first time street photography

Hey!

I know it kinda sounds like cheating...but if you want to get even closer to the person you wish to photograph, simply ask them a question. Not too intrusive obviously..for example you could ask what they are doing or ask them locations to some place. Once they feel comfortable with you around them you can ask if you can take their picture!

Obviously not a good Idea if you want a more natural photograph though.. Good luck!

Nathan
 
if you're a tourist , on your hols in some far flung foreign land you'd snap away without a care in the world. Just put yourself back in that mindset when your over here. No one cares so long as youre not ramming the lens up their nose.
 
essexash said:
if you're a tourist , on your hols in some far flung foreign land you'd snap away without a care in the world. Just put yourself back in that mindset when your over here. No one cares so long as youre not ramming the lens up their nose.
Click to expand...

Thats a good way to think of doing it :thumbs:
 
Ive never had the courage to do it but I would like to give it a try, I feel like I dont really understand what street photography is all about and I think if I tried it maybe id understand it a bit more.
Also, when im out and see people taking photographs in the street and I might be in the shot I have a habit of veering out of the frame if possible as I dont like my photo being taken, ive never came across a street photographer getting up close to me but I probably wouldnt like it, I wouldnt confront them but I wouldnt be too happy about it!
 
I just walk upto them and ask if it would be ok to take their picture. I find that most people are quite flattered to be asked. True, some say no for whatever reasons so I just smile thank them and walk away. The people I want to photograph usually ask why I want to photgraph them? I tell them the truth ie I like your peircings, tatoos, hair colour whatever prompted me to ask in the first place. Good luck and go for it!
 
Well, I've taken a couple of them from long distance to test out my zoom function as I've recently got my first ever bridge camera, still a long way off affording a decent DSLR and touring the country attending events and concerts like I hope for some day, but it will do for now and loving every minute of it.

But I don't like posed for photo's as much unless its something such as a wedding/model shoot, etc... (not got the experience or guts to try those yet either lol.)

But I'm hoping to develop my street skills too, I'm just starting off further away where I'm more comfortable for now, and as I get more confident I'll hopefully start getting closer to the subjects so I can capture better expressions/moments and more detail.

I'd recommend starting off the same if you're worried about peoples reactions too, stay in your comfort zone and let the comfort zone expand.

Life's not short, it's the second longest thing you do, no need to dive into things straight away, work your way to them, you may learn something new on the way.

Edit: Also, focus on someone with something unique about them, colourful hair, strange outfit, etc... such as the Mario guy in one of the above photo's, you'll have an easy answer if you're approached and asked why you were taking their picture. Much easier to say "you were the only guy dressed in a mario hat" than it would be to say to someone "I like your erm... i just... i thought you'd make a cute, erm.. I mean good subject for a photo."
 
Last edited:
Definitely a lot to be said for using a small & compact camera rather than an "in your face" DSLR.

I moved from a bulky D700 to a tiny Ricoh GR and I find it's rare for people to ever notice the GR and if they do they just assume I'm a typical tourist with a point & shoot so "harmless" :cool:
 
boliston said:
Definitely a lot to be said for using a small & compact camera rather than an "in your face" DSLR.
Click to expand...

I carry my old Canon Compact while out and about on the street, and it's about the size of a packet of cigarettes. Absolutely great for discreet photos on the street, I have managed to grab some decent candid photos.
 
I started doing it a while back and love it. Here are a few tricks that I came up with along the way.

First a long lens is a must. 135mm should work but 200mm is idea. One thing I do is plant myself looking down a sidewalk where people are coming towards me. I aim right at them, take the shot but don't stop pointing or looking up from the camera. This confuses the subject at first but they end up thinking that you are not shooting them but something behind them as they walk by you. I hope that makes sense.

The other thing I do is to look for backgrounds first and position myself where the subject will walk by and I can capture them with a cool background.

Here are a few street shots I took on my recent trip to San Francisco.

http://[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/47096888@N06/9250839531/] Untitled by shayne_photos, on Flickr[/URL]

http://[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/47096888@N06/9253622282/] Untitled by shayne_photos, on Flickr[/URL]

http://[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/47096888@N06/9253624432/] Untitled by shayne_photos, on Flickr[/URL]










there's more but I want bore you. You get the idea.
 
Last edited:
I realise this is a bit of an old thread now, and the OP may not be interested in street photography any more.. but, the first thing you should realise is that taking photos of 'odd' people doesn't really count as street photography. All the usual 'rules' of photography still apply, the most important of which being that there should be a reason for the shot to exist.

Think why you're taking the photo, what's going on that's interesting? Why is the composition or moment interesting? Sniping a shot at 200mm (or indeed sticking a wide angle up their nose) of an overweight / punk / homeless person doing nothing is boring and borderline exploitative.
 
Jayst84 said:
I realise this is a bit of an old thread now, and the OP may not be interested in street photography any more.. but, the first thing you should realise is that taking photos of 'odd' people doesn't really count as street photography. All the usual 'rules' of photography still apply, the most important of which being that there should be a reason for the shot to exist.

