Is everyone a street photographer now?

[mike dixon]

<i>As a new street photographer I was guilty of smashing the shutter so often to get a shot, so at least one of the bunch might be better composed or focused. I guess its a learning process, now I think more and compose more and click less.</i><P>

 

If it's any consolation, Robert Frank shot about 27,000 exposures (on film!) to get the seven dozen images that ended up in <i>The Americans</i>. Based on his "batting average," the guy must have been a total hack! If someone that unskilled could produce a book that profoundly influenced the entire genre, maybe there's hope for the rest of us . . . ;-)

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Robert Frank had an idea and a vision. He was not snapping at anything and everything that came into his field of vision. I bet if I looked carefully at the thousands of rejects, I'd see some purpose and vision he was moving toward. It would likely not all make sense to me, because I'm not inside his head, but I bet I'd see a thoughtful and visionary photographer at work. I think that's different from what Marie is getting at. Maybe not. I'm not inside her head either. Just giving her the benefit of the doubt in agreeing that there are likely many shutter-happy and pretty mindless snappers out there that can't be compared to or even spoken about in the same breath as Robert Frank.</p>

[MarieH]

<p>Id' love to see Robert Franks rejects, no doubt still artful. Film was cheaper then but still expensive to waste I'd think. But that's an interesting point you've both made.</p>

[mike dixon]

How many photographers, when they begin, start off with a clear idea and vision of what they want to accomplish? I agree that Frank had an idea and vision (as well as considerable experience) before he began, but I would be surprised if that vision were not further developed and shaped by the many thousands of photos he took.

 

It's unrealistic to expect people who are trying something new to NOT take a lot of pointless photos. Sure, there are people who will never develop any clear vision of what they're trying to do, but I don't think that people who are madly snapping away are necessarily doing something wrong. They are at least doing something and enjoying their hobby. That's how I became passionate about photography; I'm not going to look down on others for going through the same stages.

[lex_jenkins]

<p>During his final year or two, Garry Winogrand was described by folks who accompanied him as seeming to snap photos randomly and without purpose. But for all we know he had a purpose that he didn't have time or patience to explain or demonstrate. It sounded as if he was using a still camera almost in documentary movie camera fashion. Rather than selecting or editing those rolls of film it might be interesting to leave them intact, in sequence, and present those photos in rapid fire slideshow or near-cinema speed. Perhaps in the context of a 3-5 minute movie, Winogrand's final vision might become apparent.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>In general, the people I'm talking about are not doing it as a hobby. They're doing it because it's a fad. It's the thing to do. It's not as intentional or thought out as stamp collecting. It's more akin to saying "like" in every sentence uttered. More of a habit than a hobby.</p>

<p>But if you guys want to turn every Tom, Dick, and Susan snapping their cell phone cameras as if they had a tick into a potential Robert Frank or Garry Winogrand, go for it. </p>

[john_h.1]

<blockquote>

<p>"much of this has very little to do with <em>photography</em>. It has to do with picture taking... ..the people I'm talking about are not doing it as a hobby."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>How dare these inferior unwashed cretins share the same space as and not yield to the grand artists among them. Don't they know who we are?</p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>In general, the people I'm talking about are not doing it as a hobby. They're doing it because it's a fad.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

How many people on the street shooting have you stopped and asked about their activities? </p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>I suppose I might feel differently if I'd actually seen more folks engaged in street photography where I live. But there ain't many of us in Foat Wuth. When I've been out and about downtown I've never seen another photographer doing what I do, which is the very typical meandering around or corner-lurking slurpshots, chattering with folks at the train station or bus stops. Maybe they're just stealthier and I don't see 'em. But I'm not seeing much of anything posted to the usual social media sites from FW. The "traditional" (dare I say cliched or stereotypical) style of street photography just isn't a very common activity here.</p>

<p>Now, on every visit downtown, I do see lots of people taking happy snaps. But it's always of their own groups of family and friends, or the usual tourist stuff.</p>

<p>Tell ya what, tho' - family happy snaps are getting better. Folks are seeing better photography on social media and either mimicking what they see or reading up online about how to make better happy snaps. I'm not seeing nearly as many "Maw, Zerelda and Abner squinting into the sun and standing uncomfortably in front of the Eyeful Tar/Leaning Tar of Pizza/Uncle Hooter's new barn."</p>

