Anyone shoot from the chest?

Yeah, I can see why using a spirit level would solve the problem of crooked images. But what I can't figure out is how that's going to solve the problem of those being photographed from noticing, and thereby altering their posture, while I'm busy leveling the camera by looking at the spirit level. I mean, if my goal is quick, surreptitious, non-obvious shooting, I'm just not sure how to do that while stopping to check a spirit level. So, instead, I just use the straigtening tool in Picasa to slightly tweak the resulting image. Now as for the out of focus shots, that's a whole other story!

-Randy

P.S. I assume everyone is aware that the style of shooting I'm talking about is sometimes called "hip" shooting and there are other threads on this forum discussing its merits.
 
Other than the situation of an armed robbery or armed stand off with hostages I can't see myself 'sneeking" photographs of people on the street. And if you know or think people don't want their picture taken what does it say about you if you take it anyway?

There are probably a few other situtations where this type of photography would be okay. The Rodney King police beating comes to mind. I'm pretty sure the police didn't want that kodak moment recorded but I would not have stopped to ask. Public domestic violence also comes to mind. But other than just a very few instances the practice strikes me as cowardly and not a great reflection upon photographers in general.

Flame suit on.
 
One of the reasons, I keep my Nikkormat is the ability to shoot from the waist. Why? The match needle is in the viewfinder and on the outside topside. Nice.
 
Yeah, remrf, in essence I agree with you. And I don't want to hijack this thread by entering into a long debate about the merits of hip shooting or surreptitously taking photographs. However, just to be clear about my earlier comments, I'm not suggesting taking any pictures that I wouldn't otherwise take if the people being photographed knew I was taking their picture. I just find that so often people change their posture, facial expression, activities, etc., as soon as they realize you're taking their picture. And I value the natural, candid image. It's for that reason that I try to take pictures without advertising that I'm doing so. I don't hide my camera or my picture taking habits. And I would avoid taking a picture if I really thought someone did not want me to take their picture. So, again, just to be very clear, I'm not suggesting taking shots folks don't want taken; all I'm suggesting is using a technique that promotes candid photography. And, to further that end, I carry a small photo portfolio of just such images so if someone inquires about what I'm doing I can easily show them. I've found that this tends to diffuse any concern/suspicion and promotes even more picture taking opportunity.

Okay, back to the original poster's question about shooting from the chest.

-Randy
 
remrf said:
But other than just a very few instances the practice strikes me as cowardly and not a great reflection upon photographers in general.
Click to expand...

Cowardly? Perhaps. But I'd rather be a Falstaff and live to print my photographs.

Clarence
 
I would like to suggest we keep this thread on topic - chest shooting or no? - rather than devolve into a debate about unstated and therefore assumed motives for how we shoot. Using such words as cowardly and assuming one is taking pictures of folks who do not want their picture taken is, quite frankly assuming a lot. Carrying that over to the realm of how it reflects upon photographers seems to almost group hip shooting with hidden cameras in hats, briefcases, etc., and almost the realm of spies and voyueristic bathroom and upskirt shooters.

As for my own habits, I occassionally shoot from the hip, as evidenced by the image I posted earlier in this thread. I also oftentimes follow it up with a more studied shot where the people in the picture know I'm taking their picture. Nothing cowardly or untoward in that. I just find that it's usually the image taken before the people are aware of me that is the more natural shot. Alternatively, I occasionally get a nice candid shot after establishing some sort of comaraderie with the person being photographed. That's a great approach, too, but takes more time and may or may not be quite as candid or, at least, may not include the original situation or activities that first caught my eye.

Okay, again, back to the original poster's question about shooting from the chest?

-Randy
 
vrgard said:
I would like to suggest we keep this thread on topic - chest shooting or no? - rather than devolve into a debate about unstated and therefore assumed motives for how we shoot. Using such words as cowardly and assuming one is taking pictures of folks who do not want their picture taken is, quite frankly assuming a lot. Carrying that over to the realm of how it reflects upon photographers seems to almost group hip shooting with hidden cameras in hats, briefcases, etc., and almost the realm of spies and voyueristic bathroom and upskirt shooters.


Read the very first post in this thread.


"Ok, I found that street photography isn't very easy. People don't seem to like getting their pictures taken. My next move was going to be my M3 across my chest and a 21 or 35mm lens. Hyperfocal and fire. I was also considering a shoe mounted spirit level. Sounds like a plan? Stu"
Click to expand...
 
remrf - I stand corrected! Thank you for pointing out those comments in the original post. Comments that I had overlooked. And I hope that my previous posts have made clear that I am not a supporter of taking shots of folks who don't want their picture taken. And sorry, remrf, for assuming (gee, guess I was the one doing all the assuming here!... oops) that your post was commenting on my immediately preceding post. Thanks again for clearing the record, remrf. Like I said, in essence we do agree! :)

