lex_jenkins Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 <p>There seems to be a presumption here that if someone objects to the act of photography in public, or demands that a photo be deleted or destroyed, that the photographer is always inherently at fault. Or that the photographer is inherently adversarial .</p> <p>While I can speak only from personal experience, this has never been the case in my handful of negative encounters.</p> <p>In addition to a few encounters with overzealous and under-informed law enforcement or security guards, which I've related so many times before it bores me just to think about it, I can recall a few occasions when someone's objection to being photographed in public turned out not to be quite what it appeared at first glance. </p> <p>They didn't object to being photographed. They objected to not being paid for being photographed. I've encountered this a few times in touristy areas where local street vendors not only sell their wares, but also consider themselves part of the local flavor. They wanted tips for providing a sort of performance art - which often consisted of simply being there - and for making the touristy place more colorful and appealing for tourist snapshots. In some instances I've agreed and offered tips to vendors whose trade included a bit of public showmanship such as flower juggling or palm rose weaving. I always try to tip buskers, no matter how inept - their music is often no worse than my photography.</p> <p>In a few other instances people objected to being photographed because they were doing something illegal. And in a couple of instances while I was taking boring touristy snaps of local architecture, some drunk and belligerent fellow would interject himself.</p> <p> It's still more fun and less expensive than photographing grizzlies, and less dangerous than juggling kittens.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norma Desmond Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 <p>Lex, IMO as well, the photographer is not always at fault. Actually, I don't think anyone is necessarily "at fault" in these situations. Yes, there are bullies both in front of and behind the camera. But it's not always about bullying. Sometimes, it's just a matter of a genuine conflict of interests where no one is the "bad guy." </p> <p>The main encounters I've had where I've seen people ask for photos not to be taken or to be deleted are people with children who don't want their children to be photographed by a stranger and certainly don't want them appearing on the Internet. There are various founded and unfounded fears out there about kids, but erring on the side of caution, for a parent, seems pretty understandable to me and somewhat ubiquitous these days. It's not that the photographer is doing something wrong or is bad for taking or wanting to take the picture of someone else's kid and it's not that the mother is wrong or bad for wanting her child's picture not to be taken. It's just two different sets of interests coming at each other and some sort of accommodation might be the best play possible on the part of one or the other party.</p> We didn't need dialogue. We had faces! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncrosley Posted March 25, 2013 Author Share Posted March 25, 2013 <p>I think Fred G. makes a very good point.</p> <p>I always listen (or read carefully) when Fred G writes, and I do not accuse him ever of self-aggrandizing in any way. He is a spokesperson for his own views on morality, and he does it well and in a well-reasoned manner. For that he earns my plaudits.</p> <p>One cannot make any valid assumptions about my manner on the street based on the things I've written about for newbie and experienced photographers and things they may encounter based on my writings about the 'margins of experience' that the street photographer is likely to encounter in a long career.</p> <p>In general, I don't think you'll find many 'street photographers' who have encountered more people who are more highly regarded than I, and of those who encounter strangers regularly on the street, anyone who in the end is regarded by heretofore strangers and subjects as a 'friend' as a result of those encounters.</p> <p>I look at a chance to go out on the street with cameras primarily as a chance (1) to get possibly great photos and (2) to meet interesting people and perhaps make their friendship where it's appropriate to the setting.</p> <p>Nobody hijacks any post that I am in for long; or I'd call them out, and it is not the case here. Fred G. adds a valuable voice and experience that should not be disregarded, and he is highly articulate in expressing himself. I regard that as a valuable attribute, not a threat.</p> <p>john</p> <p>John (Crosley)</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norma Desmond Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 <p>Thanks, John. As I said, you and I have developed a healthy and productive respect for each other personally as well as for each others' work. In some ways, our differences probably help bring us closer.</p> We didn't need dialogue. We had faces! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asher Posted March 25, 2013 Share Posted March 25, 2013 <p>The single most important skill that the majority of street photographers lack: <br> <strong>editing</strong></p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncrosley Posted March 25, 2013 Author Share Posted March 25, 2013 <p>Photo editing or editing in writing? You could have used a few more words, to convey a full meaning instead of ambiguity, I feel.</p> <p>john</p> <p>John (Crosley)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asher Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 <p>^^^<br /> <strong>Both</strong></p> <p>However, I was of course referring to photo editing, as the thread is about street photography tips, not writing tips.</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 >>> One cannot make any valid assumptions about my manner on the street based on the things I've written about for newbie and experienced photographers and things they may encounter based on my writings about the 'margins of experience' that the street photographer is likely to encounter in a long career. Why is that? >>> In general, I don't think you'll find many 'street photographers' who have encountered more people who are more highly regarded than I, ... How were you able to determine how highly regarded you are? www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarieH Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 <p>Brad has a point, People don't know who you most street photographers are in general, nor why your photographing them, or "how highly regarded you are." Sorry John, I would not recognize you on the street either.