Think why you're taking the photo, what's going on that's interesting? Why is the composition or moment interesting? Sniping a shot at 200mm (or indeed sticking a wide angle up their nose) of an overweight / punk / homeless person doing nothing is boring and borderline exploitative.
Click to expand...

IMO you should of started this off with "IMO"...

Odd people sure do count as street photography because odd people are interesting for most people (excluding you of course). BTW you should "realise" that is not how you spell realize. lol:bonk:
 
shaylou said:
IMO you should of started this off with "IMO"...

Odd people sure do count as street photography because odd people are interesting for most people (excluding you of course). BTW you should "realise" that is not how you spell realize. lol:bonk:
Click to expand...

Of course it's my opinion, I wouldn't be writing it if it wasn't. Or rather, if it were someone else's opinion that I was relaying, I would preface it with "in XXX's opinion". Starting every sentence with "in my opinion" is redundant.

A shot of an 'odd' person can obviously be thought of as street photography, but as I believe I went on to clarify, for it to be good street photography the shot needs something else, another dimension. Taking and publishing snaps shots of people you find odd is basically exploitation.

Realise is exactly how I spell realise, it's also how everyone else who speaks British English spells realise.

PS it's "should have", not "should of". ;)
 
jamie615 said:
I'm going into the city on Saturday with a freind for my first run.
I also have a 50mm f1.8 do you think it would be better? I was hoping not to get that close but it may be usfull to use a fixed focal length so I know the frame befor I lift the camera to my face. What do you think??
Click to expand...

I would leave the 50 at home and get the longest lens you can find. You will not get a candid shot when sticking a camera in some strangers face. I started out the day with a canon 24-70 2.8II on a full frame and quickly realized that I needed my 70-200 to get what I was after.

One more bit of advise, positioning yourself key to getting good shots.

http://[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/47096888@N06/9253603624/] China Town San Francisco by shayne_photos, on Flickr[/URL]
 
Most people seem to recommend something in the 28mm-50mm range (or full frame equivalent on a crop sensor).

200mm seems more like "sniper photography" to me :D
 
shaylou said:
I would leave the 50 at home and get the longest lens you can find. You will not get a candid shot when sticking a camera in some strangers face.
Click to expand...

Absolute rubbish. You can use whatever lens you want but people doing street photography with 200mm lenses are going to very much be in the minority.
 
boliston said:
Most people seem to recommend something in the 28mm-50mm range (or full frame equivalent on a crop sensor).

200mm seems more like "sniper photography" to me :D
Click to expand...

Hahaaaa I use 70-200 and when i have that on its not easy to hide at all :D for me it's the perfect choice, more for tighter framing of the subject rather than long distance.
 
shaylou said:
BTW you should "realise" that is not how you spell realize. lol:bonk:
Click to expand...

Jayst84 said:
Realise is exactly how I spell realise, it's also how everyone else who speaks British English spells realise.

PS it's "should have", not "should of". ;)
Click to expand...


Now now, no arguing :p you should both "realise" they're both right, obviously the propper English one is more right than the American version though :D

Also, it's sweets not candy, crisps not potato chips, candy floss not cotton candy, erm... I'll behave now :p back on topic ;)
 
Jayst84 said:
Of course it's my opinion, I wouldn't be writing it if it wasn't. Or rather, if it were someone else's opinion that I was relaying, I would preface it with "in XXX's opinion". Starting every sentence with "in my opinion" is redundant.

A shot of an 'odd' person can obviously be thought of as street photography, but as I believe I went on to clarify, for it to be good street photography the shot needs something else, another dimension. Taking and publishing snaps shots of people you find odd is basically exploitation.

Realise is exactly how I spell realise, it's also how everyone else who speaks British English spells realise.

PS it's "should have", not "should of". ;)
Click to expand...

Haha, it's kinda like "color"here vs there huh. lol.

I get what you mean by good street photography. It just came across a little harsh. I see a lot of shots of people that are nothing more than a capture without an incident. It's like the plan was to just get a shot off and there is nothing interesting, creative or skillful at all about the pics. So I do agree with you, just giving you a hard time. :thumbs:
 
boliston said:
Most people seem to recommend something in the 28mm-50mm range (or full frame equivalent on a crop sensor).

200mm seems more like "sniper photography" to me :D
Click to expand...

Not sure what sniper has to do with it but to each is own. It is not about being super far from them if that's what you are implying. It's about being far enough away to blur the background and keep the shot candid at the same time. I have used all ranges of lens and ended up with the best shots with a longer lens. The proof is in the pudding but once again to each is own.
 
ernesto said:
Absolute rubbish. You can use whatever lens you want but people doing street photography with 200mm lenses are going to very much be in the minority.
Click to expand...

Of course he can use any lens he wants. I find that the longer lenses work best for me. The main theme here seems to be about people being afraid to get in someones face, (can't blame them) so a longer lens is clear solution for this issue.
 
Dark Knight said:
Hahaaaa I use 70-200 and when i have that on its not easy to hide at all :D for me it's the perfect choice, more for tighter framing of the subject rather than long distance.
Click to expand...