<p>Brian Luenser, a fellow about my age and accountant by profession, is probably the most active and prolific photographer taking public candids downtown, and I doubt Brian would describe himself as a street photographer. He's more of a downtown ambassador, greeter, documentarian, society photo-columnist, and advocate for the revitalized downtown area. And his snaps are getter better too. A couple of years ago his photos were pretty unremarkable. But he's become more confident and comfortable - aided by his phenomenally popular Facebook page, with hundreds of followers, more than many well known photojournalists - his impromptu portraits have become better. Couples and groups actually seek him out downtown at night and during events to ask him to take their photos for his Facebook wall. And he's been invited to be the designated photographer for events such as the Fort Worth Symphony Orchestra's summer outdoor concerts. That sort of access will help him improve his game even more.</p>

<p>From that perspective, mashing the shutter button a lot, producing a bunch of unremarkable photos, but persevering, learning and improving may conceivably result in Brian eventually being recognized as a significant contributor to the city's documentary history, something that hasn't been done consistently by anyone else since the local daily newspaper became insignificant a decade ago.</p>

<p>He may never become one of the cool kids in street photography. But there's more to candid photography than the detached observer, alienated loner, the quirky "sort of a spy", and the ironic juxtapositionist.</p>

[spanky]

<p>Comparing most of todays street shooters to Frank and Winogrand is useless in my opinion. First of all, Winogrand has been dead for 30 years and to the best of my knowledge Frank stopped street shooting with his "NY Bus Series" from the 1950's. I would love to see what Frank would do with SP today, but I'm not going to hold my breath; he seems content to be more or less retired, living off the sales of his "The Americans" prints (have you seen how much some of these are going for on the auction block?) and I guess some of his later still life photographs.<br>

Furthermore, Winogrand, Frank, Klein, and others of their ilk are from a different time, a different culture. A lot has changed since their heyday and like all art, their work is the result of the individual way each of them filtered and processed their time and culture. All art is an expression of its time. That is not to say it's irrelevant in todays contemporary times, I'm just saying that todays SP is bound to be different then that of 50-60 years ago. Who can say how the best of todays street photography will resonate with people in the year 2064?</p>

<p>Now then, I visit a few other SP forums and this kind of discussion often turns up. Yes, there are a lot of people who refer to themselves as "street photographers." Yes, there is a lot of mediocre (and worse) SP being uploaded to the net everyday. So what? Some of it I like, some of it I don't and often for reasons I cannot quite put my finger on. Some people like Eric Kim, whose work I find to be mediocre at best, still are able to market themselves brilliantly and are able to set up workshops where people are willing to spend a fair amount of cash to be "taught" street photography. Other then mild curiosity as to why some people would willingly fork over their cash for such a pursuit, I really don't care and I don't see why anyone else should either. I'm far too busy thinking about my own work and how I can make it grow and meet my high standards. Maybe that's what some people need to do: Stop worrying about what other people are shooting and concentrate on their own work.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Jeff, do you really think I'm going to justify myself to you? What number of people would satisfy you? I wonder. Actually, I don't. </p>

[spanky]

<p>One other quick comment I forgot to mention. Many of the photographer we admire had the luck of knowing the right people who were instrumental in them getting grants and such. Walker Evens and Edward Steichen were two huge names in photography back them as was John Szarkowski later on. They were all centered in NY and they all assisted photographers in establishing careers. As far as I know, none of of these photographers ever held a steady 9-5 job like myself and I presume most others here in this forum. When you have that much time to pursue something, of course one will eventually excel at it. A 40 hour work week is much longer then 40 hours when you factor in commute times and such. I'm lucky that I have what little time do to devote to photography.</p>

[Brad_]

>>> Many of the photographer we admire had the luck of knowing the right people who were instrumental

in them getting grants and such. … A 40 hour work week is much longer then 40 hours when you factor in commute times and such. I'm lucky that I have what little time do to devote to photography.

 

I think it is much more about embracing a strong commitment/drive ethic. That's evident in the consistently excellent work they produce, the high standards they impose on themselves, and the

connections fostered through relentless pursuits. That's what I see coming from the people I know who have made

something happen with respect to their photography.

 

Sorry, the 40 hours a week regular job getting in the way just doesn't wash. It's an excuse.

