[oculus]

It is often said that the best street photography is up close and personal; but is there a point when street photography can be excessively up close and personal?

I spent yesterday in midtown Manhattan with a specific agenda -- to take street photos of New Yorkers in their urban environment at close proximity (about 5 feet away). I like what the proximity does for the images. We see more details and facial expressions really become alive. However, because I am still new at this photography thing, I do find myself asking a certain compositional questions as I develop my style: does the proximity take the subjects out of their environment? in other words, do these images come across more as "portraits" than "street photography"?

Additionally, do the images "work" in color? I am consistently menaced by the enigma of white balance. Shooting in RAW only makes matters worse. I find myself in endless and indecisive tinkering. It drives me nuts.

Thanks in advance for your consideration!

---

Last edited by oculus; 03-25-2015 at 12:55 AM.

[troika]

I'm no authority, but I think your WB looks okay in these. I like the energy of the close subject and dramatic backgrounds. Watch out you don't get punched doing that with strangers in New York, though.

What I would change about these photos (though it's an artistic choice and I don't claim to know what I'm talking about), but... I would crop these straight or at least establish one horizontal or vertical line somewhere. Photos 1 and 2 have wildly leaning buildings. I would either horizontally level the photo using a street sign as the horizon or vertically on one of the buildings.

Photo 3 looks leveled to the background. Photo 4 is close, but I think it's falling off to the left a little bit.

In the first one it's pretty dramatic and maybe that's what you're going for. Just my observations. I would make he person the subject and try not to draw my eye or emotion to something in the background.

[robgski]

I think the closeness is very proper.

I agree with the cropping, having a vertical or horizontal anchors the subject of the photo.

[oculus]

That is good advice, about the cropping. Makes a huge difference.

[CreationBear]

does the proximity take the subjects out of their environment?

I think that's a nice insight, but I don't think it's a matter necessarily of "how close" as to where the subjects are in the frame. For instance, the "security detail" that struck my whimsy is anchored on the left side by the dapper gent that's quite close to the lens, but the rest of the frame is occupied by interesting human figures in the middle distance(s). Similarly, the picture of the old woman in the Chinese market is a similarly articulated moment in time, with her figure almost tumbling out of the lower half of the picture, as if from a panel of a manga. The difference with these images, though, is that they follow the "rules" for composing half-torso portraits--you can't see the forest for the tree planted four-square in the frame. To my mind, there's a lot more energy to be found in those idiosyncratic compositions from your earlier photos.


As for WB, I also think you're at a disadvantage when "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia" when shooting color, simply because the default values SOOC provide results indistinguishable from the typical, casual "snap." You might agree with Dartmouth Dave that monochrome is (finally) played, but for myself I could see the need to establish some genre conventions, a "sign" as it were to use to read your intentions as an artist and your relationship with the subject. (Unless you're doing the greasy Terry Richardson thing, and there it helps--a lot--to have your camera pointed at Kate Upton.) One thing you might consider is desaturating things a bit and cooling the WB--a kind of Voigtlander preset, as it were.

[oculus]

I think that's a nice insight, but I don't think it's a matter necessarily of "how close" as to where the subjects are in the frame

Agreed.

To my mind, there's a lot more energy to be found in those idiosyncratic compositions from your earlier photos.

Yes; and this, I think, is the lesson learned. There is nothing particularly moving (for me, at least) about a stationary "candid street portrait" unless the subject is unusually captivating. These four images, maybe with the exception of the first, are not successful for that very reason. They lack the energy or movement which characterizes the urban flow and which, I think, is captured in successful street shots. Frozen movement. In that sense, street photography (at least the kind I like to try to make) is not very different from sports photography or the best of wildlife photography.

a "sign"

I think there is analogue to street photography in the literary genre of the so-called "creative non-fiction" where an author relates real events or happenings, but with a particular nuance of style (as a storyteller) which signals to readers that what they are reading is not mere historiography. Maybe this is the function of monochrome.

