street photography - how do they take these shots?

kristoffon · 12-11-2009, 07:00 AM

I'm linking these from the Wall Street Journal's today's "pics of the week" so if for some reason they don't show up click that link and refer to pics #2 and #6.

They are both wide angle shots (I'm guessing 18mm and 30mm roughly if APS-C) from very close. Yet the subjects remain entirely unaffected by the photographers presence. In the second show the camera must be almost crammed in the person's face.

How do they do it? Do they simply walk up to them and keep clicking until such time that the subject decides to ignore the photographer? Do they ask if they can photograph them? Do they ask for them to act natural? How would any one of you approach taking pictures such as those?

Last edited by kristoffon; 01-22-2010 at 04:59 AM.

WMBP · 12-11-2009, 08:57 AM

Originally posted by kristoffon

How do they do it? Do they simply walk up to them and keep clicking until such time that the subject decides to ignore the photographer? Do they ask if they can photograph them? Do they ask for them to act natural? How would any one of you approach taking pictures such as those?

All of the above, and more. Sometimes they just walk up and shoot. The great news photographers for magazines like Life, National Geographic, etc., more often seem to have spent at least a little time with their subjects - but sometimes very little. Dorothea Lange reports that her famous photograph "Migrant Mother" was taken very quickly:

I saw and approached the hungry and desperate mother, as if drawn by a magnet. I do not remember how I explained my presence or my camera to her, but I do remember she asked me no questions. I made five exposures, working closer and closer from the same direction. I did not ask her name or her history. She told me her age, that she was thirty-two. She said that they had been living on frozen vegetables from the surrounding fields, and birds that the children killed. She had just sold the tires from her car to buy food. There she sat in that lean- to tent with her children huddled around her, and seemed to know that my pictures might help her, and so she helped me. There was a sort of equality about it.

(Originally from: Popular Photography, Feb. 1960. Quoted here from the photo's Library of Congress web page.)

I've wondered a lot about Lange's account. She acknowledges that there was some interaction between her and the mother, but I think she deemphasizes it. I don't doubt that she worked quickly. But the photos were hardly spontaneous candids. We know that she took half a dozen shots. They are all quite different - and all of them are carefully composed. I am sure that she worked very deliberately and that the mother and her children accepted the fact that they were being photographed and cooperated with the photographer. Perhaps the woman was so tired and scared that she was willing to be pushed around by a photographer who just pulled of the road, but I doubt it.

There's a wonderful documentary about the great war photographer James Nachtwey, with the unsurprising name "War Photographer." In it Nachtwey talks about how he gets these amazing shots of, oh, mothers who have just gotten the news that their son was blown up, and so on. In that particular case, he says that some of his subjects understand that he's a news photographer and they think that his photos will help their cause. In other words, he says much the same thing that Lange said. I'm not entirely sure that's a good or sufficient explanation. And not everybody he photographs is someone who is desperate for help from the outside.

So if the subjects are not simply too weak to object and, at the same time, are not motivated by simple self-interest to ignore the photographer, then how do the photographers get these great shots? Ultimately, it's simply a matter of how the photographer relates to people.

To do this kind of photography you have to be able to become invisible, or at least, to work in a way that makes people feel comfortable around you. This personal talent isn't unique to war or documentary photographers like the folks who shoot for National Geographic. It's also a talent required by wedding photographers (for the candids) and by ordinary news photographers (to some extent).

What's the talent consist of? Well, for starters, it's got very little to do with photographic skill, although I think you do need to understand what you will need photographically to capture the photo you want. I mean, before you start relating to people, you need to know where the light is, how you're going to frame your shot, etc.

But aside from that, the personal skill is an interesting, almost paradoxical, combination of chutzpah and humility, of impudence and something that resembles shyness. You must have the nerve to walk to the situation and lift your camera to your eye. In some cases, like Nachtwey's, that quality is more than nerve, it's real courage. But at the same time, the photographer has to be non-threatening, almost invisible. Nachtwey says that he respects his subjects and that they know it; I think that respect is an important element.