<br /> I remember having an argument over a refund of money for a tattoo that was paid for by my daughter who later changed her mind. The tattoo artist was refusing any refund, he said "Do you know who I am?" I said, " I don't care if your the president of the US, I just want my daughter's money back." Evidently he's well known in his microcosm. If he were Justin Beiber it might of been different lol. But I don't think most 'street photographer's' have any weight as far as recognition goes. I don't usually bother with the how or why of what I'm doing, there really is no point. Its not going anywhere except maybe pn or flickr. If they allow the photo I take it, if they say no, I don't.<br /> Will this photo matter in 100 years, I hope so, but most likely not :)</p> Henri Matisse. “Creativity takes courage” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norma Desmond Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 <p>What I took John to be saying is that the people he comes in contact with seem to regard him highly. I have little trouble telling who regards me highly and who does not. It's a matter of talking to people and reading them. Not that difficult. </p> <p>As for the tattoo guy, Marie, your story makes sense and I'd feel the same way as you. But it's not quite comparable. The more accurate analogy would be whether you'd more likely allow a tattoo artist who was held in high regard by a lot of people and who you held in high regard because you'd witnessed him tattooing others and seen his results to provide you with tattoo services. People John meets feel more comfortable allowing him to photograph them because of his reputation on the streets. That makes perfect sense to me. Word can get around on the street.</p> <p>Whether a photo will matter in 100 years has somewhat little meaning to me. Sure, many great photos have lasted in our collective minds for hundreds of years. I'd bet that as many great photos have been lost to time. We just never got to see them. I'm not really making photos for posterity, though there is the aspect of permanence and remembrance that photos tend to deal with. I photograph to express myself, to be useful, because I want to and am moved to. And I photograph to communicate with the idea that sometimes the photos will move or speak to others. Whether or not that continues beyond a few years doesn't often enter my mind.</p> <p>I suspect, Marie, we probably agree on the point that you and I both have determined that an individual photo is not as important as taking certain other actions when it involves other people.</p> We didn't need dialogue. We had faces! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncrosley Posted March 26, 2013 Author Share Posted March 26, 2013 <p>I am working on making some of my photographs recognizable beyond my lifetime.</p> <p>Some you are viewing have been existence since 1968, and they are some of my best ever; that's 45 years -- nearly half a century in which those photos have so far stood the test of time.</p> <p>Some photos are bound to a specific time and place; others are not. <br> I am told by experts most of my photos with their 'stories' are 'universal' in appeal not only for 'time' but also for geographical audience, at least among 2nd and 3rd world countries.</p> <p>A world class expert (Lucy Award Winner) advised me several years ago after curating (at his request) my total work to that time that I then had enough to display in highest class museums and galleries, but said the price would then be to stop photographing then and start working on (1) residing in the US, (2) devoting all my time to gaining entrance to the top world ranked galleries and museums, (3) with his free help which he offered.</p> <p>Believe, me, he knew everybody, as he proved by taking me to exhibitions and introducing me to people famous in the photography and photographic exhibition field -- people most here would give their eye teeth to know. </p> <p>They were his friends and more (he was a godfather to Nann Goldin's child, close friend to the late Helmut Newton, took me to meet Sally Mann and the same night went to a showing of Graciele Iturbide's work he was instrumental in preparing/organizing, etc., etc., etc.,). He seemed to know everybody, and those who didn't could read his CV and alone it would open doors that otherwise were closed.</p> <p>Unhappily, he's now disabled, or I'd be outta here and (as he promised before he got disabled) exhibited, and probably collected. </p> <p>No guarantees, but there also was no charge or fee expected ever. I also did not want as he demanded, to give up actively photographing to schmooze in the highly charged gallery/museum exhibition world to help open those doors he promised to open, and which I knew full well he could open. </p> <p>Guess I missed my chance -- for now.</p> <p>But I'm happy taking my photos.</p> <p>Whenever I go to a photo fest, such as Photo LA recently, people in the business who look at my work pronounce it exhibition quality (my best work of course, a small fraction of the stuff I post here, of course, just, say,, my top 80 or so photos).</p> <p>At the time I made the decision to keep photographing, the advice I received from one exhibited photographer then was 'we're in the depths of recession, nobody's selling anything; just keep working on increasing your inventory of good stuff so you have more to sell in galleries later.'</p> <p>And a well known gallery owner confided in me he held an exhibition one month and did not sell one print, so that was the background in which I was then making decisions.</p> <p>The curator's disability kind of blind sided me, as I had depended on his promise of help, but that's life.</p> <p>Did I miss the boat?</p> <p>Maybe, or maybe not.</p> <p>I carry with me a private book which none of you have ever seen, which onlu a handful of gallery owners have ever viewed because but is not shown widely because it has too big a selection and needs to be redone and recurated).</p> <p>I'm working on that now.</p> <p>No one who has ever seen it has ever 'flipped through it to get to the end', but instead almost to a one, each pro in the exhibition business who has seen it has parsed over it, photo by photo and given very encouraging words and references.