what, I don't know, but I know that there's fear there. Standing behind the camera helps me overcome many of those fears, to the point where I am much more likely to start a random conversation with a stranger than if I was just standing there, fully exposed. I don't know if this is how you feel, but I'm glad I finally found some shelter.<br>

*___<br>

Fred,<br>

To answer your questions: "Did you want me, the viewer, to fill in my own story and were you just providing your written context as background information?" The story was both background info and a part of the greater story told along with the images. In most cases, I find, what makes a picture great is that it speaks for itself, but in this case, I think that without the background, the viewer might be a bit confused about why the main character in this tale is merely a spectator amongst the action of the scene. <br>

As you point out "When I look at your four photos, I am mostly tuned into the focusing in on the man, your subject, within the crowd, and the change of his expression. I wouldn't have thought he was observing anything in particular and wouldn't, of course, have known about the dancing guys he was watching." While his expressions are interesting in themselves, they mean more to me knowing that they were due to some internal conflicts and not just a simple reaction to what was going on in front of all of us.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"I'm curious if you made a conscious decision not to include in any of them what he was watching? If it was a decision, was it an aesthetic/photographic one or a more practical one, perhaps not being able to get the right angle or the danger of situating yourself in the street?"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The answer to this one is simple: My subject (at the time) was not just the old man, but his expressions and reactions. With only a 50mm at my disposal, I don't think any other angle or view would have helped me capture the moment(s) any better. After all, there I was, just looking around, and there he was, just looking.<br>

*___<br>

Josh,<br>

I know I'm hooked. Oh no! Actually, I love it. I started off as a naive humanist, slowly turned into a bitter cynic, but now, through this newly found passion of mine, I have gone combined the two into either a naive cynic or a bitter humanist, or better yet, someone who's just interested in trying to understand himself through others. <br>

Also, thank you for your compliments. I, too, look forward to conversing with you more. I really admire the way you seem to give life to the artificial, such as in the "teatro regazzi marionette" shot. I tried to do something similar in one of my shots, but I still feel like there is something missing.</p>

<p>_______________________________<br>

Finally, to touch on the topic of ethics and exploitation, this has already come up for me. I never have this problem when I'm photographing "regular" people, especially since I'm not out there to ridicule anyone, but I definitely have a slight issue when I'm photographing street performers. It seems odd, I know, but the issue usually comes down to the tip jar. Having grown up in the debit card age, I rarely ever carry cash with me. So, when I am out and about looking for subjects and I come across someone performing, no matter how awesome of a shot becomes available, I always have second thoughts if I have nothing to offer to the tip jar. It's like, it's one thing to go into a store and leave without paying if you exit empty-handed, but, in my case, I am taking something with me and I feel like if I am not being fair to the real artist in front of me. Has this stopped me before? Yes. Have I ignored this feeling at other times? Yes. Sometimes the only way to feel better about it is to ask if it's OK to take the shot, but if I chicken out, then I try to do it without being noticed. This usually doesn't work out. <br>

<br /> The two times where it worked out well were when I asked a dancer beforehand and then walked far enough away and behind him so that he couldn't tell if I was there or not and especially so he didn't know if I was about to take his picture. The other time, I just took a shot anyways. Since it was "just a kid" having fun, it didn't seem as exploitative this time around. What should one do in these situations?</p>

<p> </p><div></div>

[inoneeye]

<p>Edgar, "...I am afraid. Of what, I don't know, but I know that there's fear there". "...but I'm glad I finally found some shelter." Maybe because i was just thinking about Diane Arbus, i remember reading that she talked about her camera in much the same way you do. I think she referred to it it as a buffer or shield? It allowed her to be bold. (paraphrased, because i am to lazy to get the book off the shelf)<br>

".... I am taking something with me and I feel like if I am not being fair to the real artist in front of me." as is anyone who stops to listen or watch w/o leaving a tip. Your shot of the dancer really caught my eye when i saw it on flickr. I am glad you shared it here. <br>

"What should one do in these situations?" it seems to me that you are doing the right thing by reflecting on it. Questioning and weighing the consequences and benefits to you and for those you shoot. You'll know. The golden rule works well for me. Of course in the street it will require some guess work but it is a good start. And don't hesitate if you want to get the shot. A tricky balancing act sometimes.</p>

<p>The last photo i posted above was the last/only(?) i ever took against someones will, knowingly. Due to the circumstances at the scene I felt entirely justified when i did. But even then i had to consider, face my own ethical standard.... after i shot it.</p>

[Allen Herbert]

<p >“I have wondered if street and documentary have more ethical considerations than other genres”</p>

<p > </p>

<p >I think they do, Fred, they have an interest in humanity. They through their photography have a desire to understanding humanity; a desire to record warts and all. A good street photographer will feel the pulse of the society they live in and offer true insights.. I often wonder why the street and documentary photographers in Germany (the home of what many consider the ultimate street camera the Leica) did not record the horrors talking place in that country. Perhaps the state discouraged them to such a degree that they were too frightened to offer honesty in their photography.</p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p > </p>

<p >Photography like any other form of communication informs us about the world about us. The more informed, the more open that society is. An open society is a free/honest society able to make decisions based on knowledge. For me its about photographing the world as it is and not to shy away from sensitive subject matter. To do otherwise wou;d be immoral.</p>

<p > </p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Allen--</p>

<p>What I love about your post is that you have introduced the flip side of ethics. The stronger side of ethics is usually the negative side, avoiding harm. The weaker side is generally the positive, the doing good side. Most laws are proscriptive . . . Thou shalt not this and that. We hesitate to enact good samaritan laws because we don't feel comfortable "burdening" people with doing good.</p>

