Street Photography advise needed

[jon ryan]

You also said anyone who says anything different is talking rubbish, which is nonsense. It's one opinion.. once side of an argument. Why not convince people WHY shooting from the hip is actually a good thing to do? What's your rationale for shooting from the hip?

Shall we have a look at what I actually said, rather than the words you are ascribing to me?

Eric Kim gives good advice on how to shoot from the hip if you want to try this method. Don't pay any attention to people who say this is 'wrong'. That's total rubbish, of course. You shoot how you want to shoot.

To put it another way, I am saying, quite clearly and in English, that there is no definitively correct way to do photography. Clear now?

I really would have expected you to know that Cartier Bresson took a lot of his shots using a camera hidden under his coat. Perhaps you need to read a bit about his working methods?

Let's see if I can explain this simply: Some shots work with the camera held up to the eye. Some shots work with the camera operated from the hip. Both methods have been used to excellent effect. One method cannot be said to be superior to the other, as long as the end result is good.

Any problems there?

 

[GlennBlackPhotos]

A fantastic melting pot of ideas and replies guys thank you all very much.
Personally the shooting from the hip approach don't appeal to me.
I was out shooting a model today and shot some candids before and after the shoot.
One girl actually smiled as if to say its ok while another turned away and made a total bline lol.
Now I have discussed it on here I accept no matter what my technique some people are more sensitive than others.
I had 3 other girls approach me and ask a few questions then they asked me to take their pic so I did.
They asked if I had a business card too:bang: so guess what I'm getting cards done lol.
I think being noticed can be a positive opportunity to network with people.
All the best.

 

[Pookeyhead]

The general impression you get from looking at the work of photographers like HCB, Erwitt, Frank, and Doisneau (the kiss aside) - they generally worked in a way that minimises the photographer's influence on the scene.

Very different from the sneaky, from the hip way of working I was referring to, and certainly not candid.

Candid can be street, of course, just as there is a blurred boundary between editorial and documentary, but candid is definitely not something that street "should" be by any stretch of the imagination.

There is a big difference between candid and shot from the hip though, and as you say. They're still in the thick of it... he up close and personal and has a camera up to his eye... not sniping away sneakily.

Perhaps I worded my initial statement a bit too strongly or vaguely, but it was in response to Gramps' assertion that street and candid are two separate genres defined by their aesthetic, which simply isn't the case.

Perhaps. I would actually come down on Gramps side of the argument if what Gramps means is the from the hip/snipped with a long lens images. To me, that's not street. It's shot ON a street maybe, but the similarity ends there in my opinion.

To put it another way, I am saying, quite clearly and in English, that there is no definitively correct way to do photography. Clear now?

Yes. However, you also said that "anyone who says otherwise is talking rubbish" when defending shooting from the hip. So if there is no definitively correct way to do photography, that statement doesn't sit well with everything else you are saying. Someone saying that shooting from the hip is not really a good way of shooting street photography, is merely expressing a "way to do photography", and can't, by your own definition, be talking rubbish.

I really would have expected you to know that Cartier Bresson took a lot of his shots using a camera hidden under his coat. Perhaps you need to read a bit about his working methods?

Not the ones I've just linked to he didn't. It's no coincidence that those are amongst his best known examples of street photography if you ask me.

Let's see if I can explain this simply: Some shots work with the camera held up to the eye. Some shots work with the camera operated from the hip. Both methods have been used to excellent effect. One method cannot be said to be superior to the other, as long as the end result is good.

Any problems there?

Yeah... I disagree... but I'm entitled to do that, and it's just my opinion. Any problems there?

