Street Photography clichés, no no's and taboos.

Black said:
Yeah. Not in an insulting way, but something other than extraordinary. Again (and I'm very ware that I'm starting to sound like a broken record), personally, a person just walking will always be just that, unless there are other elements that elevate the image. Layering / no cross overs etc.

Layering will be something new to me (and its not necessarily something I subscribe to), as I'm a shallow DOF shooter in the main. Going to give it a punt though, just because it'll stretch me a bit.



Ooo, that's contentious. Processing changes the aesthetic, but not really the content. Sometimes it'll add to the overall impact, sometimes it'll detract. My current project involves quite a lot of processing, giving quite harsh look - but its not like the fashionable crushed blacks and high contrast of the Provoke (or GR) aesthetic. Which I also like, but always dependant on content.
Click to expand...

... I like contentious, otherwise it would be all grain, contrast and dark in the corners ... what's layering anyway? ... that menu in photoshop?
 
Jamie,

Yep. There's no right or wrong answer - the thread is really for bouncing opinion and ideas around. I have my own idea of what I find to make an interesting photograph and there'll be lots of people who find the stuff that I like leaving them cold.

I suppose I'm being quite provocative - but I'm sort of asking "do you really find images of [insert topic from list] interesting enough publish and warrant feedback?". The answer is of course, yes, or else these images would not be shared.

For me, street photography is about clever one liners. When a story is being told in a succession of images, it evolves into social documentary. Semantics, I know, but there you go. But if that definition was to be true (and I am not, by any means, the definitive street photographers wiki) then do images that do not push the boundaries become redundant?

Street photography is a very difficult genre to do well. And it's also unique in that it has no unique selling point. I'd assume (and it is only an assumption) that its probably the one photographic genre that earns the least amount of people the least amount of money?

I'm going off on an tangent, but I'm sure you follow what I'm trying to ask?

Okay, I'm not so sure... ;)
 
Black said:
I was just browsing through Frank's mobile phone inspired thread and the first thing that came to mind (as well as thankfully being surprised by a few of the images in there) was, what is the general consensus on certain trite street photography subjects? You know, the ones we have all been guilty of at some point, but generally have been done to death and rarely offer anything really engaging for the audience?

Examples?

People just walking.
People walling with bags of shopping.
People on mobiles (cell phones)
People walking, using mobiles.
Buskers.
That same street performer who appears to be in every city in the world, no matter where you go.
People selling huge bunches of balloons.
And, arguably, the homeless (perhaps deserving of its own thread at some point?).

This is, of course, by no means a definitive list, but with the absence of any other additional factor, be it lighting, composition or content etc, that may set them apart from being decidedly ordinary or at the very least, subjects that overly saturate the genre, do you still consider these subjects worthy of constant documentation?

I realise there will be no right answer. Like everything else, this will be subjective. The list above, I am guilty of shooting every one of them, but equally, its what I avoid now (though I am mulling the last entry as a possible occasional exception) as I just don't engage with them. Do you? And, if so, why do you, for example, engage with an image of someone simply walking, perhaps in profile, in public?

I'd be interested to read everyone's thoughts :)
Click to expand...

Like Joe stated "It's all been done before" but what makes the random photograph fun for me to view is, & I said this in another thread, I get to see what the photographer saw & chose to shoot. It may be random to most but I still get excited as a kid in a toy store when I view photographs. Street corners, towns, cities, places that I will never personally get to visit.
 
MIkhail said:
Confusing the originality/interesting quality of the subject with the originality/interesting qualities of a photograph is a biggest misconception of all to me.
Interesting subject- mediocre picture (will i be banned for this?)
Click to expand...

I was rushed, what can I say? :D

PS ... and, I do hope so ;)

Chris; there are lots of wrong answers, haven't you noticed?
 
Sparrow said:
... I like contentious, otherwise it would be all grain, contrast and dark in the corners ... what's layering anyway? ... that menu in photoshop?
Click to expand...

:D Layering is when there usually very deep DOF and lots of interesting elements are all caught in the same frame at the same time. Consider it as something that is "content rich".

Or "lucky" ;)
 
Black said:
:D Layering is when there usually very deep DOF and lots of interesting elements are all caught in the same frame at the same time. Consider it as something that is "content rich".

Or "lucky" ;)
Click to expand...

Ah, I see ... like those landscapes I don't like?
 