At any rate, for the reasons stated I think the following photos from my recent safari in the urban jungle are more evocative (for me at least).

[Kerrowdown]

but is there a point when street photography can be excessively up close and personal?

Only if you so close it gets you noticed, then it IMHO becomes portrait rather than street photography.

I use a 20mm now for about 90 percent of my street work, Robert Capa is accredited as saying "If your pictures aren't good enough, you aren't close enough"

[oculus]

I use a 20mm now for about 90 percent of my street work,

Do you use the SMC Pentax-A 20mm 2.8? I have thought about going with a wider lens, but when I want wide I usually reach for my GR, which has an 18mm (28mm equiv) lens.

[CreationBear]

Boom, as the kids say. I imagine street shooting involves more than its share of curating (not to mention cropping)--can you really expect "the decisive moment" every time you trip the shutter?--but these are awesome. I was going to say you might try Kerrowdown's A20 2.8 (or the ubiquitous DA 21 Lmt.) but it looks as if the 28 is serving up the Naked City with some fava beans and a nice chianti.


FWIW, it's funny you mention "creative nonfiction," because its underlying ethic is one that informs my understanding of what you're practicing with your camera--both genres have a similar tension between fidelity to the "real" and its simultaneous reliance on artifice. That's also what I was trying to get at (however unsuccessfully) in my comments about the "Oracle:" since both writer and photographer must by necessity omit so much of the subject's humanity--either through ignorance or simply artistic focus--it's incumbent on us to protect those who we've appropriated for our own purposes.

[robgski]

I've used the 40mm pancake lens for street photos, it's small and unobtrusive, so most people don't even register my K-5 as a camera and react to it, and it's compact.
I have a 17mm fisheye that works very well for street shots because it takes in so much of the scene with almost everything in focus, but it's solely manual, I really guess the right aperture to use, but despite being a fisheye, the distortion is minimal, I really like this lens even if it is less compact.
I really do think the 21mm will be my next purchase.

I live in a small town, so getting "street shots" is tough especially after 8 PM when they roll up the sidewalks.

[oculus]

it's incumbent on us to protect those who we've appropriated for our own purposes

I am always grateful for your insights and the eloquent aplomb with which you share them. I think this is why I shy away from photographing people who are ostensibly "down and out" e.g. the homeless. There's nothing noble or even difficult about taking pictures of the feeble or anesthetized. Sure, their beards look cool when you paint them with clarity and contrast -- but we've all seen it a thousand times.

I imagine street shooting involves more than its share of curating (not to mention cropping)--can you really expect "the decisive moment" every time you trip the shutter?

Out of over 800 frames taken in one day, I'd say there are about 25 or so "keepers". I do all my processing in LR or NIK, which, yes, sometimes involves cropping and exposure adjustments. The thing about "decisive moments" is that they are taking place all around us all the time. We just have to be ready to capture them.

[Kerrowdown]

Do you use the SMC Pentax-A 20mm 2.8?

Aye that's the one, previously I used the 15mm, but it gets a bit heavy in use for street work.

[AggieDad]

I am not trying to high-jack this discussion, but I am curious. Do people whose photos are published on the web unbeknownst to them have any recourse? Has their privacy been violated or is this allowed?

Thank you.

[oculus]

Has their privacy been violated or is this allowed?

It is allowed so long as there is no expectation of privacy, such as in a public place (e.g. a city street). The right of a street photographer to practice, publish, and sell their art is protected by the first amendment. This was recently upheld by the New York state supreme court (cf. Nussenzweig v. DiCorcia). Legality would only enter into the question if the images were used for advertising. Such is my understanding.

[AggieDad]

It is allowed so long as there is no expectation of privacy, such as in a public place (e.g. a city street). The right of a street photographer to practice, publish, and sell their art is protected by the first amendment. This was recently upheld by the New York state supreme court (cf. Nussenzweig v. DiCorcia). Legality would only enter into the question if the images were used for advertising. Such is my understanding.

Thank you for clearing this up.

Don