Trying to define 'Street Photography' for me

Forbiddenbiker said:
...got side tracked.

Is it like you require some level of quality in composition for it to be street then? No room for a little context to sort of emphasize the random moment.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say composition in the landscape sense but I prefer it to be 'real', I don't get the 'chopped off', surreal style. I don't go with what I would describe as random shooting from the hip ... I guess I lean more toward the 'candid' than abstract.
 
ZoneV said:
Maybe SOOC is stretching it, but the point I was trying to make was his lack of interest in PP. He believed in the moment of captue, not post processing, hence his reluctance to even crop his images. It's one of the things he's most well known for as any search of "bresson darkroom" seems to confirm.
Click to expand...

Its well known that he had little interest in what happened after the capture but to say his prints were not manipulated in any way is flippant.
 
Simon photo said:
Its well known that he had little interest in what happened after the capture but to say his prints were not manipulated in any way is flippant.
Click to expand...

That's good, looks like we're on the same page (at last :)).
 
DG Phototraining said:
This has to be one of my favs - moreso when I read the 'amazing' comments

Oh how I to aspire to be able to shoot like this...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/oscar_luis/8176784448/in/pool-onthestreet

NOT :D

If ANY of you arty Street lovers can make a sensible argument for this being good photography (Street or otherwise) then you're a genius :lol:

Dave
Click to expand...
You protest too much. there are good bad and great wedding photographers, the same applies to street photographers

Some photographers shoot weddings, some landscapes, some portraits, some street, some abstract, some buildings some products etc. etc.. You need to realise that whilst what might be one mans cup of tea, might be your pet hate. It doesn't matter. Go and do what you enjoy
 
gramps said:
It's just a mish-mash for me, I can see how it might appeal to some due to the apparent interaction between the man and woman centre of frame but it holds nothing for me.

Now this one ...
Different story altogether :D


http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4013/4224617157_152b17c5b6.jpg
Click to expand...

Yep not bad - quite similar in style to this photographer http://www.flickr.com/photos/paolo_rabuffi/7263326232/in/pool-onthestreet

I'm not a great fan of colour for street, but some people manage to pull it off
 
gramps said:
I wouldn't say composition in the landscape sense but I prefer it to be 'real', I don't get the 'chopped off', surreal style. I don't go with what I would describe as random shooting from the hip ... I guess I lean more toward the 'candid' than abstract.
Click to expand...


No I agree, I'm with you on that as I hope you can tell from my shots, clean and tidy... I dunno, Its such a wildly personal genre street, I guess I've come to like any personal take on it, forgetting its photography even! like its about the 'street part' which is the actual observation! not how well it was shot...which now I write that for the first time seems a little anal, maybe I should go back to being more critical. :gag::D
 
I like all the shots in the OP, and i can see the reasoning behind each for whether or not it is technically street - for me the definition of street is that the photo captures something interesting and that tells a story of the people in the shot. You connect with the subjects and it makes you think about that person and their lives.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Bruce Gilden - he is a bit marmite but his shots do tell a story and he certainly manages to capture interesting 'characters'....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRBARi09je8&sns=em

He says 'If you can smell the street by looking at the photo then it's a good street photograph.'

I also like this guys videos on different types of street photography - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sADQW-NlttE&sns=em (be sure to watch all the parts)
 
Last edited:
I am still not understanding how people are saying a photo is not in a certain category because they don't like it or think it is crap. That doesn't change what type of photo it is.

A bad portrait is still a portrait
A bad landscape is still a landscape
A bad street photo is still a street photo
 
Surely, good or bad, the discussion is about what constitutes 'street' - is it just street because it's shot in the street? ... Hence a photo of the pavement is 'street' or does it need more?



Is this wildlife photography?


092860-monkey-story1.jpg


STORY
 
donutagain said:
no thats my wife ,,leave her out of it :D
Click to expand...

Looks like my wife...........







but she doesn't smile.


So have we defined what 'street' photography is yet? For me, it should take place or have relevance to its title.