[MarieH]

<p>I hold down a full time job. I am off one day per week and every other weekend. So I have 4 days in two weeks to entertain myself, see my daughter, do my groceries, get my oil changed, laundry, go pay bills, cut the lawn, cook... Yeah it kind of gets in the way. If I had 40 free hours on the other hand..I'd shoot many more pictures, especially if someone gave me a grant or was paying my bills. And then again there is the winter. On my one weekly day off, I usually have life to contend with, though sometimes I will call sick, take a 'me' break and go out and take pics a few hours. But losing a days pay is sometimes not at all a wise move. Marc Todd has made a good reality bites, point. I'd love to be free to travel to interesting places like Chicago and Philadelphia and Detroit to take pictures, who wouldn't come back with a nice portfolio if that was possible? And not everyone can afford to travel on their vacations, for various reasons, its been 'balconville' for me while I save up for new winter tires or other needy things. :)</p>

 

[EricM]

Excuses

[MarieH]

Im a nurse. Eric your a 'unit still photographer' Lots of free time have you? Maybe I should look into

your line of work. I need a rest.

[EricM]

<p>My post wasn't intended to be offensive and hit a sensitive spot. You can have results, or excuses. But not both. I've learned that the hard way and is covered in Brads most recent and concise post. </p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>I don't think a 40-hour-a-week job and other commitments is an excuse. For some, it's simply a fact of life. Marie is explaining why she hasn't devoted the time to photography. I haven't understood her to be making excuses, but rather to be explaining her reality. Folks live with very different realities and very different limitations and very different demands on their time and energy. I know plenty of people who would like to spend their time in a certain way and would surely have the drive and skill necessary to do so and for all kinds of reasons, among them priorities, they just cannot. It's not an excuse. It's just how it is for most folks who aren't living the model or ideal of what someone else thinks a photographer's life should be. They are living <em>their</em> life, not Frank's and not Winogrand's and not Eric's.</p>

<p>When I was working what was more like a 60-hour a week job, I wanted very much to go to school to get my Masters, but I just didn't have the time or energy to do it the way I knew I wanted to, in a serious and devoted way. So I waited until work eased up and I could accommodate myself as a student. I don't think I was using work as an excuse. I was facing up to reality and making realistic choices. Doing something well and doing something with the kind of devotion one wants takes time and energy, and we don't always have that even if we would like it to be that way.</p>

<p>No. The world isn't divided up into only those two things: results or excuses. There are demands. There are unforeseen events. There are commitments. There's struggle. There are kids to feed, parents to care for. And some people, no matter how desperately they want to pursue other things, fulfill various obligations they have and put their own desires and needs on hold.</p>

[spanky]

<p>Well, if you're shooting digital, then yeah, a 40 hour work week probably isn't going to be an issue. You can edit and photoshop your work on your hour lunch breaks even. If you are a film shooter who is crazy enough to insist on doing your own processing and printing as I am, then yes, a 40 hour work week is going cut into your time and it's not just that, but all the other day to day business of life that needs our attention (like DMV visits which I had to do today.) I try to develop two rolls a day on the days I work. That's 10 rolls a week. My two days off I'm shooting or I'm in the darkroom. When I'm out shooting I often shoot 10 or more rolls. So it's a never ending cycle. Ultimately, it comes down to priorities: Shoot less and have more time for the darkroom or shoot more and just accept the fact that some rolls will get developed but could possibly never be looked at. I have many such rolls going back years that I intend to get around to "someday." I have no idea anymore what's on them, my negatives are organized by format and year and each envelop will have a simple location or event written on it. I simply decided that my priority would be to spend what little free time I can scrape together shooting and I would just do sporadic printing such as on rainy days.</p>

<p>Somewhere I have a magazine interview with Bill Owens where the writer asked him why he took such a long hiatus from photography after publishing his books in the '70's. He replied that it was more important to him to put his kids through college then for him to be a artist. I'm of the same mindset. I'd rather not have to worry about paying the rent on any given month or having to live on oatmeal and rice cakes so I work full time and consider my photography a simple pastime. Maybe if I lived in New York and got started in photography much earlier in life then I did, and I moved in influential circles, then maybe I'd play the starving artist gambit for awhile.</p>

[spanky]

<p>Well said Fred, thanks.</p>

[EricM]