-Randy
 
I'm very new to this "street" stuff, but I've started wearing the M6 on my chest and using hyperfocal distance technique. Now and then I'll raise the camera to my eye to frame, but for the most part do it "surreptitiously":) I related an experience I had a year or so ago here on the forum where I was obviously taking pictures on the street here in Philadelphia. In other words I was not being "surreptitious", but obviously aiming, framing and shooting. I'd found that a smile generally dealt with most situations until that evening. Apparently, one of my subjects was engaged in something criminal. He approached me and asked for the camera. Rather than go into detail, suffice it to say that if Philly's finest hadn't been handy, I might have ended up a local homicide statistic. So some may call shooting from the chest or hip cowardly, but all I know is I've had no more problems since. I prefer "surreptitious":D
 
vrgard said:
remrf - I stand corrected! Thank you for pointing out those comments in the original post. Comments that I had overlooked. And I hope that my previous posts have made clear that I am not a supporter of taking shots of folks who don't want their picture taken. And sorry, remrf, for assuming (gee, guess I was the one doing all the assuming here!... oops) that your post was commenting on my immediately preceding post. Thanks again for clearing the record, remrf. Like I said, in essence we do agree! :)

-Randy
Click to expand...

No problem here. I recall an earlier thread the topic of which eludes me wherein you described your technique for shooting i.e. having with you a sample of your candid street shots when you go out to shoot. This struck me as a very good way to both get the candid shot and not offend or annoy your subjects. And very possibly make some new friends.
 
I enjoy taking hip shots. And yep, I've gotten quite a few disappointing results with their heads cut off, ceiling/floor shots, etc. Like all other types of shooting, it takes practice so since I like it, I'll just keep practicing.

I use a neck/shoulder strap, rather long, so I've found the best framing comes from raising the camera a little nearer the chest. In crowds though, I have raised the camera just over head-high for a downward angle. Also, if I'm planning this type of shooting, I'll use the 28mm or 35mm lens (mostly 35, my recent favorite). As far as getting the shot level, I'm just not that concerned with a little tilt one way or another. (And sometimes I get a LOT of tilt.) But in many cases, it rather adds to the candid nature of the shot - IMHO.

90% of my hip shots are from 2-3 meters, so focus is always preset and f8 helps give me some help there. But I simply step up or back to get the range approx. and fire away.
 
I have a friend who always shoots from the chest or hip with his 20D + 17-40, his shots suck but he shoots them none the less. I almost never shoot from the hip and only had one shot come out right doing so. I always shoot too high when I do it from the hip.
 

Attachments

  • Street_Side_Collision.jpg
    Street_Side_Collision.jpg
    242.9 KB · Views: 0
I sometimes shoot from the hip, and use a wrist strap when I'm doing street photography to make that easier. But I usually zone focus and use the VF to quickly compose. Nobody has ever had a problem with it, and I very rarely attract attention. I think the secret is to be relaxed but work quickly. If you look sneaky, people will notice.

Ian
 
If you hang your camera over the left shoulder and grasp the strap with your left thumb, the camera naturally falls under your left arm. Then drop your right arm down to the camera and your thumb naturally falls over the shutter release. You look as if you just have your hands crossed in front of you and the lens poking out is barely noticeable.
Works best on a wider angle using manual pre-focus, but you can get some interesting shots this way completely un-noticed.

Another method I employ is to take the shot as normal, then before taking the camera from the eye, turn away from your subject. This looks as if you are just framing a shot. Never make eye contact after the shot and don't wind on until they've forgotton about you.
This obviously works best with a quiet camera - I wouldn't try it with my F90!

Nick
 
"Ok, I found that street photography isn't very easy. People don't seem to like getting their pictures taken. My next move was going to be my M3 across my chest and a 21 or 35mm lens. Hyperfocal and fire. I was also considering a shoe mounted spirit level. Sounds like a plan?"

If you live in New York, most of the more colorful characters probably would prefer not being photographed. The three card monte game, illegal street peddlers, hawkers for peep shows-the list is never ending over here. Remrf suggests that photographing unannounced is cowardly. I see no other practical way to capture street life.

A friend of a friend actually does quite well around here photographing on the street without resorting to any inconspicuous techniques. However, she is a 24 year old petite and attractive female. I'm, 220 pounds with tattoos and a buzz cut. Not the same. Stu
 
Not to hijack my own thread but I've been fascinated of late with a photographer named Bruce Gilden. His photos of Japanese street life are very interesting. I don't know how he gets the guts up to ask the Yakuza if he can photograph them. Stu
 
Stu,

RE: Bruce Gilden, you may already know that he's a New Yorker and Magnum member/ associate, whatever they call it.

He's known to be one of very few street photographers who uses flash too. Holds it up in his left hand, attached via synch cord, and blasts people, normally using a 28mm. There's a video of him shooting in NY floating around the net somewhere, totally conspicuous and right in your face!
 
Last edited:
I saw shots from his book Go. He must be very lucky or very fast on his feet to get away with what he does. I would love to pull off shots like his, but without getting my a** kicked in the process. And with a flash!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top