zauhar
Mentor
Note to self: Enter Fotoura International Street Photography competition.
If I win, I will be overjoyed. If I lose, I can console myself by seeing what actually won.
Randy
If I win, I will be overjoyed. If I lose, I can console myself by seeing what actually won.
Randy
taskoni
Well-known
Thank you for the explanation !
I like the second one better too.
Regards,
Boris
I like the second one better too.
Regards,
Boris
airfrogusmc
Mentor
I would say most likely staged which goes against what many of the greats in this genre we about.
In Bressons words:
" 'Manufactured' or staged photography does not concern me. And if I make a judgment, it can only be on a psychological or sociological level. There are those who take photographs arranged beforehand and those who go out to discover the image and seize it."
zauhar
Mentor
Regarding the "second place photo" in the set, does anyone accept as authentic the second reflection (in the front passenger window)? To me that is clearly a manipulation. Does the contest impose any rules regarding constructed images?
Randy
Randy
taskoni
Well-known
Dear Sevo.
No, I didn't missed the portfolios, I also like his other images better, and I find the second place winner's work more to my liking.
Just was curious why the people who like it like it - wanted to get their points, not to keep the thread to the stage - "the picture is great because I say so, you guys are too narrow minded and don't understand sh*t about photography".
Regards,
Boris
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
Well, there is staged and staged. You certainly cannot do a photo essay on nudists without prior permission, or you'll find yourself in court over privacy violations - but it does not necessarily follow that the individual pictures are posed and directed.
airfrogusmc
Mentor
It looks to me like its people passing on the street to the left of the boy at the edge of the frame and they are so bright because the are in the direct sunlight and maybe brought up even more in post. Looks OK to me.
airfrogusmc
Mentor
Only the ones that were there know for sure. Still an interesting and thought provoking image.
zauhar
Mentor
You don't see the abrupt curvature of the reflection that clearly doesn't match the frame of the car window?
Randy
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
It looks odd, but does not seem to be manipulated - ELA mapping that image does not show any irregularities at or around that reflection, the strongest evident manipulation to the image (besides brightness and colour levels) is rather strong sharpening applied to the (still blurred) girl in front.
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
I've always thought that it's the story in the photograph not that there's a Street. A candid slice of life.
zauhar
Mentor
How would that algorithm detect a geometric manipulation? I am saying that the curvature of the reflection does not appear to match the shape of the reflecting glass.
While it is certainly possible that some weird combination of circumstances could produce that, to me it looks clearly unnatural.
Randy
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
It cannot. But it detects increases or losses in detail, like the seams between parts in a composite image, as well as any attempts to hide them by blurring or with the repair stamp. Which would also catch out if that area had been warped. So it is a pretty good indicator that that reflection has been there in camera, and has not been significantly processed.
airfrogusmc
Mentor
The blurred person in front/left reminds me of the way Frank used those kinds of things in his work. They are just visual elements that are not meant to be the subject. Supporting players only. Not meant to be sharp. The reflection looks right to me. The lady is passing by looking at the photographer also see the full image.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Why didn't the second one win?
The first one is ... well, trying too hard, maybe...
The first one is ... well, trying too hard, maybe...
BlackXList
Well-known
I'm finally going through the winners and runners up gallery now, and something's striking me.
Somebody earlier in the thread mentioned a "fine art" strain of street photography, and that's what I'm seeing a lot of in many of the galleries.
It's something that's often visible when people are shooting medium format, a very rigid composition, often with the person (at least nominally a subject of the photograph) pretty small in the frame.
I never understood why using a camera that would resolve more detail, would make photographers use less compositional space for their subjects.
I think this really helps me identify where I get no impact from many of the images, it feels like the subjects are just too far away to have any impact.
Of course there are the occasional shots where it works, or it's used to establish a visual pattern etc, but in general, if it looks like something from Street View, then (to me) it feels like something from Street View as well, no impact, no immediacy.
Similarly if the composition is entirely rigid, then it's not providing me with what I want from Street Photography, which is a more fluid and by it's nature reactive experience, it begins to feel rigid and staged (even when it's not) and that does nothing at all for me.
It's notable just how much more impact Javier Arcenillas gallery has than all of the others put together.
I'm not saying that ALL street photography has to be in such harsh conditions, and it's notable that several of the entries had shots that depended on reflections similar to Arcenillas first one, but none had the impact of his.
There seem to be 4 main trends this year:
The "Fine Art Street Photography" approach
On camera flash
"borrowing" very very heavily from Saul Leiter
the Nachtwey "top of the head" in the bottom of the shot.
Somebody earlier in the thread mentioned a "fine art" strain of street photography, and that's what I'm seeing a lot of in many of the galleries.
It's something that's often visible when people are shooting medium format, a very rigid composition, often with the person (at least nominally a subject of the photograph) pretty small in the frame.
I never understood why using a camera that would resolve more detail, would make photographers use less compositional space for their subjects.
I think this really helps me identify where I get no impact from many of the images, it feels like the subjects are just too far away to have any impact.
Of course there are the occasional shots where it works, or it's used to establish a visual pattern etc, but in general, if it looks like something from Street View, then (to me) it feels like something from Street View as well, no impact, no immediacy.