Yeah i tried a lot of different lenses and love the 70-200 for the street. It is a bit hard to hide for sure but i found a way around that. I mentioned it before but basically you act like you are taking a pic of something behind them and leave the camera up until they are clearly past you. Works like a champ :thumbs:

The other two ways I use is a pole or corner building and the go to one is my friend standing in front of me facing me and I shoot over his shoulder. ;)
 
shaylou said:
Yeah i tried a lot of different lenses and love the 70-200 for the street. It is a bit hard to hide for sure but i found a way around that. I mentioned it before but basically you act like you are taking a pic of something behind them and leave the camera up until they are clearly past you. Works like a champ :thumbs:

The other two ways I use is a pole or corner building and the go to one is my friend standing in front of me facing me and I shoot over his shoulder. ;)
Click to expand...
Exactly Shayne :thumbs:

To be honest I don't hide either, I feel that makes people more suspicious, as you and others have said don't stop, just keep shooting
 
Last edited:
shaylou said:
The other two ways I use is a pole or corner building and the go to one is my friend standing in front of me facing me and I shoot over his shoulder. ;)
Click to expand...

You sound like some sort of spy and have a very odd approach to street photography (not that there is anything wrong with it if it works for you)

Have to say I am with the 99% of people who use a lens between 28 and 50 and don't hide around corners!
 
shaylou said:
The main theme here seems to be about people being afraid to get in someones face, (can't blame them) so a longer lens is clear solution for this issue.
Click to expand...

An even better solution, I find, is to use a waist level finder: I can shoot just a few feet away from people in plain sight and they never even notice me, because I never need to lift the camera up to eye level. The experience is much more enjoyable overall, as there's no rush to compose, and it's far easier to catch candid moments.
 
skysh4rk said:
An even better solution, I find, is to use a waist level finder: I can shoot just a few feet away from people in plain sight and they never even notice me, because I never need to lift the camera up to eye level. The experience is much more enjoyable overall, as there's no rush to compose, and it's far easier to catch candid moments.
Click to expand...

I tried that but found myself missing a lot of shots. To me the composition is so important that your method does not work so well (for me).
 
ernesto said:
You sound like some sort of spy and have a very odd approach to street photography (not that there is anything wrong with it if it works for you)

Have to say I am with the 99% of people who use a lens between 28 and 50 and don't hide around corners!
Click to expand...

Lets not make this into something that its not. I like to capture people in a candid gesture so standing out of the way sometimes helps. The 70-200 stands out like a sore thumb so it's almost a must to have to stand off to the side to not intermediate the subject. 95% of my street shots are with me standing in plain view.



I like the way you use spy, odd, hide around corners and put me in the 1% range of people doing this but I guess that's okay as long as you cover yourself politeness with

"not that there is anything wrong with it works for you".

Come on,, if your going to insult someone be a man about it and just do it!
 
You don't have to hide away with a long lens to take candids, I really don't get why people think that using a short(ish) lens means having to get in peoples' faces.

None of these were taken at more than 50mm and none of the people were aware of my presence before, during or after I took the shots.
 
fabs said:
You don't have to hide away with a long lens to take candids, I really don't get why people think that using a short(ish) lens means having to get in peoples' faces.

None of these were taken at more than 50mm and none of the people were aware of my presence before, during or after I took the shots.
Click to expand...

http://monotonal.co.uk/people/files/people-14.jpg shows 160mm in the exif (240mm full frame equivalent) :exit:
 
I recently watched a good BBC documentary about Vivian Maier – The Secret Nanny Street Photographer. If you haven't watched it yet, try the iPlayer - worth it in my opinion.
Maier used a twin lens Roliflex, with it dangling around her kneck she looked downwards, so there was no eye to eye contact.
A lot of subjects look at a SLR as being quite intimidating, but less so with a noddy, toy looking camera. I have a Rolie 35, with the twist and turn lens lock, which should disappear because its so small, still I find it rather unnerving to go on the street, but people and city landscapes offer some of the best opportunities.
Steve
 
gramps said:
As a first go I would think you will feel more comfortable with the zoom ... then if you get brave try the 50mm.
Click to expand...


Won't people get creeped out seeing some guy pointing a zoom lens at them? :thinking:

I just visage OP in a black car with tinted windows using 600mm

Then i realised thats a telephoto more than a zoom.
I better get some rest.
 
fabs said:
You don't have to hide away with a long lens to take candids, I really don't get why people think that using a short(ish) lens means having to get in peoples' faces.

None of these were taken at more than 50mm and none of the people were aware of my presence before, during or after I took the shots.
Click to expand...

Those are really good. I wonder why so many street shots are black in white. Not just yours but a lot of what I have seen.
 
elliotedwards said:
Won't people get creeped out seeing some guy pointing a zoom lens at them? :thinking:

I just visage OP in a black car with tinted windows using 600mm

Then i realised thats a telephoto more than a zoom.
I better get some rest.
Click to expand...

From what I have experienced they get more creeped out from a camera closer to them then a camera pointing at them from across the street.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top