</p> <p>I just haven't been serious about this business, possibly unil now.</p> <p>Re-scans and reworks of my early works are the beginning stages of what may be an exhibition attempt that is very, very serious.</p> <p>And then if I'm successful, my work will be known long after I'm gone.</p> <p>By the way, none who spent time going over my photos in the book ever had time or temperament to humor me. </p> <p>None had the reputation for suffering fools or those with no talent.</p> <p>Which is encouraging.</p> <p>Right now, I'm lining up my ducks, then we'll see what happens when they're in a row.</p> <p>john</p> <p>John (Crosley)</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncrosley Posted March 26, 2013 Author Share Posted March 26, 2013 <p>Fred (and Marie),</p> <p>It is not just reputation alone which allows me freedom on the street to take lots of shots, often from incredibly close.</p> <p>A lot of it has to do with manner and bearing. I act reassured in part because I KNOW I can produce and if pushed to prove it I can do that also.</p> <p>I carry myself now with assurance that comes from having taken from 1/2 to 1 million street photos and having my photos viewed conservatively by over 100 million times (not clicked views, but at least that many viewers, and clicked views also are in the high tens of millions just on this site and not counting the tens of web sites/blogs that appropriate my images (but spell my name right).</p> <p>I work on the street quickly,, patiently, with great humor when called for, and general bonhomie, with quick wit for those who have a remark and a riposte for those who are looking for entertainment and think they can impale me with a barbed remark. They often end up big supporters because they see I can hold my own after I turn their remarks back on them; they respect that. I can be glib where necessary, silent where needed and cautious when demanded.</p> <p>And I also can produce the goods.</p> <p>When I show a sample or representative photo to someone I've enlisted to pose for me, I am sure never to disappoint; and in addition, I almost always start out with one to five good ones on my SD or CF card from the last session that are impressive enough to a passerby. They are my resume or calling card for those who haven't the slightest idea of who I am. Pro equipment when I'm carrying that helps greatly; people assume pro equipment = pro photographer (faulty logic in part but who's going to argue).</p> <p>Those who are disappointed are those who are looking for landscapes and pretty flowers, and there are some of those people, but frankly very, very few. Nost are very interested in my specialty -- interesting photos.</p> <p>Their interest in seeing other interesting photos (even the first one or two of themselves if they're doubters) often gives me the cachet to take photo after photo that would be denied other photographers. In addition, I'm amazingly fast and vary my views taking a great number of views (at times) in an inordinately short period, as not to try people's patience, which often can run out in a minute to three minutes.</p> <p>I've learned to work assuredly and quickly and still get occasionally great results under what to most would be to most insuperable pressure.</p> <p>Surprised subjects often find that in allowing me to try for a photo, I might already have taken 15, and one of those might be just the right one -- a winner.</p> <p>And then it's all over in a very short time, so they can get going to their next engagement without being held up unless they WANT to stand around and schmooze, which sometimes happens.</p> <p>Or call their friends over to view their photo, which also happens very frequently.</p> <p>There's endless variety on the street; far too endless to describe here.</p> <p>john</p> <p>John (Crosley)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norma Desmond Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 <p>John, yes, I'm well aware of that. I was addressing reputation because that was what was being discussed, but most of us are aware how important demeanor and people skills are when photographing other people, and many other things for that matter.</p> We didn't need dialogue. We had faces! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 <p>A world class expert (Lucy Award Winner) advised me several years ago after curating (at his request) my total work to that time that I then had enough to display in highest class museums and galleries,would then be to stop photographing then and start working on (1) residing in the US, (2) devoting all my time to gaining entrance to the top world ranked galleries and museums, (3) with his free help which he offered.</p> <p> <br /> Wow, John. Some bloke on PN said one of my photos was interesting but that is as far as I've ever got to some sort of fame.</p> <p><br /> <br />"but most of us are aware how important demeanor and people skills are when photographing other people, and many other things for that matter"Fred</p> <p>Thanks Fred but I'm not to sure about the other things.I really want to be ethical and proper like you and John....but the other things are confusing me.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allen Herbert Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 <p>"I am working on making some of my photographs recognizable beyond my lifetime"</p> <p>Me to. But I think I must try harder.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 >>> Many times at the outset of shooting, I'll intone 'I DO NOT DELELTE, so don't ask me.' I've yet to walk into a neighborhood/area or situation with my camera needing to make a proclamation like that, no less right from the start. But apparently that's something you've done many times. Why is that? I'm curious because I've only been asked once over many years of shooting strangers to delete a photo. But you need to make a proclamation to any and all around about your deletion policy. www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncrosley Posted March 26, 2013 Author Share Posted March 26, 2013 <p>Brad,</p> <p>Perhaps you misunderstand. </p> <p>In any case you misrepresent me, knowingly or unknowingly.