Similarly if the composition is entirely rigid, then it's not providing me with what I want from Street Photography, which is a more fluid and by it's nature reactive experience, it begins to feel rigid and staged (even when it's not) and that does nothing at all for me.
It's notable just how much more impact Javier Arcenillas gallery has than all of the others put together.
I'm not saying that ALL street photography has to be in such harsh conditions, and it's notable that several of the entries had shots that depended on reflections similar to Arcenillas first one, but none had the impact of his.
There seem to be 4 main trends this year:
The "Fine Art Street Photography" approach
On camera flash
"borrowing" very very heavily from Saul Leiter
the Nachtwey "top of the head" in the bottom of the shot.
clayne
shoot film or die
I also thought #4 (Giovanni Cocco) had the most honest non-gimmick based photos going on there as well. Even then, there's this air of "snapshot-ism" aka "look at what I'm not pointing out but you're supposed to realize as the viewer" vibe about all of the galleries on there. Perhaps that's the "fine-art" edge. Gets a bit annoying - as does the irony-driven photography and general lack of subject engagement. The whole "look at what I can see, observant aren't I?" driven style of photography is ultimately destined to burn itself out as it grows old amazingly fast.
170 + years of photography doesn't support this though...
RichC
Well-known
As jsrocket says, these images are far more typical of photography, an opinion supported by history and usage. It’s more likely that the “decisive-moment street photography” style beloved by RFF will become relegated to the past. In fact, it’s arguable that it has already become irrelevant as a photographic approach, and has “burnt itself out as it grew old amazingly fast”: it’s certainly dismissed by most serious photographers (e.g. look through the portfolios of Magnum photographers who joined the agency within the last two decades).
The true photograph is the snapshot, a record of the world, showing the deliberate and the extraneous - and this applies to nearly all photographs: those being taken now, and those from the past. Fox Talbot - one of the inventor’s photography - alludes to this snapshot aesthetic that so many of you dismiss, in the world’s first photobook published in the 1840s, “The Pencil of Nature” (free, here):
Although I speak of “snapshots”, this is mere shorthand: a snapshot is spontaneous with no artistic or other intent than to simply record, taken without regard to technique. The images in this competition - which Dabchick calls "look at what I can see, observant aren't I?” photography - are not snapshots: they show a high degree of technical skill, compositional ability and concern with narrative and our culture.
In contrast, the highly contrived, poor attempt at the “decisive moment” beloved by RFF is about performance, shape and geometry - not the essence of photography. These images are “all show and no go”. Most decisive moment photographs on RFF are nothing of the sort: they’re simply awkward moments and juxtapositions. The decisive moment is far more complex than capturing an aesthetic moment, often involving a person caught mid-movement. Even Cartier-Bresson acknowledges this: the decisive moment is composition plus the peripeteia - the “story telling” moment. It’s about capturing that time during the unfurling of an event that tells us most about what’s happening. Picture a kissing couple... It seems that for most (including RFF, judging from the gallery) the decisive moment is when they kiss - but you’ve missed Cartier-Bresson’s point entirely.
Let us return to our amorous couple – would not a picture of them a moment before the kiss, eyes locked on each other, lips parted, not quite touching, tell us more about their passion than the kiss itself? Or maybe the moment after, longing and desperation apparent as they part? The kiss itself tells us far less. This idea of picturing the perfect moment of a narrative is by no means new, and long predates Cartier-Bresson and photography: it’s Diderot’s instant, described by the critic in the mid-18th century.
In short, the images in this competition are far more relevant to photography and to culture, through their acknowledgement of picture-making and technology - both in the present and historical - than most so-called “street photography” encountered today (like much of the photography on RFF). And also far truer to Cartier-Bresson's forging of the decisive moment than the many pale imitations on RFF.
zauhar
Mentor
A fine analysis Rich. I would suggest that the decisive moment style is now relegated to the dustbin because it is difficult. It is hidden. It involves much time, invested with no immediate result, a large element of chance, perhaps even the magic of ones psyche to put oneself at the right place at the right time.
Contrast the classic street photographer like Cartier-Bresson with his modern counterpart. (This is all fantasy on my part, so sue me.) HCB strolls the streets - or stays in one place. He has a simple camera, maybe only one lens. He does not appear to be doing much. At the end of the day he unloads his camera, ultimately ignorant as to whether or not he succeeded in capturing anything of value.
The modern photographer is constantly in motion. Gear to set up, maybe a tripod. Since he is a recorder of snapshots, of raw reality unencumbered by his own psyche, he can get right at it. He has immediate feedback from his LCD screen, and on silicon he is ready to accumulate thousands of images. At the end of the day, he knows exactly what he has. Back at his office, he spends hours enhancing the images (not quite snapshots, are they?), hours of constant activity.
In short, the modern photographer is the epitome of "Busy-ness". Like the office worker who needs to fill every hour with pointless meetings and email, constructing spreadsheets with numbers that in the end build nothing and fill no bellies. Just as the modern photographer has a rich Art House vocabulary to give apparent meaning to their toil, likewise the modern office worker has an extensive (if laughable) toolkit of words to justify all they are doing.
I doubt that many RFFers have illusions that the images they post are on par with notable photographers, rather they are sharing their current work with friends.
Randy
EDIT: Before I am pounced on, yes I did understand that you were not describing the contest photos as 'merely' snapshots, but rather recognized their subtle organization and structure.