Narrow view of street photography or...?

twitch · 06-01-2011, 09:22 PM

I thought the street photography in the article was pretty exceptional and that in my mind gives him some credibility. I've tried to take street photos and it really is very very hard ..... carving good composition with people doing something interesting in it, out of a sea of randomness on the street is deceptively difficult.

ovim · 06-01-2011, 09:37 PM

Originally posted by Class A

FWIW, I didn't confuse him. I intentionally linked to a gallery on his website. Top class stuff on his website, AFAIC.

I don't see who else might have been confused, but I might have missed something.

Ok, maybe it was just me who was confused

CWyatt · 06-02-2011, 03:58 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by twitch

I thought the street photography in the article was pretty exceptional and that in my mind gives him some credibility. I've tried to take street photos and it really is very very hard...

My view is: difficulty matters to photographers; results matter to everyone.
It doesn't matter how you got it. Getting it is the thing.

**Ash** · 06-02-2011, 04:31 AM

Originally posted by CWyatt

My view is: difficulty matters to photographers; results matter to everyone.
It doesn't matter how you got it. Getting it is the thing.

+1
The viewer has no clue what it took to get the photo, nor does it concern him/her - the content of the image though is what matters, however way it is obtained.

**Digitalis** · 06-02-2011, 04:45 AM

Good point Cwyatt, in the end all that matters is the image...not the circumstances under which it was made.

midori · 06-02-2011, 04:58 AM

If you look on Hardcore Street Photography on flickr - they don't like anything with a telephoto, and it has to be of certain types of subject or they don't like it.

Flickr: HCSP (Hardcore Street Photography)

... there's even a refuseniks group...

Flickr: Deleted from Hardcore Street Photography

Though I think complaining about not being accepted into a group of snobs only serves to strengthen and dignify that group.

You really have to take manifestos, concepts of "authenticity," critiques from peers, and competitions, with a pinch of salt. So much of it is self-serving, and is more to do with group membership, social psychology and plain envy (see the film "Amadeus") than actual truth.

Just think - how many Oscar winning films do you watch on a regular basis, and how many of them are actually remembered, in comparison with other films of their time?

You just need to stick to your vision, your way, and try to find your audience.

**rparmar** · 06-02-2011, 06:45 AM

Originally posted by midori

You just need to stick to your vision, your way, and try to find your audience.

Indeed. It helps also if you are happy with a small audience and have no interest in courting fame or any other false idols society presents us with.

TaoMaas · 06-02-2011, 09:31 AM

Originally posted by CWyatt

My view is: difficulty matters to photographers; results matter to everyone.
It doesn't matter how you got it. Getting it is the thing.

This is true. Photography isn't the same as Olympic diving. Degree of difficulty doesn't figure into the final score.

twitch · 06-05-2011, 06:48 PM

Originally posted by CWyatt

My view is: difficulty matters to photographers; results matter to everyone.
It doesn't matter how you got it. Getting it is the thing.

This is true. I have grab shots that were much better than painstakingly set up tripod shots.

However I do find the shots that I spent time over to be more personally satisfying and therefore more enjoyable, even though ultimately for viewers of the photos it's the result that matter. I also tend to learn more when I've been very deliberate...

CWyatt · 06-06-2011, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by jeztastic

It is amazing. But I get the impression he is finding a great landscape/architecture/abstract shot and then hanging around waiting for someone or something to move into it. Different again to the classic street photography thing, although clearly he can do that too.

That certainly is a technique that I use (but less over time). However in the gallery ClassA rather nicely linked, only 6 out of 34 shots are using that technique.

jeztastic · 06-07-2011, 05:04 AM

Originally posted by CWyatt

That certainly is a technique that I use (but less over time). However in the gallery ClassA rather nicely linked, only 6 out of 34 shots are using that technique.

Interesting. And that wasn't meant as a criticism by the way, more of an observation on the different ways of taking street photos.

This is the one I was thinking of:

Camus Wyatt: Photographs | Street I

Some of my favourite street/candid photos have been taken with a telephoto - apparently a big no-no!