NOTE that this non-aggressive, respectful attitude distinguishes this kind of photographer from a celebrity stalker (paparazzo). All you need to be a celebrity photographer is chutzpah. Indeed, you'd better NOT respect your subjects in that line of work or you simply won't be any good. I'm not sure about street photographers. Most of them seem like hit-and-run shooters to me. At least judging from this video, Bruce Gilden just seems to walk down the street and shove a camera in people's faces. I don't think Garry Winogrand got his photos by being shy. But there's another famous street photographer in New York (an older man who has also been involved in film but whose famous name escapes me right now) who, if not shy, exactly, is certainly very polite, standing on the street, engaging people in conversation as they come by, and then asking if he can take their photo. Maybe that's how you do it when you get older and you can't run as fast any more. :-)

Will

kristoffon · 12-11-2009, 10:07 AM

Thanks Will for a very interesting and informative response.

LeDave · 12-13-2009, 09:29 PM

Sometimes if you stay at a location long enough, people who were curious of your presence, will stop noticing you as much.

jgredline · 12-13-2009, 09:33 PM

If you want to get those types of shots that you posted, you need to get the camera and stick it into the situation and do it very fast...If you have to think about it, you missed the shot.

**Michaelina2** · 12-14-2009, 04:48 AM

Although not street photography, the principles are the same... check out Sam Abell's approach...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9nXP7cv4xE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ph7sdr44QRc

Cheers and enjoy the season...

creampuff · 12-14-2009, 09:24 AM

The secret to the ultra wide angle is to shoot subjects not more than an arm's reach away from the camera. Seriously.

kristoffon · 12-14-2009, 10:00 AM

Originally posted by creampuff

The secret to the ultra wide angle is to shoot subjects not more than an arm's reach away from the camera. Seriously.

What we're really after is the secret so shoot subjects at arm's lenght and photograph things other than surprised stares or annoyed scowls

bbluesman · 12-15-2009, 08:13 PM

Very interesting thread. Will excellent analysis and interesting responses. Don't really have anything to add other than really agree that if people feel the respect and even admiration that comes across better than treating them as butterflies to be mounted in an album...

Cosmo · 12-16-2009, 02:03 AM

1. In this type of reportage assignment photography, the subjects will know who the photographer is/ will have spent some time around the photographer/ will have been told what the photographer is doing and will be okay with him/her taking photos of what they are doing.

2. The photographer is fast and un-intrusive.

vizjerei · 12-16-2009, 09:41 AM

Originally posted by kristoffon

What we're really after is the secret so shoot subjects at arm's lenght and photograph things other than surprised stares or annoyed scowls

just wear your camera with ultra wide lens on your neck, set it to TAv mode, and turn your body to the direction you want to take pic of, and press the shutter button

or even better with a shutter release cable.

mr. jef · 12-17-2009, 04:55 PM

I don't know if this is really helpful, but i find that a second person can be most efficient. On the occasions were i was asked to do social/street documentary, i almost always took someone with me to talk a bit with the people (of course, we were interested in their words too, but i guess even if you don't need to write something, it helps to make people feel at ease). This way, i was free to take my time for framing and arranging light and focus (these were manual shots). I've tried to combine shooting with chatting my subjects up, but it seems i am too concentrated on taking pictures at that point to be really nice to talk with.

Another method i like to use is having a very small semi-automatical camera that you can shoot without anyone noticing you were taking pictures by either being fast, or shooting from the hip, or when riding a bike. For this i very much liked the old Olympus pen ee-3 (with film, so you can have a very small camera with good image quality). Also, old cameras seem to be a lot less intimidating, people actually warm up quite a bit when they see you holding an old Voigtländer in its battered eveready leather case.

Lastly, an extremely wide angle allows you to take pictures of people without pointing a camera at them. This is nice.