</p> <p>There are occasions when people based on my initial judgments of them, may turn out to be of the sort who after tying up my time for from 5 minutes to 30 minutes including conversation, suddenly and fractiously, will demand (at the end) that I delete their photos, and that comes 'out of the blue' or at times because of some intervening input from a friend, passerby or other, perhaps, who has told them they should be selling their image, or they just had more to drink or for of lots of other reasons. Read on, please.</p> <p>For those select individuals whose nature I judge from meeting them and beginning to work with them 'UP CLOSE' where their cooperation is desired, in those cases I may feel it necessary to tell them NOW in advance that I just do not delete to avoid any later discussion of the issue. It's not an issue at the start or I wouldn't be cooperating with them, but certain individuals are up to no good (again, read on).</p> <p>IT's happened several times that time wasters have suddenly changed their minds, perhaps to impress friends, on hearing input from 'friends' or acquaintances or just bystanders,, or for other fractious reasons, they'll suddenly demand deletion, and that has nothing to do with the quality of the photos, our interrelationship theretofore, or any such, but in their personal nature - - - - some people are just spoilers and take delight in spoiling.</p> <p>I had a wife whose uncle was such an individual.</p> <p>He was a spoiler for almost everything he ever got involved in.</p> <p>A teacher, he was counseled not to take children off school premises without field trip permits.</p> <p>So, in contravention, he took them all to 'ice cream' reasoning that no one could deny children ice cream at Baskin Robbins, but no one knew where they were going or that they had gone until the kids went home and told mommy and daddy.</p> <p>After many such episodes, he lost his job and pension.</p> <p>He took pleasure in yanking peoples' chains . . . . he delighted in 'negative attention' . . . . stirring up the pot, in order to get personal attention, because although he had even a 'doctorate' (his thesis was written by his spouse), he really did not feel adequate to garner legitimate attention, so he developed a high art in frustrating people to get and keep their attention. It did not matter that he bothered the hell out of them so long as he had their attention. </p> <p>The youngest born, he had two very accomplished serious and responsible older brothers. He only got attention by 'acting out', and that developed into a lifelong personality trait that grew exaggerated the older he got.</p> <p>Long dead by now, I'm sure, last I heard, he was defying the US government as a 'tax protestor' and for a while was paying his debts using phony 'legal documents' which supposedly drew off the assets of a decades long bankrupt company which some confused tax protesting nincompoop had dreamed up was taken bankrupt for allegedly wrong reasons and therefore anyone who came along could just issue an instrument that looked like a check that 'drafted' or 'touted' off the assets of this long bankrupt and dissolved company's assets as though those the company's dissolution had never happened and could be ignored and the assets flowed into the hands of those smart enough to grab them and used 'instruments drawn on them' to pay off debts'.</p> <p>And then that uncle was placed under a conservatorship for his own safety instead of being carted off to jail (or rather he was released from jail because of a conservatorship having been formed to care for his finances).</p> <p>If there was a right way to do things, he did things the wrong way, not because he didn't know right from wrong, but because he felt he had the ultimate right to do as he wished no matter what and without consequences, and also it had the side effect of frustrating everybody around him, particularly those who liked and/or loved him.</p> <p>All to get and keep attention.</p> <p>There are such individuals in the world and ultimately you will photograph one or the other, and they will cooperate with you, tie up your time and at the end, demand you delete for some spurious reason or just 'because'.</p> <p>Because in real life thee are such individuals around that you may some day photograph if you work the streets.</p> <p>They will soak up your attention, barrage you with questions, eat up your time, and as you are walking away, sure of your friendship, they will suddenly demand you delete everything, for reasons that are entirely spurious, but sure to engage you some more and sure to tie up your attention, for that's what they really want -- attention. You're going on and withdrawing attention, and they want more; a deletion demand ensures they will get more attention.</p> <p>So, some may be told they are entitled to money, some may be trying to impress friends who happened by, some may now be taking more swills of that bottle which may (or may not be in that paper bag) but people frequently implicitly promise to cooperate, then at the last minute or even beyond then change their minds out of bad faith . . . breaking that implicit promise and often for no good reason at all. I tailor my messages to avoid such people doing such things when I think I've got one as a subject, or might have one, and only then.</p> <p>After having such things happen several times (an refusing to delete, since their actions were an implied promise to let me keep all my captures) I finally have begun to recognize likely candidates for such behavior, and for those individuals, I now will tell them outright my policy.</p> <p>It's a practice borne of experience and for a select few.</p> <p>I don't blare it to everyone, and seldom speak the words. The words are meant for just the right person.</p> <p>You see, you have misunderstood and/or misrepresented me. That's OK, because you have never seen me work, or walked in my shoes.</p> <p>If you had, you'd have I think a far greater appreciation for the nuanced existence of life on the street as I lead it, and the subtlety with which I go forth, instead of taking a word here or a phrase there and trying to use it to define me negatively.</p> <p>Think about that, please.