We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one

 

[simonblue]

Their no right or wrong way to shoot street photography,right or wrong lens,their a great many photographer work to admire out their past and present,but try to follow your own path,and find your own style

 

[Richard King]

this is 100% to do with body language

If you were taking a pic of your daughter in the middle of the street you would find that there is no reaction at all

The people are not looking at who you are taking, they are looking at the way you are behaving. If your body language was "I feel comfy, im taking photographs of my daughter, or the tree, or the building" you would have no reaction at all

 

[jon ryan]

Yes. However, you also said that "anyone who says otherwise is talking rubbish" when defending shooting from the hip. So if there is no definitively correct way to do photography, that statement doesn't sit well with everything else you are saying. Someone saying that shooting from the hip is not really a good way of shooting street photography, is merely expressing a "way to do photography", and can't, by your own definition, be talking rubbish.

*another sigh *

Let's try again, shall we? With added emphasis for extra clarity this time. What I actually said was:

Eric Kim gives good advice on how to shoot from the hip if you want to try this method. Don't pay any attention to people who say this is 'wrong'. That's total rubbish, of course. You shoot how you want to shoot.

You need to read, and understand, the whole paragraph, OK? Not just pick a bit of it, then change a couple of words (you need to learn to quote accurately. It's very important) and ignore the rest.

I am not saying, never have, never will, that one method is superior to another. The only method that matters is the one that produces the result you are after, and limiting your shooting technique will reduce the range of shots you can obtain.

 

[Pookeyhead]

*another sigh *

Let's try again, shall we? With added emphasis for extra clarity this time. What I actually said was:

I know what you said:

"Don't pay any attention to people who say this is 'wrong'. That's total rubbish, of course."

It doesn't really matter what comes after that. Following it with "Shoot what you want" doesn't nullify the previous statement.

I know what you're saying, but you can't say they're talking rubbish. As there is no right or wrong way, they're merely expressing their opinion. Perhaps not in a very endearing way, but their opinion nonetheless. If anyone stops shooting something because someone tells them not to, then they need to look deeper into a subject rather than follow one person's advice.

For the record, I think shooting from the hip results in very un-engaging shots, and I think it's rather cowardly. You can't say I'm talking rubbish though. It's just my opinion.

I am not saying, never have, never will, that one method is superior to another. The only method that matters is the one that produces the result you are after, and limiting your shooting technique will reduce the range of shots you can obtain.

No argument from me there. I'm just giving my opinion for others to decide upon.

As you say.... shoot what you want. It's your camera.

 

[jon ryan]

For the record, I think shooting from the hip results in very un-engaging shots, and I think it's rather cowardly. You can't say I'm talking rubbish though. It's just my opinion.

What the hell is 'cowardly' photography? It's photography, not a test of manhood!

 

[jon ryan]

"I'm right, everyone else is wrong"

See? I can use selective quotes as well.

 

[Pookeyhead]

Like I said Jon.. we'll have to agree to disagree. It's my opinion. I defend everyone;s right to shoot what they want, when they want.. but I can still have a personal opinion.. and a right to share it.

 

[Steve]

Just photograph old people sitting on benches.

They will be an easy target.

And make sure you do a high contrast black and white conversion with extra grain for that authentic street look.

 

[ernesto]

What the hell is 'cowardly' photography? It's photography, not a test of manhood!

This is the bit I was getting at when I used the term "given away". From the hip shots tend to look exactly that - sneaky shots that are not usually well composed and not usually at an optimum angle and you can tell that a mile off.

That is not to say they can't sometimes be good, or that you shouldn't do it (I do it myself) but I do feel that they never quite look right. If you think the opposite and they all look great they so be it.

 

[norters]

If it's taken on the street it's a street photograph.

 

[Forbiddenbiker]

If it's taken on the street it's a street photograph.

Yes but its not often 'street' photography.

 

[Ed Sutton]

If it's taken on the street it's a street photograph.

Yes but its not often 'street' photography.

So if you take a photograph of a horse that might not be 'horse' photography? What if the horse is on a street?

 

[SThornton]

So if you take a photograph of a horse that might not be 'horse' photography? What if the horse is on a street?

I think we may have the makings of another horse scandal here! Lol

 

[Forbiddenbiker]

So if you take a photograph of a horse that might not be 'horse' photography? What if the horse is on a street?

I think that comes under horse portraiture in the street doesn't it.