<p>If it's not a number one priority in your life, then it's not a number one priority. It's as simple as that.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Marc, sure. But I'll tell you something. I'm a digital photographer and wouldn't be able to complete most of my processing or printing on a lunch hour. I devote a lot of time to each print, often treating them as I would a painting, finessing color, bringing out shadow detail, working with gradation of tone. I put in the time and care necessary to get out of a shot what I want. While I understand that digital makes some stuff easier and more accessible to do, it's not as simple as some of the apps and advertising make it out to be, when you want to develop your own style and relationship of that style to your content. I don't think it's a matter of the particular medium as much as it is the kind of care and nuance you put into what you're doing.</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Eric, I agree, if it's not the top priority, it's not the top priority. But if you choose to prioritize a sick kid or a job over photography that DOESN'T MEAN and SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN TO MEAN that you're using your sick kid or job as an excuse. It just means you've prioritized. Every choice we make to do something entails a passive choice NOT to do something else at the same time. But the choice we make is not an EXCUSE not to do the other thing. It's just a choice. And sometimes, we don't have or feel we have the luxury of choice. We have bills to pay and mouths to feed, and those often aren't choices in the same way other things are choices. They are kind of necessities to survival. In any case, I certainly wouldn't make the judgment that someone who prioritizes one thing over another is using that first thing as an excuse not to do the other unless I had a whole bunch of other information which pointed in that direction.</p>

[Uhooru]

<p>Its quite ok to make a choice, but a choice isn't an excuse. Certain achievements simply require a certain level of drive, effort, time, and commitment as pre-requisite. Really, I think the thing that sets photographers apart and I guess its true in any creative activity, is when they stumble on to something in their work that compels their interest to explore an idea or pathway and go where it leads. When you get on that stream, really the drive will be there. think about when you learned to walk and talk. Depending on how strong that motivation is, one will find a way to try to accomplish it. If the time and energy isn't forthcoming, no matter the reason, well, it seems axiomatic, but we get out what we put in. Unfortunately there's no pill I know that alters that equation.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>It's a challenge to pursue any creative outlet while juggling work, families and other priorities, along with our physical capabilities. When I was younger I had way too much energy and could juggle a full time job, very physically demanding part time jobs in patient care and loading/unloading trucks on a freight dock, while still having enough energy for local theater.</p>

<p>But now, with less energy and some mobility impairments and chronic pain due to a car wreck several years ago, I've adjusted my expectations. My primary occupation has been as caregiver for various elderly relatives so they can live at home rather than having to go into nursing homes. Basically I simply adjusted from working in patient care for other folks at hospitals and clinics to doing the same thing at home. Suits me.</p>

<p>Thanks to occasional relief from visiting nurses and aides, I have two or three days a month where I have enough free time and feel well enough to go into town and see a play or musical performance, meander around snapping candid pix and just enjoying myself. I make the most of those opportunities and it's not at all unusual for me to take 500-1,000 photos in a single day. I snap pix freely, intuitively, just responding to the moment, sometimes anticipating a moment that may not come, whether passing scenes from the bus or snapping while walking in a crowd without even pausing. The camera is often set to continuous framerates, and I've even learned to get some use from my Nikon V1's silly "smart photo selector" mode. The buffer is like having my own Omega 13 device (fans of the movie Galaxy Quest will get the reference).</p>

<p>It costs me nothing but time and generous use of the delete key later in reviewing photos. It's my time, my shutter release button and delete key. To borrow the joke about the boy in the bathtub, it's my soap and my penis and I'll wash it as fast as I want. I've never regretted shooting "too many" photos. I've often regretted hesitating and missing a shot. When I shot film I was almost as prolific on the shutter release button and used to have dozens of undeveloped rolls of exposed film. Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, a flood ruined those rolls, but I don't waste time fretting over it. Life moves on and presents new opportunities.</p>

<p>But rather than investing all my hopes for satisfying photography into those few days I have to myself, I've adjusted and adapted. Most of my photos are taken within a mile of home; many within 400 yards of my door. I photograph folks I meet in my neighborhood - usually with permission, or in ways that faces can't be identified, since folks here have different expectations of privacy than in the more touristy downtown area. I photograph whatever catches my eye while I'm walking for exercise. Apparently I'm considered the harmless eccentric guy with the camera now. Awhile back, as I was photographing birds hovering around parking lot lights one night, I could smell pot smoke coming from a nearby group of fellows who were relaxing outside their shop after work. One of the guys sounded a bit paranoid about seeing me with a camera, around 20 yards away, although I wasn't aiming at them. The shop owner said "Nah, he's cool. He's a photographer."</p>

<p>That may be the only time in my life I've ever heard the words "He's cool" and "He's a photographer" in the same thought.</p>