</p> <p>john</p> <p>John (Crosley)</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted March 26, 2013 Share Posted March 26, 2013 >>> You see, you have misunderstood and/or misrepresented me. That's OK, because you have never seen me work, or walked in my shoes. If you had, you'd have I think a far greater appreciation for the nuanced existence of life on the street as I lead it, and the subtlety with which I go forth, instead of taking a word here or a phrase there and trying to use it to define me negatively. I can only read and contemplate what you actually write, and then relate that to my own experiences shooting on the street. Needing to proclaim from the get-go to subjects many times 'I DO NOT DELELTE, so don't ask me,' would come off very curt and off- putting and for me would not be a good start building trust and rapport.. From your last post t sounds like you have encounters with subjects that apparently get worse over the duration of the shoot. It's all very odd... For me, rapport with subjects always gets better with time as trust builds. I've never had what you characterize as a "time waster" who changed their mind. Actually, I would never characterize any person I meet on the street in those terms. Sometimes people I approach on the street for conversation and photos say no when asked if I can make a few photos of them. I still still enjoy hanging around and talking with them about this and that, even if I don't come away with a photo. Sometimes on subsequent encounters a person who said "No" two weeks earlier will ultimately change their mind. Trust builds slowly sometimes, especially if people are reluctant to being photographed. www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncrosley Posted March 27, 2013 Author Share Posted March 27, 2013 <p>Brad,<br> <br />How many photos have you taken, over how many years, and in how many countries?</p> <p>My photo career spans a time spent with a wire service both as reporter editor, photo editor and world service photo editor, and in that capacity many people on reflection did not want things recorded, especially 'big business' when such photos were inimical to what they saw their best interests.</p> <p>I worked with many who had or would go on to win Pulitzers; if I had stayed I very well might have earned one.</p> <p>I worked as a free lance in Viet Nam with no gun and only a pair of cameras. I ducked bullets, bombs and mortars to get captures. I have always been justifiably concerned for my own safety, for threats to that safety can arise at a moment's notice, often when life seems most boring.</p> <p>I conducted aerial surveillance from 12,000 feet for months over Nevada's parched Virginia Mountains with a telephoto lens from a Cessna 172 documenting the hunting down of wild horses in those mountains which resulted in landmark federal legislation protecting wild horses. </p> <p>The plane's expenses were underwritten by a Reno secretary with a national organization who called herself 'Wild Horse Annie' (whom I never met), and in the process my documentary aerial photos took front pages nationwide showing corrals built to ensnare wild horses that roamed public lands as they were to be trapped from freedom to dog food.</p> <p>The man and/or men who build those corrals allegedly used helicopters and open door airplanes and shotguns and/or rifles to stampede the horses into box canyons from the air, then into increasingly narrow barbed wire pens, the wire of which was shielded from view by sagebrush and other scrub vegetation, resulsting in the wild horses being herded into holding pens where the only exit was a stock ramp into the back of a truck which would lead them to a slaughterhouse where they would be butchered for dog food. </p> <p>No permits were available, and such a process may not have been illegal; it was 'borderline' to say the least, but not very palatable.</p> <p>The result of my photos and the Wild Horse Annie campaign was the federal government outlawed such a practice. A fellow who helped arrange the surveillance transportation had to pay his attorney an initial retainer of $5,000 just to begin his defense when the man who allegedly was shooting horses from helicopters and small planes then had the temerity to sue him for 'defamation', and all the while, this good willed University of Nevada, Reno, professor had just had a child born with Down's syndrome -- which in itself was bankrupting and a personally devasting blow.</p> <p>I had just become transferred to New York AP world headquarters, or doubtless I would have been fighting the same lawsuit.</p> <p>The man who was suing, like so many others, would have given anything to deprive the public of a view of what was happening. If he would have known of my film beforehand, he certainly would have demanded deletion or worse; perhaps he would have murdered me to get at it, who knows? He was a man with a less than sterling reputation and one I recall of resolving matters violently.</p> <p>That is NOT self-aggrandizement; those were the wild west days in Nevada and scores were sometimes settled personally. At the time people still were 'strapped' with six shooters and many wore large silver belt buckles, cowboy style.</p> <p>In another instance while there in Nevada, I used to look under my car hood and at my car's shifting system before starting it in the early mornings after I photographed Nevada's largest brothel master in a place where he denied he was, apparently expanding his legendary brothel empire into a place where he vehemently denied that he was expanding it. </p> <p>I had proof of his lies.</p> <p>He offered first to treat me as a guest of his at the local Reno hockey league which it appeared he had a controlling interest in, to sit with him in VIP box seats, which I treated as an invitation from the devil and refused.</p> <p>Later, he tried to bribe me, offering me a 'run of the house' free credit at his brothel in Mustang, Nevada (yes, that famous brothel, the one where championship heavyweight boxer Oscar Bonavena later met his death, mistaken by a brothel 'guard' for a deer, it was told police, although Bonavena had been having an affair with the brothel master's wife.) Figure that one out.</p> <p>Was there danger for me if I accepted? I thought so. Danger even taking the photos once it became known and refusing to delete them.</p> <p>I turned down the 'run of the house' free prostitute credit which had no time limit or number of uses.</p> <p>Loud music I had heard through the grapevine was used to disguise then loud in-the-wall motion picture recording used to blackmail people, just like in Godfather II, a period which I am more than a little familiar with, as it happened in my territory, near Reno -- Lake Tahoe, Nevada side.