CWyatt · 06-07-2011, 11:47 AM

Yeah that one of mine you linked is both a telephoto and one of those waiting-for-the-right-person shots. To be honest I haven't owned a telephoto now for a while (partly due to cost), but I do subscribe to the wide to standard focal length idea most of the time.

magkelly · 06-07-2011, 03:21 PM

Exactly, and they make me laugh when I see that, every darned time. It's not just photographers though who toot their own horn and attempt to look good by teaching the masses. Photographers have nothing on paranormal people for instance. I watch ghost shows for fun? Nearly every darned time someone mentions the word "psychic" it's usually got "world-renowned" or "famous" beside it even if I've never heard of the person. ;P

Originally posted by MRRiley

People who write manifestos like that are mainly trying to place themselves above the rest of us mere mortals...

Alan Clogwyn · 06-08-2011, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by magkelly

Exactly, and they make me laugh when I see that, every darned time. It's not just photographers though who toot their own horn and attempt to look good by teaching the masses. Photographers have nothing on paranormal people for instance. I watch ghost shows for fun? Nearly every darned time someone mentions the word "psychic" it's usually got "world-renowned" or "famous" beside it even if I've never heard of the person. ;P

Don't mix the two worlds either, my ex wife decided one day that she wanted to photograph ghosts, and sayd that orbs in phoots were spirits (look like flash lit dust spots to me!) Oh How I laughed, she didn't see the funny side!

Anyone else think that was like reading something from a wannabe Ken Rockwell?

RioRico · 06-08-2011, 02:58 PM

Originally posted by Alan Clogwyn

my ex wife decided one day that she wanted to photograph ghosts, and sayd that orbs in phoots were spirits (look like flash lit dust spots to me!) Oh How I laughed, she didn't see the funny side!

Is that why she's now your ex?

Hay, I've photographed ghosts too! And UFO's (flying, and crashed, and beaming victims skyward), sasquatches, aquatic monsters, alien tracks, chemtrails, etc, and I hardly even had to cheat! But that's not street photography. Some street characters are even worse.

06-07-2011, 11:47 AM	#42
CWyatt Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,291	Yeah that one of mine you linked is both a telephoto and one of those waiting-for-the-right-person shots. To be honest I haven't owned a telephoto now for a while (partly due to cost), but I do subscribe to the wide to standard focal length idea most of the time. Last edited by CWyatt; 06-07-2011 at 03:33 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Streets My take on street photography	aaronius	Post Your Photos!	35	04-17-2011 08:42 PM
Street Photography	Sparkle	General Talk	6	01-12-2011 06:16 AM
Street photography?	PHOTOCOP	Photographic Technique	30	04-09-2010 04:44 AM
Landscape The view across the street	BethC	Photo Critique	6	04-08-2010 12:29 PM
Street Photography-Photographing the street photographer?	Reportage	Photographic Technique	10	03-23-2009 07:41 AM

06-01-2011, 09:22 PM	#31
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	I thought the street photography in the article was pretty exceptional and that in my mind gives him some credibility. I've tried to take street photos and it really is very very hard ..... carving good composition with people doing something interesting in it, out of a sea of randomness on the street is deceptively difficult.

06-01-2011, 09:37 PM	#32
ovim Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Tre, Finland Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,229	Originally posted by Class A FWIW, I didn't confuse him. I intentionally linked to a gallery on his website. Top class stuff on his website, AFAIC. I don't see who else might have been confused, but I might have missed something. Ok, maybe it was just me who was confused

06-02-2011, 03:58 AM - 2 Likes	#33
CWyatt Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,291	Originally posted by twitch I thought the street photography in the article was pretty exceptional and that in my mind gives him some credibility. I've tried to take street photos and it really is very very hard... My view is: difficulty matters to photographers; results matter to everyone. It doesn't matter how you got it. Getting it is the thing.

06-02-2011, 04:31 AM	#34
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Originally posted by CWyatt My view is: difficulty matters to photographers; results matter to everyone. It doesn't matter how you got it. Getting it is the thing. +1 The viewer has no clue what it took to get the photo, nor does it concern him/her - the content of the image though is what matters, however way it is obtained.

06-02-2011, 04:45 AM	#35
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Good point Cwyatt, in the end all that matters is the image...not the circumstances under which it was made.