Wedding - at weddings
Sport - at sports
Landscape - should be wider than it is tall (ok, I'm just kidding here)
 
Not sure 'we' have defined it phil8139 or even come close, but I'm pretty sure I've improved my view on what it means for me - which was the whole point really and I appreciate all the comments that have helped form my view

It certainly seems to be much wider a genre than any other I'm used to with far more interpretations on not only what it is but the 'quality' of work that is not only acceptable but WOW'd at by many

Ta :)

Dave
 
DG Phototraining said:
It certainly seems to be much wider a genre than any other I'm used to with far more interpretations on not only what it is but the 'quality' of work that is not only acceptable but WOW'd at by many
Click to expand...

So its somewhere for the happy snappers to place their pics and become a 'Photographer'?

For want of a better word, a place for 'Uncle Bob' street view style.
 
bl0at3r said:
for me the definition of street is that the photo captures something interesting and that tells a story of the people in the shot. You connect with the subjects and it makes you think about that person and their lives.
Click to expand...

it seems like what you've just defined here is an interesting 'people' photo, regardless of where it was taken! :)
 
All street to me...

That flickr group, well doesn't do anything to me...To me that is more like the top 100 worst channel 4 candid camera outtake production...Which to be fair is how they declare themselves as candid....Weird Candid can be street but doesn't have to be, nor does it mean that street has to be a weird candid...

Just enjoy shooting :)
 
A photo taken on the street is a street photo. Even the ones of young people on mobile phones.
 
Street photography doesn't just have to be about the 'emotions' shared between the subject and the photographer.

that's a very narrow minded view, and limiting in your shooting.

when I'm out on the streets shooting, I often look for context between the surroundings and the subject, or focus on the shadows / light. or the interesting features of something happening in the street

as Bresson said: "were constantly dealing with vanishing moments" (or something a long those lines) - and so, street is about capturing the moment, the essence of the street, the culture, the people and the happenings - all encompased within that particular environment.

That's what I believe to be street.
 
Love it, love it, love it!

rofl.gif
 
Oh...

The Terminator : His camera is his weapon, and the number of frames per second is his only buying criteria. His camera is huge and his lens looks like a grenade launcher. He is a master of camouflage. Of course, his 300mm lens makes it easier. The decisive moment does not exist, or at best, it is located somewhere in his last 10 shots burst.
Click to expand...

definitely :D
 
:lol::lol: really!... Ive so got the wrong impression.

I fear im more of a desperate dan
II) The English Patient : Patience is his main virtue. A shot is as good as the time and effort it took to get it. He identifies carefully a setting, studies the light and positions himself for the perfect composition. His finger always ready on the shutter, he then waits for the missing element to appear. His wait might last for hours, sometimes braving rain, wind and the suspicious neighbors. Eventually, nothing will happen, but it doesn’t matter, he’ll be back tomorrow.
Click to expand...

:bonk:

Ive been a few of them...
 
It's an age thing - so little time ... so much left to do :lol:
 
gramps said:
Surely, good or bad, the discussion is about what constitutes 'street' - is it just street because it's shot in the street? ... Hence a photo of the pavement is 'street' or does it need more?



Is this wildlife photography?


092860-monkey-story1.jpg


STORY
Click to expand...

Around these parts that could easily pass as "nightclub photography".

Edit to CMA: referring to the animalistic nature of the youngsters when they've had a few, nothing to do with race!
 
Last edited:
Ash. said:
Street photography doesn't just have to be about the 'emotions' shared between the subject and the photographer.

that's a very narrow minded view, and limiting in your shooting.

when I'm out on the streets shooting, I often look for context between the surroundings and the subject, or focus on the shadows / light. or the interesting features of something happening in the street

as Bresson said: "were constantly dealing with vanishing moments" (or something a long those lines) - and so, street is about capturing the moment, the essence of the street, the culture, the people and the happenings - all encompased within that particular environment.

That's what I believe to be street.
Click to expand...