</p> <p>That was a time when a dissident member of the Nevada Gaming Control Board (or Commission?) I forget which, backed out of his South Lake Tahoe driveway, shifted his car into gear and the resulting bomb explosion blew him to smithereens. He had been threatened by someone in the gaming industry, and the threat was carried out. His state organization controlled who got gambling licenses and he angered someone and got payback; Las Vegas then widely was known to be 'mob run'.</p> <p>It is the same territory where later criminals planted a special bomb in a casino (at Lake Tahoe) designed to blow the casino up. Remember that?</p> <p>A casino owner, ticked off at my revealing something 'interesting' about his then new Las Vegas casino for his now very famous casino empire, threatened to 'get even with me' for my reporting of his financial liaisons which threatened his future empire's gambling license -- another reason every nasty, bitter cold morning I inspected under my hood and my drive mechanism to check for bombs before driving to work at AP, Reno.</p> <p>That was not paranoia but just good common sense in a state where people (businessmen) took out people who 'bothered them' by rather dastardly means, and I irritated lots of people just by writing the truth.</p> <p>Similar things happened to holdout businessmen under Yeltsin's regime when I lived for a while in Ryazan and Moscow Russia. People were offered pittances for their 50% interest in businesses - often hotels -- and sooner or later an explosion in their car typically sent them to the hospital for six or eight weeks, to 'give them the message' A fiancé told me of criminals polishing off rival criminals in front of her huge high rise apartment buiding with AK-47s, and no effective police response,then later took me to the cemetery to show me the graves and the five - foot tall black bas relief grave stones of young mafia men and their girlfriends/wives slain in Russian mafia wars which was an entire section of the cemetery.</p> <p>That's my background -- a journalism background and a huge background in life. </p> <p>In journalism, you neither reveal your sources, nor ever give up your film for anything.</p> <p>I've modified that somewhat to accommodate 'street' style shooting, but journalism's my background, and at the time I began shooting 'street' deletion was NOT a possibility short of stripping OUT all your film; deletion became a possibility only when the masses began shooting with digital and realized that deletion was a possibility and a few smart ones began demanding it.</p> <p>In my understanding, although Cartier-Bresson's shooting then was highly regarded, no one then even had coined the word 'street' to describe that manner of shooting. My shooting therefore I think predated the word 'street', though I stand to be corrected by those who know better, if they can substantiate their claims.</p> <p>I shoot in often US ghettos, in cities where the murder rate is nationally among the highest, where I'm often the only white face in a sea of black, yet I get along, and I do so by not being a wuss or being seen as weak. To show those characteristics is to invite trouble, believe, me, for that will get one marked as prey. Prey gets hounded and even terrorized by the predators of such places.</p> <p>On the contrary to show strength (as in my story of the famous fashion model who hung with the CRIPS and the BLOODS and then wrote a famous book about her experiences) is to gain respect and 'street cred'. That's good for more than a modicum of safety and even some freedom to take good photos.</p> <p>In Venice Beach there are some hoodlums I've taken respectable photos of. I can't be sure they're hoodlums, but I have strong suspicions, but they greet me as a 'friend' each time they see me, which is not frequently. I think they have passed the word that I am protected near their turf all because I did not back down when challenged and also took of one boss a world class and flattering (to him) photo.</p> <p>I stood up to him and his friends and they respected that. </p> <p>I also shoot in foreign countries, and have learned literally hundreds to thousands of tricks to safeguard myself. . . . particularly where I don't understand the spoken language. The language of 'street' however, is sometimes universal.</p> <p>I change my behavior in a country without government, say in violent and poorest Subsaharan Africa, of course.</p> <p>In some countries life is cheap, and one has to weigh every move with caution. A stolen camera sold could feed an entire family for several years in some countries, so one has to behave with great caution, but be careful not to trepidate for fear of triggering a predator response.</p> <p>I often have carried tens of thousands of dollars of equipment openly around my neck in a country where salaries have averaged $100 a month for many in the regions (not in city centers, where salaries are somewhat higher) and felt OK, because I have established a modus of caring myself on the street. That does NOT mean unfriendly, it just means with circumspection and always being alert and aware.</p> <p>I don't think that you should be second guessing my street manner without observing me based solely on what I have written here, and without also perusing my entire portfolio and actually reading those 16,000 plus comments, for to do otherwise would have you steering into the territory of wrong generalizations.</p> <p>Also to do that is far beyond the scope of what started out as a primer for newbies and some tips and tricks for the more experienced.</p> <p>If you are comfortable in your haven of the world shooting how you do, that's fine. I also make literally scores -- even hundreds to thousands of friends and acquaintances on the street; it's one of the finest parts of shooting 'street', but there is a side of danger too, and it's always lurking just around the corner.</p> <p>I move in many circles, and I am adeptly tuned to the nuances of each in most cases; I do not baldly go out and commit social faux pas, and instead lead a finely nuanced existence on the street, and in return get what some regard as wonderful captures, often shooting up close, almost from nostril distance people who two minutes before never had met me or knew I existed.'</p> <p>You don't get such cooperation by being a 'elephant in china shop' socially.</p> <p>I must be doing something right, because many of these people are PROUD of having met me and often will stop me later to say 'hi, remember me?' (I sometimes do and sometimes don't) and even point out from my portfolio by description a particular capture they liked.