john_sidlo

<p>I was going to compose a reply, but Frank Uhlig seemed to hit the nail on the head.</p>

<p>John Updike passed from the scene today, a writer whose books I've enjoyed for decades. A true polymath, he wrote novels, short stories, criticism and several books on "Looking At Art". On 2/5/2006, my wife and I happened to be at the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, when I recognized that shock of white hair from the many jacket covers I'd seen, "Looking At Art" and snapped this photo:<br /> <img src="http://www.johnsidlo.com/images/UpdikeLookingDSC13838.jpg" alt="" /> <br /> While not a particularly good photo, it came to mind when I read <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/28/books/28updike.html?scp=5&sq=Updike&st=cse">this NYTimes article</a><br>

Fare thee well, Mr. Updike!</p>

It sounds as though this photograph will be shown and compared to the earlier photo, so you should try to replicate it as much as possible in lighting and focal length. If it was overcast or sunny, morning, noon or night, you should try to take the photo at about the same time. These issues may have to be traded off with times of traffic congestion. Shooting it at the same season would be even better, but probably not an option. Try taking a range of shots at various focal lengths to approximate what you see in the original, paying particular attention to matching the perspective and angle, and from the same rooftop if possible. Using a tripod is a good idea, and shooting at f8 to f11 will get you the best performance from your lenses - choose the lowest ISO and use whatever shutter speed that implies. Shoot it in "raw" format to get the most resolution and color accuracy.

<p>Back in May, Richard (www.vanle.com) <a href="http://www.photo.net/street-documentary-photography-forum/00PXmU">

posted </a> a note about a street photo contest run by a New York public radio station. Along with some others

who frequent this forum, I entered this contest. Today they <a

href="http://www.flickr.com/groups/wnycstreetshots/">announced the winner, Joe Wigfall</a>. Congratulations to

the winner, and thanks to Richard for the heads-up for this contest, which had over 9000 entries from hundreds of

shooters.</p>

<p><b>BUT </b><br/>They sent me a private invitation to show <a

href=" of my entries</a> along with

the winner and some others at the Camera Club of New York,

336 West 37th Street from July 11th through August 8th. Drop in and have a look if you find yourself in that

neighborhood!</p>

<p>The photographer at the link cited said he responded with "I told him that yes, in fact, I can." This is a response I have given as well. I've never encountered anyone as aggressive, happily. </p>

<p>

I'm wondering, out loud, if another response might have defused the situation more quickly, for example by saying "Sorry to have bothered you", smiling and walking away. It occurs to me that contradicting his mistaken understanding of your rights are is unlikely to result in a calm debate, when he was already so angry. It really is unimportant whether you were right or not <i>at that exact moment</i>. A greater priority is not to get slugged, or have your equipment damaged, or to respond physically yourself.

</p><p>

In those situations, I'm beginning to think it can be better to simply apologize and avoid argument. Unless, of course, it is your goal to establish some new First Amendment principle, for example.</p>

<p>

On a typical outing I might see dozens of shot opportunities. I miss shots for lots of reasons, some valid, some not: I wasn't ready, the subject turned their head at the last minute, an unanticipated light suddenly appeared, I didn't frame it well, I accidentally included too much. Maybe another valid reason is avoiding a bloody nose. Another photo op is sure to be around the corner.</p>

This particular forum frowns on equipment discussions. You'll have better luck on other forums listed on the photo.net home page.

OK, Ellis, one of those links is in my paste buffer ready to add to the forum here, but I see you've beaten me to the punch.

 

Highly recommended.

<p>Hoo, boy! That's from a Police Poster seen on the Streets of London.</p><p>

The story:

<a

href="http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/visual_arts/article3574763.ece">Street

photographers fear for their art amid climate of suspicion (London Times,

3/22/08)</a></p>

<p>One of you Londoners should capture an image of this poster and post it here.

After you post bail, of course.</p>

thx leslie

Sounds to me like you're looking for an excuse to buy a new camera: just do it and pick the camera you've really been wanting. There are equipment forums elsewhere on this site (not here - it is generally discouraged in this forum).

 

If on the other hand you really do want to get into photojournalism, I'd start out by looking for good books on the subject (and not on the hardware). I'm not a photojournalist, but I did read an informative, enjoyable book about it, "Photojournalism - The Professional's Approach" by Kenneth Kobre. If you're interested in that, then maybe a real photojournalist here will chime in with a better recommendation that mine.

1. Male / Female

 

M

 

2. Straight / Gay / Bi

 

S

 

3. 15-29 / 30-44 / 45-60 / 61 and above

 

61+

 

4. Married / Single / Commited

 

M/C

 

5. City / Country [you live or spend most time in]

 

Boston

 

6. What is your primary cam?

 

D200 (but searching for a digital Konica Hexar)

 

7. What is your primary lens?

 

35mm

 

8. Besides Street/Doc photography, what photo genre do you like most?

 

none

 

9. How often do you shoot? Everyday / few times a week / once a week / less frequent

 

few times a week

 

10. Where do you hang online besides Photo.net?

 

none

 

11. What's in your MP3 / walkman / stereo / tape deck ?

 

na - I tried doing this with earphones, and it didn't work. I'm more into the music of the street.