Black said:
Jamie,

Yep. There's no right or wrong answer - the thread is really for bouncing opinion and ideas around. I have my own idea of what I find to make an interesting photograph and there'll be lots of people who find the stuff that I like leaving them cold.

I suppose I'm being quite provocative - but I'm sort of asking "do you really find images of [insert topic from list] interesting enough publish and warrant feedback?". The answer is of course, yes, or else these images would not be shared.
Click to expand...


Chris

I`ve always had the impression that street photography was the one area which interested you the least.

I can`t really help you with that because if you view many street images dispassionately many will fall into those categories you`ve already cited.

Myself I`m not too concerned because I shoot what I find interesting ...that`s it really .

I like being out on the streets and the possibility of interaction.
I find people interesting even if I don`t manage to get any good shots.

If you can`t find anything interesting on the street then maybe you are in the wrong place.
 
I find photographs shot on anything longer than 24mm and further away than 1ft a no-no. The rest doesn't matter so long as you adhere to this one iron clad rule. Of course I'm a walking cliche of a street photographer ;)

Quick question. If I can't photograph from behind how am I supposed to get creepy shots of young women in short shorts?
 
Sparrow said:
Ah, I see ... like those landscapes I don't like?
Click to expand...

To a certain extent, yes :) It's something that is quite prevalent in the likes of the HCSP group on Flickr and the inevitable collectives formed from there. I'm not a fan of applying rules to genre's and, if there are established rules, then I certainly advocate breaking them as often as possible.

Layering, to me seems to be 90% luck, machine gunning and patient editing. Practitioners will argue its about observation, practice and patience. So, the patience bit we agree on.
 
Michael Markey said:
Chris

I`ve always had the impression that street photography was the one area which interested you the least.

I can`t really help you with that because if you view many street images dispassionately many will fall into those categories you`ve already cited.

Myself I`m not too concerned because I shoot what I find interesting ...that`s it really .

I like being out on the streets and the possibility of interaction.
I find people interesting even if I don`t manage to get any good shots.

If you can`t find anything interesting on the street then maybe you in the wrong place.
Click to expand...

Mike, it probably is and that's probably because the more I expose myself to it, the more it seems to be a case of diminishing returns. But, it is also one of the more accessible genre's. I have taken an extend break from shooting street for some time. I don't want to paint myself into a corner as a decidedly amateur photographer and fully expect for my interests in differing genres to shift as often as the wind changes direction. And why shouldn't it? I see merit in most genre's, but that doesn't mean I want to practice them.

I don't think anyone should give two hoots about what others think about their shots if they're not trying to make money. Any rare compliment, I will happily take and a pleasant by-product of any photos I take.

I find plenty interesting on the street. Shooting street shots is what has led me to doing a long term project and because of that, I will always keep my hand in street shooting. My output isn't massive, but that is because I feel zero pressure to publish anything for the sake of third party expectation. Thats one of the joys of being very amateur.
 
OurManInTangier said:
Quick question. If I can't photograph from behind how am I supposed to get creepy shots of young women in short shorts?
Click to expand...

I have examined the RFF gallery and am sure that there is someone who is excellently qualified to answer that very question, Simon ;)
 
... like this, although I did this on porpoise :D

2813222527_f2f6164f82_b.jpg
 
Boring photos and obnoxious pictures of homeless people.

99.9% of street photography I see online is really really boring and as far as I can tell completely pointless.
 
I feed the beast with my professional work so I can shoot whatever I want how ever I want to shoot it with no pressure to make $$$ with personal work though I have had some success with my personal work. Just not enough to give the family the life they so deserve.

As far as telling others how and what they should photograph, I believe as Ansel Adams believed:
"No man has the right to dictate what other men should perceive, create or produce, but all should be encouraged to reveal themselves, their perceptions and emotions, and to build confidence in the creative spirit."-Ansel Adams
 
OurManInTangier said:
...
Quick question. If I can't photograph from behind how am I supposed to get creepy shots of young women in short shorts?
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:
Do it quick. But start to work slowly on it :)
First, start to take if from the side:


Beautiful ... morning. by Ko.Fe., on Flickr

Then start to take it in front, but while they are on "not aware mode" a.k.a. talking on the mobile.


Princess... St. by Ko.Fe., on Flickr

I'm on the second stage right now, can't take it from the hip level in front. :)
 
The thing is most public life, especially if you shoot everyday and don't live in a big hustling city, is ordinary, but that isn't the problem with boring street photography.

It's people making the same pictures, same subject matter, same presentation etc. it's all become so uniform
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top