</p> <p>I shoot often in foreign countries and often I don't even speak the language, which can complicate matters, but I am a skilled communicator, even if means resorting to sign language or pidgeon English/other language.</p> <p>I analyze each of the extremely few negative encounters quite thoroughly to determine how it might be avoided next time, and for some have distilled my considered responses here and distributed them free.</p> <p>Do NOT make the mistake of thinking you can distill ME as a street photographer by the warnings I post here, for that would be simply wrong.</p> <p>instead, look at my photos, as Fred has suggested.</p> <p>I must be doing something right.</p> <p>And when I walk down the street of a foreign city (several in fact) where I've been seen photographing, residents frequently regard me as one of their own, and I even hear my name called out, as a friend. </p> <p>In fact, this is quite common.</p> <p>This does not happen to locals at all, as no one knows their name.</p> <p>Do you hear your name called out where you photograph?</p> <p>To these former and possibly future subjects, my friendship is valued as are my captures which many have taken the time to look up.</p> <p>I take that as a high honor and always strive to deserve the positive attention by behaving honorably and properly on the street. One way to do that is to avoid controversy, and one way to avoid controversy is to be explicit where it is called for based on my long, long, long experience, though such instances are pretty rare.</p> <p>Remember, if you read above, I was photographing strangers in a strange city (Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine) during the time when (unbeknown to anyone to anyone since there was a news blackout) during about a 20-day period two youths killed for thrills and for profit over 20 people in one of the great mass murders of the 21st Century. I carried expensive equipment, and I have no doubt I was targeted by them, but they were killing people who allowed them to get close or who were unaware of the danger they posed; I kept vigilant and probably escaped an almost certain death by their brutal bludgeoning thrill and profit attacks.</p> <p>In one murder, they plunged a screwdriver into a victim's eye and turned it, and are heard on their own thrill video exclaiming that the guy just wouldn't die! That might have my fate if I were less aware and more accommodating.</p> <p>You never know when you're out photographing when the next person might be the next mass murderer or thrill killer; I am sure I've met three mass murderers in my lifetime while out on the street, and each time not fallen prey, and each time did not recognize them for who they were but pieced it together from evidence I learned later, including these two youths (whom I count as one, which means there are two others I have not written about).</p> <p>One of those actually threatened to slice my throat at age 19 with the same beef carving knife he used to slice prime rib for Columbia Univ. dignitaries as well as grandmothers he first raped after trapping them in elevators between floors in Manhattan's Washington Heights neighborhood before he sliced their throats.</p> <p>He had that same knife to my throat in a fit of anger where he worked as a cook and I a waiter and dared me 'You don't think I could do it, do you college boy?!!!!' I replied I fully believed he could indeed slice me to pieces with that knife, and thereupon, flashing a huge, almost disarming grin, he let me go, and carried on, slicing prime rib as though nothing had happened.</p> <p>My cool saved my life, I am certain!<br> .<br> My last day of my freshman year on the way to Grand Central railroad 'over the taxi back seat I saw his photo, full page in the front page of the tabloid New York Daily News with the headline 'Washington Heights grandmother murder-rapist caught!, etailing how they had found THAT KNIFE in his food services locker --the multiple murder weapon that came a hair from slicing my throat to death. Don't believe me, either, if doubtful -- do your own research!</p> <p>Read in Wikipedia, under the title 'Dnipropetrovsk Massacres', if you doubt me about the mass murders in Dnipropetrovsk, then go through my portfolio and match posting dates, and posting cities with the murder dates.</p> <p>I was well known in that city.</p> <p>I do not denigrate you or your experience or background.</p> <p>I ask you based on this brief recount to not denigrate mine either.</p> <p>I expect to die with my boots off, having been through war, riots, been in numerous ghettos with a camera when just to BE in a ghetto with my white skin was almost a death sentence, traveled world wide (numerous times), been shot, been chased by murderous individuals only to be saved by cops and had numerous other incidents too numerous to mention.</p> <p>I ask that you respect that background and my journalism roots.</p> <p>I respect that you cannot possibly have that background, and understand that your comments probably are well meaning, but are lacking in the experiences I have squeaked through for a lifetime, some good part of which was spent either gathering the news which often was unwelcome or taking photos on the street, which is not always welcome, but which can be welcome and wonderful when it works out well.</p> <p>Which it so often does.</p> <p>I hope to die with my boots off, despite all.</p> <p>I wrote what I wrote so others may do the same; there are tricky situations that can develop on the street, and not just in some Silicon Valley or San Francisco enclave of the high average income and highly educated (where I lived for a long period), but throughout the world, where I have lived also for a long time among those who see in just one camera around your neck the cost of over a year's food, rent and living expenses if just they can get their hands on it to resell it.</p> <p>I wrote this for your (and others') benefits, out of the goodness of my heart and out of what I do so commonly and usually -- sharing.</p> <p>It's why I have nearly 2,000 photos on this service.</p> <p>Sharing.</p> <p>I do it on the street when I can, when it's safe, so I can also share the photographic proceeds with you and other PN members.</p> <p>For an illustrative example, please see my latest posting, 'Konstantin (and friends).' (no link, you might understand more by browsing my photos and comments rather than just this thread, and that includes reading the 'Request for Critique' under that photo, which describes a very common occurrence.