 

12. How long have you been shooting SP/Doc? 0-2 / 3-6 / 7-10 / above 10

 

7+

 

13. What is/are your other favorite hobby beside SP/Doc?

 

na

 

14. Favorite street photography city you have been to?

 

nyc

 

15. Favorite focal length for Street/Doc AFAYK

 

35

 

16. Favorite RAW converter/ editor / library software combo or film / developer combo

 

ps

 

17. Where do you look for Street / Doc Photo inspiration?

 

books, mostly

 

 

18. A movie about photography you would recommend?

 

war photographer - James Nachtwey

 

19. How many times have you been physically attacked from street shooting? verbally abused?

 

none/a few times/confronted about once a year

 

20. Favorite beverage alcohol or otherwise

 

vodka

Thanks, Robert.

Top 10 reasons to use a tripod with street photography:

 

10. Your camera weighs more than 40 lbs.

 

9. ?

 

8. ?

 

7. ?

...

<p>"leslie cheung prolific poster, Jan 23, 2008; 08:25 p.m.

 

John,

 

This method probably won't work with people shots which is what Susan is after I believe. "</p>

<p>

Yes, it will. Light is light.

</p><br/>

<p>See

<a href=

"http://www.johnsidlo.com/image.php?src=Dereksm.jpg&url=images2002">

http://www.johnsidlo.com/image.php?src=Dereksm.jpg&url=images2002</a>

, for example.</p>

You also have to take special pains in printing these, since they are not your average daylight photos. The typical printing system is automated and tries to produce a daylight shot. I had a photo of a night sky from a tripod once, that I could absolutely not get printed. Finally I got a film scanner and did it myself, and found a perfectly exposed shot of the stars in Arizona. If it was noise, it corresponded to the small number of constellations I was familiar with.

<p>Here's neopan 400 pushed to 800, and although I don't have the exposure info, I think it was from the meter underexposed by 2. One nice side effect of pushing a stop, for night shots, is the nice contrast you get from pushing.</p>

<a href=

"http://www.johnsidlo.com/image.php?src=CoolidgeFrontsm.jpg&url=images2002">

http://www.johnsidlo.com/image.php?src=CoolidgeFrontsm.jpg&url=images2002</a>

"Barry Fisherphoto.net patron prolific poster, Jan 23, 2008; 06:45 p.m.

 

John, is the purpose of your way to basically allow a faster shutter speed/higher Apeture combination?

"

 

It is to allow a faster shutter speed, and to get an image that looks like it was shot at night, both. Push to get the speed, and underexpose to make it (unlit bg mostly) look dark, as it does at night. In my experience that usually requires a 2 stop underexposure on top of that. With digital, I usually up the exposure to at least 800, and underexpose (as read by the meter) by 2. Your metering generally aims at a neutral gray, and that is not what you see at night - it is DARK.

Before the date, try pushing the tri-x a stop or two, and then underexpose your resulting iso 800 or 1600 2 stops. See if that gets the effect you want.

 

In other words, put Tri-x 400 in the camera, set the ISO to 800, then underexpose that by 2 stops, then follow the instructions to develop the film at 800. (or 1200 or 1600).

Thanks for the links Eugene. I found his discussions of portrait and assignments and camera very interesting. WRT the camera, it reminded me of "Avedon At Work in the American West" by Laura Wilson. That book, and a video featuring Avedon on PBS, brought out similar issues - the camera is so large and imposing, and the setup so lengthy that the subject starts to retreat into their own reverie. Somewhat akin to the retreat I witness on the trolly as I observe and photograph people traveling there. His interactions with the subjects, lengthy, sometimes distanced, but watchful and unnoticed under the hood, also resonated. Reflecting on that process of setting up a shot with 75-100 lbs of gear, arranging the scene and subject, over many minutes, definitely introduces another dynamic.

 

I also do photo assignements on a very modest basis - Covers for a local advertiser magazine, but often find them also an interesting experience - different from the Street Photography I do most - directed and focussed, but full of enough surprises that thinking fast on your feet is required. I also find some of the instincts of watching faces on the street to be helpful at this.

Before going out shooting, stand in front of a mirror, point at yourself, and repeat "I give myself permission to do this", until it sinks in.

 

Ask forgivness, never permission. Smile when caught. Be safe, however - pass up a shot you think is risky.

 

Watch and shoot faces, gestures, interactions, body language.

 

Really good street photographers throw away 97 to 100 of every 100 pictures they take. Less experienced shooters have more keepers.

check this out:

 

http://www.ianmaceachern.com

Thx, Ray.

It was so long ago I can't remember. However, that seems like the service I'm subscribed to.

After someone here mentioned "Google Alerts" a while back, I've been receiving

3-4 alerts a week on the topic "street photography" from Google. A good part of

the time I get a hit on something like "Main Street Photography", but

occasionally there's a nice surprise, such as this:

 

<<<<<<<<<<<

 

Google News Alert for: "street photography"

 

80 to watch in '08

 

Brooklyn Papers - Brooklyn,NY,USA

 

Lara Wechsler, Park Slope: Combining the finesse of fine art with the grit of

 

street photography, her photos of Coney Island (larawechsler.com) are ...

 

>>>>>>>>>>>

"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself"...

 

FDR, March 4, 1933