Discussion in 'Talking Pictures' started by Geren, Feb 10, 2020.
I wasn’t being nasty to Mike!
I don’t “do street” because I don’t like being deliberately photographed and I feel that should be reciprocated. I take pictures of parades because anyone dressing up and performing in public is inviting to be photographed. Ditto for sporting events. People also get in the way so inevitably some of my pictures have people in them but it isn’t deliberate. Anonymous figures can also lend scale to landscape.
So no I don’t think these are “street”, I’d say documentary/portrait
May I just point out that not all aspects of street photography involve photographing people.
Which ones do you think were posing for me?
This is true. Peopleless streets can be interesting...
IMVHO, Tony, the initial three are portraits, albeit unposed , and the fourth is more street(ish) and/or a kind of environmental portrait Much like my photo
from Wednesday morning is kind of an environmental, albeit sadly, portrait ...
But the very basis of the street photography that you define "meaning that they were not in communication with the photographer, or ideally knowing a photo was being taken of them" traces it's roots back to Cartier-Bresson and the 'decisive moment'. And whilst Cartier- Bresson style may now be seen as dated, the same mantra is promoted by Joel Mayerowitz, who says when editing you should look back to ' the instant you made the photograph, the fraction of a second when something came to you and you knew that that was the moment you had to capture.....when everything came together...will stand out afterwards'.
We may not always be successful in capturing that emotion/moment which made us raise our camera, but to take a photograph and not know why you took it, whatever the genre will surely lead to images that lack both focus and soul?
That's rather a wide claim, can you prove it? How do you know the photographer's intention? How do you define "focus" in that context? How do you define "soul" in that context?
Is this, in fact, anything more than common place pretentious nonsense?
I don’t think I’ve yet found a picture in my archive where I’ve asked myself “why the heck did I take that?” I’ve often asked myself “where did I take that?”. I do cull pictures so anything out of focus or otherwise grossly faulty gets deleted.
I take pictures mainly as a record/reminder of where I’ve been so my intention is always clear. I was there, I saw that, I took the photo. When editing I can usually summon up a memory. I usually edit in timely fashion but today I reprocessed some pictures from 2009 and 2010 with reasonable recall of the occasions. I don’t see how it affects the editing process though.
I’ve no idea about what is meant about the “soul” of a picture. A picture either works or it doesn’t. I don’t see what good anthropomorphising it does.
Possibly the best exposition of "Street Photography" that I have come across was a brilliant talk given to our camera club by former AP editor, Damien Demoulder, just before "lockdown". Certainly a photo of a street scene without any people would not meet his definition but, as other have said, does the genre title or definition really matter so much? Some of Andrew Flannigan's examples (above) are interestng and worthwhile photographs although they might no meet some experts' definitions of SP.
Yes, we went on one of his talks up in Lincoln last year, organised by LCE. Great day; morning in class, lunch and then out on the street with Damien. Even my Wife thoroughly enjoyed the day, packed full of fun, chat and knowledge.
Thought it was time to hone my very basic skill in SP. I bought a couple of books online to get me going again. Not bought on bloody Amazon I might add. https://flic.kr/p/2jYjyb9
@PeteRob "I don’t think I’ve yet found a picture in my archive where I’ve asked myself “why the heck did I take that?”"
Truth be told, Pete, that's what I exclaim about the majority of photos ,especially, since I started shooting digital
Thinking on it Jack, it’s probably because you are out looking for possible pictures whereas I’m not the creative type. I take a picture as a record. I’m enjoying the sights or I see something that appeals. I don’t think “that might make a picture” of things I walk past and I can’t take a picture of something to order. I’m just amazed at how folk, especially Kate, can create to match Tony’s daily challenge. I can’t do it.
Out of interest, do you have a "minds eye" or are you one of the aphantasia folk? Before I take a photo (not all of the time admittedly) I compose it in my head, and can see it, can picture it in B&W or whatever, or how I want it to look after some PP. It doesn't always work obviously, but my mental images of memories or whatever are quite graphic, so with what you are saying, I wondered whether that is something that you may not have. It is probably totally unrelated and just a creativity thing as you say.
There was a long discussion on the forum about that. I hesitate to say not so long ago, time seems increasingly elastic these days.
I don’t/can’t pre-visualise/create. I get unbearably stressed if I’m forced into that situation. Luckily the only circumstance I’ve come across that is on corporate team-building events, “let’s do something arty”. It sounds ridiculous but I got myself in a right state over “today we will design and print a T-shirt” which happened at Brathay, I think. It is a training place in the Lakes. I absented myself for the afternoon and let the others get on with it, couldn’t face it, poor show for the team that was.
BTW I should have written “Kate and Nige” in #234
I have re read my post. It wasn't meant to be condescending in any if it did come across that way.
I don't think it did seem condescending.
In my case, I "discover" the picture in the viewfinder, very few of my pictures are planned in any way. I would argue that the number of my pictures which I feel are worth keeping has risen sharply since I started using digital and even more so since I changed to (mostly) mirrorless.
At the end of the day, it seems to me, whatever gets you where you want to go is the right approach for you.
Not in the slightest. I can't see why you should think it might.
Edit: the prior discussion on aphantasia, it I remember correctly, was that it seemed more prevalent in photographers than in the general population. Perhaps it is the lack of ability to recall visually that makes the record-keeping type of photography that I do such an attractive thing?
I actually found something that might be considered street that I hadn't deleted. I'd normally chuck this because the lady walked in from the right. Some territorial barney going on between the busker and the town crier at the "cross", which marks the centre of Chester, but a 24 mm TSE is not the best focal length to capture this.
274A0273.jpg by Pete, on Flickr
Separate names with a comma.