</p> <p>Be safe, please (and a trifle less presumptive, please).</p> <p> john</p> <p>John (Crosley)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norma Desmond Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 <p><<<<em>In my understanding, although Cartier-Bresson's shooting then was highly regarded, no one then even had coined the word 'street' to describe that manner of shooting. My shooting therefore I think predated the word 'street', though I stand to be corrected by those who know better, if they can substantiate their claims.</em>>>></p> <p>John, I couldn't really find when the term "street photography" was coined (didn't do an exhaustive search), but found two interesting articles on street photography as an activity. Though they are wiki-type articles and therefore somewhat more popular than studied, they give some interesting background.</p> <p>The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flâneur">FIRST ARTICLE</a> is about the first street photographers, though as you say they may not have been called that.</p> <p>The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flâneur">SECOND ARTICLE</a> is about the word <em>flâneur</em>, which I enjoyed reading. I vote for changing the <em>Street and Doc</em> forum to the F<em>lâneurs With A Camera</em> (a phrase coined in the article) forum, just because a little French sounds ever so sophisticated! :)</p> We didn't need dialogue. We had faces! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncrosley Posted March 27, 2013 Author Share Posted March 27, 2013 <p>Fred G.</p> <p>At one time the term Flaneur (I don't have the accent on my keyboard) was well discussed by European members of Photo.net, especially in comments under their photos. That time has long since passed. In fact many members described themselves as flaneurs with cameras, and some of them were from France.</p> <p>This, then is a revival of an idea that withered on this service, now to be reborn.</p> <p>Retracing his footsteps and travels as MOMA has done of Henri Cartier-Bresson, it should be quite clear his was a lifestyle of flaneur with camera much of the time.</p> <p>Agree?</p> <p>Thanks for the observation.</p> <p>john<br /> <br />John (Crosley)</p> <p>Fred, I think your links need fixing. In my experience, both lead to the same article on flaneur, and the first did not lead to 'street photography. You may want to fix that if I'm correct and not victim of a computer error.<br> jc</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 <p>Loafer with a camera. I like the sound of that.</p> <p>I am a Loafauxteaugraveuriste.<br /><br /><br /><br /></p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norma Desmond Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 <p>John, sure. You're right, I got the first link wrong. It should be <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Street_photography">HERE</a>. Always good to be reminded of Atget.</p> We didn't need dialogue. We had faces! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted March 27, 2013 Share Posted March 27, 2013 >>> How many photos have you taken, over how many years, and in how many countries? I don't know, nor do I think that is relevant. Whatever the number is, if I quadrupled it, I would still not proclaim 'I DO NOT DELELTE, so don't ask me,' from the beginning of an engagement with a subject on the street. As I said, it would come of curt and off-putting, and I have respect for the people I photograph. My time has never been "wasted" by "time-wasters." I just don't characterize people/subjects in terms such as that and others you have used here and on other pnet threads. >>> instead, look at my photos, as Fred has suggested. I don't think Fred suggested that, but you have a couple times. And I've viewed them in the context of your writings on this thread. Are you looking for feedback? Let me know... BTW, I think Asher's advice is spot-on and the best overall on this thread... www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncrosley Posted March 27, 2013 Author Share Posted March 27, 2013 <p>Brad, I'm saddened that you continue to misrepresent what I have written. I suggest you re-read the entire thread, do so in context, and without a seeming agenda or just run the risk of sounding like a troll and thus being ignored.</p> <p>No, I am NOT looking for your feedback; with 16,000+ comments to date, I have plenty of feedback, and if I feel you have misrepresented me as I state above, why would I be seen to value in any way your further feedback?</p> <p>You have taken points out of dozens I have made, and which I have emphasized happen rather rarely and which apply rarely and to a relatively small number of people in a nuanced street setting as read by me with my enormous international experience spanning parts of five decades shooting, and somehow characterized it and my actions negatively as though that were the way I carried myself always with everybody I meet -- which is a totally false characterization of (1) what I have written and (2) how I comport myself.</p> <p>That reflects a clear misreading and/or misunderstanding of what I have written.<br /> Whether through thickness, malignancy, or just carelessness you have now several times used editing trickery and selective editing to mischaracterize me and my street behavior which you have NEVER OBSERVED.</p> <p>I feel that such behavior is bad and request that you cease and instead concentrate if you want to contribute to doing so productively to help other photographers as I have, stating your qualifications (as I have) rather than trying to pick a fight over semantics.</p> <p>This entire post was made in good faith for the edification of certain members especially newbies, and not for ad hominem attacks which mischaracterize and misstate the entirety of the presentation or my behavior, by selectively editing and emphasizing a few points to the total disregard of literally dozens of other points.</p> <p>If you have personal problems with me, I invite you to write me, and I guarantee you a civil response; my e-mail is on my biography page, and I read e-mail in a timely manner. This is not the place for such colloquy. You might be surprised by my response if you write.</p> <p>I think you can comport your writing here better and for the good of the whole Photo.net community as I have, and I expect no less from any Photo.net member.</p> <p>john<br> <br /> John (Crosley)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now