And of course, small lenses, small cameras, in my case not too pro looking bag... for now, a k20 with a compact old prime seems to be unobstrusive enough for my needs. Then again, people are always shooting pictures everywhere in this city, i guess the threshold has shifted a bit.

reeftool · 12-21-2009, 08:42 AM

It is less obvious taking pictures from waist level. That is possibly how he did it. Excellent photos. It's very hard for people to ignore you when you are shooting pictures, especially up close. Kids in particular like to pose for the camera. I think that young boy had no idea his picture was being taken.

dougdeep · 01-21-2010, 09:12 PM

Agreed. Look at the child in the first pic. How tall do you think he is? Waist height? He's shooting from the hip.

In the 2nd pic, there's a few people lying on the ground. He may have just gone with the flow, casually lied down. Or perhaps he set the camera down with a timer or remote shutter.

I bet these photo journalists have a ton of experience and a huge bag of tricks.

CWyatt · 01-22-2010, 01:30 AM

You can't categorically say he's shooting from the hip. I've taken photos that close with noone noticing, and not from the hip.

I think it is definitely a skill you pick up. People notice me quite a bit, but it's decreasing as I get fast and better technique.

As others have pointed out, a key is speed - with feet and with camera. Part of that is pre-visualisation. You know what you want, you've already got the camera settings, or flick it over with your fingers without looking - then lift up fast and shoot. You can enhance the photo often by quickly bending or going up on your toes right when you shoot.

These don't show any evidence of it as such, but again as pointed out - being unintrusive and yet becoming as much a 'normal' part of the surroundings as possible is as an element. Photojournos are there to take the photos - so with that mindset you just DO it, sometimes people will look, sometimes not. Non-journalism street is a bit more tricky with the embarassment factor, but I think that's something that's overcome with experience or mindset.

I'd also point out that in the photos you posted, the subjects have a lot of other things to think about than someone with a camera.

Un-noticed:

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
Noticed/in full view:
.
.
.

12-11-2009, 07:00 AM	#1
kristoffon Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Brazil Posts: 532	street photography - how do they take these shots? I'm linking these from the Wall Street Journal's today's "pics of the week" so if for some reason they don't show up click that link and refer to pics #2 and #6. They are both wide angle shots (I'm guessing 18mm and 30mm roughly if APS-C) from very close. Yet the subjects remain entirely unaffected by the photographers presence. In the second show the camera must be almost crammed in the person's face. How do they do it? Do they simply walk up to them and keep clicking until such time that the subject decides to ignore the photographer? Do they ask if they can photograph them? Do they ask for them to act natural? How would any one of you approach taking pictures such as those? Last edited by kristoffon; 01-22-2010 at 04:59 AM.

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?	PHOTOCOP	Photographic Technique	30	04-09-2010 04:44 AM
Street Photography-Photographing the street photographer?	Reportage	Photographic Technique	10	03-23-2009 07:41 AM
Street Photography	GLXLR	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	02-23-2009 11:01 PM
So you like street photography?	Voe	Post Your Photos!	15	08-20-2008 03:03 PM