06-02-2011, 04:58 AM	#36
midori Inactive Account Join Date: May 2011 Location: London Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 21	If you look on Hardcore Street Photography on flickr - they don't like anything with a telephoto, and it has to be of certain types of subject or they don't like it. Flickr: HCSP (Hardcore Street Photography) ... there's even a refuseniks group... Flickr: Deleted from Hardcore Street Photography Though I think complaining about not being accepted into a group of snobs only serves to strengthen and dignify that group. You really have to take manifestos, concepts of "authenticity," critiques from peers, and competitions, with a pinch of salt. So much of it is self-serving, and is more to do with group membership, social psychology and plain envy (see the film "Amadeus") than actual truth. Just think - how many Oscar winning films do you watch on a regular basis, and how many of them are actually remembered, in comparison with other films of their time? You just need to stick to your vision, your way, and try to find your audience.

06-02-2011, 06:45 AM	#37
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	Originally posted by midori You just need to stick to your vision, your way, and try to find your audience. Indeed. It helps also if you are happy with a small audience and have no interest in courting fame or any other false idols society presents us with.

06-02-2011, 09:31 AM	#38
TaoMaas Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: Oklahoma City Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,574	Originally posted by CWyatt My view is: difficulty matters to photographers; results matter to everyone. It doesn't matter how you got it. Getting it is the thing. This is true. Photography isn't the same as Olympic diving. Degree of difficulty doesn't figure into the final score.

06-05-2011, 06:48 PM	#39
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	Originally posted by CWyatt My view is: difficulty matters to photographers; results matter to everyone. It doesn't matter how you got it. Getting it is the thing. This is true. I have grab shots that were much better than painstakingly set up tripod shots. However I do find the shots that I spent time over to be more personally satisfying and therefore more enjoyable, even though ultimately for viewers of the photos it's the result that matter. I also tend to learn more when I've been very deliberate...

06-06-2011, 02:51 PM	#40
CWyatt Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,291	Originally posted by jeztastic It is amazing. But I get the impression he is finding a great landscape/architecture/abstract shot and then hanging around waiting for someone or something to move into it. Different again to the classic street photography thing, although clearly he can do that too. That certainly is a technique that I use (but less over time). However in the gallery ClassA rather nicely linked, only 6 out of 34 shots are using that technique.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-07-2011, 05:04 AM	#41
jeztastic Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Canterbury Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 596	Originally posted by CWyatt That certainly is a technique that I use (but less over time). However in the gallery ClassA rather nicely linked, only 6 out of 34 shots are using that technique. Interesting. And that wasn't meant as a criticism by the way, more of an observation on the different ways of taking street photos. This is the one I was thinking of: Camus Wyatt: Photographs \| Street I Some of my favourite street/candid photos have been taken with a telephoto - apparently a big no-no!

06-07-2011, 03:21 PM	#43
magkelly Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,901	Exactly, and they make me laugh when I see that, every darned time. It's not just photographers though who toot their own horn and attempt to look good by teaching the masses. Photographers have nothing on paranormal people for instance. I watch ghost shows for fun? Nearly every darned time someone mentions the word "psychic" it's usually got "world-renowned" or "famous" beside it even if I've never heard of the person. ;P Originally posted by MRRiley People who write manifestos like that are mainly trying to place themselves above the rest of us mere mortals...

06-08-2011, 12:26 PM	#44
Alan Clogwyn Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Gwynedd Photos: Gallery Posts: 93	Originally posted by magkelly Exactly, and they make me laugh when I see that, every darned time. It's not just photographers though who toot their own horn and attempt to look good by teaching the masses. Photographers have nothing on paranormal people for instance. I watch ghost shows for fun? Nearly every darned time someone mentions the word "psychic" it's usually got "world-renowned" or "famous" beside it even if I've never heard of the person. ;P Don't mix the two worlds either, my ex wife decided one day that she wanted to photograph ghosts, and sayd that orbs in phoots were spirits (look like flash lit dust spots to me!) Oh How I laughed, she didn't see the funny side! Anyone else think that was like reading something from a wannabe Ken Rockwell?

06-08-2011, 02:58 PM	#45
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by Alan Clogwyn my ex wife decided one day that she wanted to photograph ghosts, and sayd that orbs in phoots were spirits (look like flash lit dust spots to me!) Oh How I laughed, she didn't see the funny side! Is that why she's now your ex? Hay, I've photographed ghosts too! And UFO's (flying, and crashed, and beaming victims skyward), sasquatches, aquatic monsters, alien tracks, chemtrails, etc, and I hardly even had to cheat! But that's not street photography. Some street characters are even worse.