<p>Many of the discussions centering around photography are about NOT photographing those who don't want to be, NOT exploiting, etc. Rarely do we discuss what our personal ethical imperatives are. A big thank you for introducing that here. Are we actively making political and social statements to make the world better? Are we giving something back when we photograph? Are we informing, opening eyes? How important is that? It's quite important to me, especially in some of the documentary work I do.</p>

<p>I do think all those considerations about making the world better are best tempered by self-imposed admonitions not to exploit or do harm in the process. Balancing things like bringing important political and social matters to light and not shying away from sensitive subject matters with some amount of sensitivity to the individuals, animals, ecosystems or environments with whom or with which we come into contact seems ethically optimal.</p>

[giuseppe_pasquali]

<p>Hi everybody. Please pardon me for my late contribution to this thread on the meaning of S&D photography. I think that street photography is a powerful narrative/descriptive tool. Street photography has to my eyes two sides that should always go side by side: the geometric-compositive side (the aesthetical side) and the narrative side (the description of the individual moment and the potential/inferential themes that can be produced by the viewer (the before and after the shot) when looking at our "slice of frozen time". I know that the weekend is long gone, but let me share with you one of my last works, ciao, Giuseppe</p><div></div>

[tonmestrom]

<p>Edgar, I think I know what you mean but for me it's simply not there. I've come to feel very much at home in virtually every environment. I don't think either disposition disqualifies in any way. As for ethics I think the answer is (or maybe should be) really simple. It´s more than anything else a matter of personal integrity and the fact of the matter is that it´s very hard to judge someones motives. Often a lot of projection and suggestion is let loose questioning the motives of a photographer on a single image. I´m not above admitting that I´ve been guilty of that as well on occassion. Point is tough that often the context is missing to judge whether any given image is exploitative or not and of course as DS said culturally defined as well.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Are we giving something back when we photograph? Are we informing, opening eyes? How important is that?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>speaking from a personal perspective opening eyes, certainly not. Informing, giving something back, yes I like to think so. Opening eyes for me belongs more to the fields of PJ and or documentary (people like Nachtwey and Salgado spring to mind). Street has more sociological, cultural and even historical connotations. That´s I think is where it´s real value lies may it be in some cases only with hindsight.<br>

Also I think it´s partly dependent on style and approach. There are some notable differences. Giuseppe already hinted at some.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>A tricky balancing act sometimes</p>

</blockquote>

<p>very true Josh. Unless you let yourself be hindered by the fact what other people may think. (Self)reflection is indeed a good thing but one shouldn´t dwell on it.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I often wonder why the street and documentary photographers in Germany (the home of what many consider the ultimate street camera the Leica) did not record the horrors talking place in that country.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I see your point Allen but there are certainly examples of that. If the act of taking a photo becomes life threatening however that changes the perspective somewhat I think.</p>

[tonmestrom]

<blockquote>

<p>Street photography has to my eyes two sides that should always go side by side: the geometric-compositive side (the aesthetical side) and the narrative side</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I couldn´t agree more Giuseppe but (to use a frightfull generalisation) that seems to be mostly a European take on things. Kind of classical like and someting that I myself find very appealing.</p>

[inoneeye]

<p>German, Finnish, Japanese, USofA, Brazilian.... etc. Even breaking it down to regional differences in some cases. Geographic and cultural differences (and the common ground) sounds like another good topic for exploration. I often see it very clearly demonstrated in photography. And have found it beneficial in acquiring new expressive tools and styles.<br>

By suggesting it as a topic, I am not intending to shut the discussion down now. <br>

Having concern with 2 sides, the aesthetic and the narrative, seems to me to be the common ground, to discern how it is used differently to communicate interests me greatly.<br>

I do look forward to this becoming a topic that we can explore. </p>

 

[Allen Herbert]

<p>“If the act of taking a photo becomes life threatening however that changes the perspective somewhat I think.”<br /><br />The thought I’m communicating is that there should be an ethical responsibility that a street, documentary photographers should photograph reality regardless of their political persuasions or whatever……..whether we should call that “doing good” or just being part of humanity is another question. What happened in Germany is, can, happen in any country. The small stone thrown by a street photographer, if enough, tells a story and allows people to be informed. It does not start as life threatening only becomes so due to indifference.</p>

[inoneeye]

<p>I second your thoughts Allen, although it is no longer likely to be me to start the ripple that a small stone can create. <br>

I have worked with and for the homeless on projects designed to make a difference. I don't think they did. Even in minor ways. No ripples from my stones. But i sleep better knowing that there are those who do try and do make a difference. Not just for the homeless. Like the monkeys on the periphery of the troop that are the first to recognize a danger and give warning to the troop. When i see a photographer using their skill this way i admire and am grateful for what they do.</p>

<p>A side story; on the last photo i posted i said "Due to the circumstances at the scene I felt entirely justified when i did [shoot the photo]." The justification i alluded to was that the man in the photo was very upset and in his self proclaimed 'official capacity' was telling me that he could and would confiscate my camera. I was on a public street. We argued and the direction it took was that as a visitor (living and working) in Italia, i did not have the right to photograph a scene that included private property. In my horrible Italian (like tarzan i had no grasp on grammar) it turned to politics. I was stereotyped as an arrogant American. He ordered me to give him my camera, i suggested we let the Polizia decide. Which i found out in a later encounter, may have favored him. When he started toward me with obvious aggression, i began to back up and snapped his picture. Not too smart since the next moment we were running.<br>

I was told later there there was some controversy, (economic and political) generated over the new construction in the background.</p>