12-11-2009, 08:57 AM	#2
WMBP Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,482	Originally posted by kristoffon How do they do it? Do they simply walk up to them and keep clicking until such time that the subject decides to ignore the photographer? Do they ask if they can photograph them? Do they ask for them to act natural? How would any one of you approach taking pictures such as those? All of the above, and more. Sometimes they just walk up and shoot. The great news photographers for magazines like Life, National Geographic, etc., more often seem to have spent at least a little time with their subjects - but sometimes very little. Dorothea Lange reports that her famous photograph "Migrant Mother" was taken very quickly: I saw and approached the hungry and desperate mother, as if drawn by a magnet. I do not remember how I explained my presence or my camera to her, but I do remember she asked me no questions. I made five exposures, working closer and closer from the same direction. I did not ask her name or her history. She told me her age, that she was thirty-two. She said that they had been living on frozen vegetables from the surrounding fields, and birds that the children killed. She had just sold the tires from her car to buy food. There she sat in that lean- to tent with her children huddled around her, and seemed to know that my pictures might help her, and so she helped me. There was a sort of equality about it. (Originally from: Popular Photography, Feb. 1960. Quoted here from the photo's Library of Congress web page.) I've wondered a lot about Lange's account. She acknowledges that there was some interaction between her and the mother, but I think she deemphasizes it. I don't doubt that she worked quickly. But the photos were hardly spontaneous candids. We know that she took half a dozen shots. They are all quite different - and all of them are carefully composed. I am sure that she worked very deliberately and that the mother and her children accepted the fact that they were being photographed and cooperated with the photographer. Perhaps the woman was so tired and scared that she was willing to be pushed around by a photographer who just pulled of the road, but I doubt it. There's a wonderful documentary about the great war photographer James Nachtwey, with the unsurprising name "War Photographer." In it Nachtwey talks about how he gets these amazing shots of, oh, mothers who have just gotten the news that their son was blown up, and so on. In that particular case, he says that some of his subjects understand that he's a news photographer and they think that his photos will help their cause. In other words, he says much the same thing that Lange said. I'm not entirely sure that's a good or sufficient explanation. And not everybody he photographs is someone who is desperate for help from the outside. So if the subjects are not simply too weak to object and, at the same time, are not motivated by simple self-interest to ignore the photographer, then how do the photographers get these great shots? Ultimately, it's simply a matter of how the photographer relates to people. To do this kind of photography you have to be able to become invisible, or at least, to work in a way that makes people feel comfortable around you. This personal talent isn't unique to war or documentary photographers like the folks who shoot for National Geographic. It's also a talent required by wedding photographers (for the candids) and by ordinary news photographers (to some extent). What's the talent consist of? Well, for starters, it's got very little to do with photographic skill, although I think you do need to understand what you will need photographically to capture the photo you want. I mean, before you start relating to people, you need to know where the light is, how you're going to frame your shot, etc. But aside from that, the personal skill is an interesting, almost paradoxical, combination of chutzpah and humility, of impudence and something that resembles shyness. You must have the nerve to walk to the situation and lift your camera to your eye. In some cases, like Nachtwey's, that quality is more than nerve, it's real courage. But at the same time, the photographer has to be non-threatening, almost invisible. Nachtwey says that he respects his subjects and that they know it; I think that respect is an important element. NOTE that this non-aggressive, respectful attitude distinguishes this kind of photographer from a celebrity stalker (paparazzo). All you need to be a celebrity photographer is chutzpah. Indeed, you'd better NOT respect your subjects in that line of work or you simply won't be any good. I'm not sure about street photographers. Most of them seem like hit-and-run shooters to me. At least judging from this video, Bruce Gilden just seems to walk down the street and shove a camera in people's faces. I don't think Garry Winogrand got his photos by being shy. But there's another famous street photographer in New York (an older man who has also been involved in film but whose famous name escapes me right now) who, if not shy, exactly, is certainly very polite, standing on the street, engaging people in conversation as they come by, and then asking if he can take their photo. Maybe that's how you do it when you get older and you can't run as fast any more. :-) Will

12-11-2009, 10:07 AM	#3
kristoffon Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Brazil Posts: 532 Original Poster	Thanks Will for a very interesting and informative response.

12-13-2009, 09:29 PM	#4
LeDave Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Minneapolis - St. Paul Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,067	Sometimes if you stay at a location long enough, people who were curious of your presence, will stop noticing you as much.

12-13-2009, 09:33 PM	#5
jgredline Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: LosAngeles, Ca. Photos: Albums Posts: 10,628	If you want to get those types of shots that you posted, you need to get the camera and stick it into the situation and do it very fast...If you have to think about it, you missed the shot.

12-14-2009, 04:48 AM	#6
Michaelina2 Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: SE Michigan USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,300	Although not street photography, the principles are the same... check out Sam Abell's approach... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-9nXP7cv4xE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ph7sdr44QRc Cheers and enjoy the season...

12-14-2009, 09:24 AM	#7
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	The secret to the ultra wide angle is to shoot subjects not more than an arm's reach away from the camera. Seriously.