That ^^ pretty much sums it up for me. I would personally define the middle few of your set to be Candids - the fact they were in street is incidental. Now I have to disagree with you as I see 1 as Street. Well it's not landscape and it's not architecture, the picture depict the way that the sunlight interacts with with buildings reflecting on one and both of them creating the unique patterns. The presence of the man separates it from landscape/cityscape. I see him as walking along the footlights delivering a soliloquy. It's an interaction of person in environment - that says Street to me.

The last one also, I agree for pretty much the points you made.

Sorry to put up a link here, but I remembered this from a blog on the BBC. The first two picture are examples of how I would define Street (and I think perhaps what Ash aludes to). The first picture is the juxtaposition but also has symmetry. The second is amusing and fortunate capture but shows an implied interaction of the man and his surroundings.

DG Phototraining said:
{SNIP} ...On a more serious note though - I do sometimes get called on to judge at camera club competitions, mostly I get good reviews (well the winner likes me) of my judging and commentary - but I'm honestly glad no-one so far has had a 'Street' theme as if I judged as I see it many would fail to be marked at all as not being fit for category; and if I judged purely on 'its a shot in a street' then I'd not be true to my own judging aspects...
Dave
Click to expand...

Is that not the point of being a judge? It is your interpretation and you judge on the shot that 'speaks' to you. It's all subjective isn't it? Hell I watch Strictly every week and the Judges there were arguing the toss over whether the kicks were too Jivey or Quickstepy, now as pro dancers, if they can't agree....
 
I actually think officially judging photographs is more pointless than I did before after reading the comments in this thread.
 
vixmix said:
Sorry to put up a link here, but I remembered this from a blog on the BBC. The first two picture are examples of how I would define Street (and I think perhaps what Ash aludes to). The first picture is the juxtaposition but also has symmetry. The second is amusing and fortunate capture but shows an implied interaction of the man and his surroundings.
Click to expand...

I agree, Both fab street shots I think ... these moments are very hard if not impossible to repeat, all tiny aspects of our lives and thoughts captured forever.

ernesto said:
I actually think officially judging photographs is more pointless than I did before after reading the comments in this thread.
Click to expand...

:D;)

I know what you mean, I think. Their is definitely a pointless side to judging, more than half the time. :gag:
 
vixmix said:
Sorry to put up a link here, but I remembered this from a blog on the BBC. The first two picture are examples of how I would define Street (and I think perhaps what Ash aludes to). The first picture is the juxtaposition but also has symmetry. The second is amusing and fortunate capture but shows an implied interaction of the man and his surroundings.
Click to expand...

Have to totally agree, would have been more than happy to get either of those.
 
DG Phototraining said:
And I think I've already spotted a few of these types in this thread :p

http://www.yanidel.net/2011/12/09/10-types-of-street-photographers/

If that doesn't make you laugh you ain't up my Street

Dave
Click to expand...


Ah, so I'm "the family man" mostly :D

I see "street" photography as capturing distinct or gritty or left of centre moments in the 'urban jungle' - It's observation, voyeurism, not just any old 'snap shot' cuts it. There has to be something to draw you in, just like any other style.

I do think people over analyse, but you could easily draw a line between what is "street" or simply "urban" photography. For me, at least, street involves people, but not just any old shot of a street with people - there has to be a focus point, something different or unusual about it. Urban could be just buildings.
 
Cagey75 said:
Ah, so I'm "the family man" mostly :D

I see "street" photography as capturing distinct or gritty or left of centre moments in the 'urban jungle' - It's observation, voyeurism, not just any old 'snap shot' cuts it. There has to be something to draw you in, just like any other style.

I do think people over analyse, but you could easily draw a line between what is "street" or simply "urban" photography. For me, at least, street involves people, but not just any old shot of a street with people - there has to be a focus point, something different or unusual about it. Urban could be just buildings.
Click to expand...

I like your definition, nearly nails it for me.

I don't think we should shy away from over analysing myself, its an important part to any study I would have thought.

...but I think Dave want this thread to end so Ill leave it their. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top