12-14-2009, 10:00 AM	#8
kristoffon Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Brazil Posts: 532 Original Poster	Originally posted by creampuff The secret to the ultra wide angle is to shoot subjects not more than an arm's reach away from the camera. Seriously. What we're really after is the secret so shoot subjects at arm's lenght and photograph things other than surprised stares or annoyed scowls

12-15-2009, 08:13 PM	#9
bbluesman Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2009 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,615	Very interesting thread. Will excellent analysis and interesting responses. Don't really have anything to add other than really agree that if people feel the respect and even admiration that comes across better than treating them as *butterflies to be mounted in an album...*

12-16-2009, 02:03 AM	#10
Cosmo Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 488	1. In this type of reportage assignment photography, the subjects will know who the photographer is/ will have spent some time around the photographer/ will have been told what the photographer is doing and will be okay with him/her taking photos of what they are doing. 2. The photographer is fast and un-intrusive.

12-16-2009, 09:41 AM	#11
vizjerei Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,418	Originally posted by kristoffon What we're really after is the secret so shoot subjects at arm's lenght and photograph things other than surprised stares or annoyed scowls just wear your camera with ultra wide lens on your neck, set it to TAv mode, and turn your body to the direction you want to take pic of, and press the shutter button or even better with a shutter release cable.

12-17-2009, 04:55 PM	#12
mr. jef Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Paris Posts: 31	I don't know if this is really helpful, but i find that a second person can be most efficient. On the occasions were i was asked to do social/street documentary, i almost always took someone with me to talk a bit with the people (of course, we were interested in their words too, but i guess even if you don't need to write something, it helps to make people feel at ease). This way, i was free to take my time for framing and arranging light and focus (these were manual shots). I've tried to combine shooting with chatting my subjects up, but it seems i am too concentrated on taking pictures at that point to be really nice to talk with. Another method i like to use is having a very small semi-automatical camera that you can shoot without anyone noticing you were taking pictures by either being fast, or shooting from the hip, or when riding a bike. For this i very much liked the old Olympus pen ee-3 (with film, so you can have a very small camera with good image quality). Also, old cameras seem to be a lot less intimidating, people actually warm up quite a bit when they see you holding an old Voigtländer in its battered eveready leather case. Lastly, an extremely wide angle allows you to take pictures of people without pointing a camera at them. This is nice. And of course, small lenses, small cameras, in my case not too pro looking bag... for now, a k20 with a compact old prime seems to be unobstrusive enough for my needs. Then again, people are always shooting pictures everywhere in this city, i guess the threshold has shifted a bit.

12-21-2009, 08:42 AM	#13
reeftool Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Upstate New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,554	It is less obvious taking pictures from waist level. That is possibly how he did it. Excellent photos. It's very hard for people to ignore you when you are shooting pictures, especially up close. Kids in particular like to pose for the camera. I think that young boy had no idea his picture was being taken.

01-21-2010, 09:12 PM	#14
dougdeep New Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 8	Agreed. Look at the child in the first pic. How tall do you think he is? Waist height? He's shooting from the hip. In the 2nd pic, there's a few people lying on the ground. He may have just gone with the flow, casually lied down. Or perhaps he set the camera down with a timer or remote shutter. I bet these photo journalists have a ton of experience and a huge bag of tricks.

01-22-2010, 01:30 AM	#15
CWyatt Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 1,291	You can't categorically say he's shooting from the hip. I've taken photos that close with noone noticing, and not from the hip. I think it is definitely a skill you pick up. People notice me quite a bit, but it's decreasing as I get fast and better technique. As others have pointed out, a key is speed - with feet and with camera. Part of that is pre-visualisation. You know what you want, you've already got the camera settings, or flick it over with your fingers without looking - then lift up fast and shoot. You can enhance the photo often by quickly bending or going up on your toes right when you shoot. These don't show any evidence of it as such, but again as pointed out - being unintrusive and yet becoming as much a 'normal' part of the surroundings as possible is as an element. Photojournos are there to take the photos - so with that mindset you just DO it, sometimes people will look, sometimes not. Non-journalism street is a bit more tricky with the embarassment factor, but I think that's something that's overcome with experience or mindset. I'd also point out that in the photos you posted, the subjects have a lot of other things to think about than someone with a camera. Un-noticed: . . . . . . . . . . . . Noticed/in full view: . . .