[Blue]

Let me be frank...There is no greater a snap shooter than me. I too have been flamed, but in truth I don't care. I won't let my joy get stolen from me because I am snap shooter...I say post away. There are far more of us snap shooters than there are true photographers.

Nesster, those are creepy cool.

Its all well and good, but don't generally show my images I use for work on here. The term 'snap shot" is as difficult to define as "art." I'd wager that 99.999% of the people critical and labeling someone's shots as snap shots are actually pitiful at catching an image and probably in fact suffer from some sort of narcissistic personality disorder and are miserable people. In most cases, the opinions of such people are limited.

[jgredline]

Its all well and good, but don't generally show my images I use for work on here. The term 'snap shot" is as difficult to define as "art." I'd wager that 99.999% of the people critical and labeling someone's shots as snap shots are actually pitiful at catching an image and probably in fact suffer from some sort of narcissistic personality disorder and are miserable people. In most cases, the opinions of such people are limited.

Agreed. Life is too short...
Here is a snap shot I took a couple of days ago...I believe this empty fireworks station will be the norm.
...

[jgredline]

Here is another snap shot.

[Andi Lo]

Your street 'snapshots' are still way better than my street 'photos' Javier.

[Nesster]

Now, Javier, these two photographs are artistic to the max, and a part of their artistry is the label of 'snapshot'. As such this aligns with the OTHER river of photographic aesthetics, running through Eugene Atget and those of the classic era who looked to Atget rather than the photo seccessionist...

So the fireworks photograph is deceptive - there is play on depth, for example the flag behind the pole in the center, and motion, both of which dimensions are suggested but not actualized by the medium. And the joyful cacophony of the flags is itself a fireworks show, no?

The second photograph is of course a brilliant examination of identity, politics, and identity politics.

[jgredline]

Now, Javier, these two photographs are artistic to the max, and a part of their artistry is the label of 'snapshot'. As such this aligns with the OTHER river of photographic aesthetics, running through Eugene Atget and those of the classic era who looked to Atget rather than the photo seccessionist...

So the fireworks photograph is deceptive - there is play on depth, for example the flag behind the pole in the center, and motion, both of which dimensions are suggested but not actualized by the medium. And the joyful cacophony of the flags is itself a fireworks show, no?

The second photograph is of course a brilliant examination of identity, politics, and identity politics.

Thanks Nesster, but trully I put no thought into those pictures. I looked, I saw and I snapped. Infact, that is part of my problem. To often I just shoot what I see.

[Ratmagiclady]

I think I'd post more if there was room for photos on the computer I hang out on the Web with. And, really, if I could get comfortable putting people photos up on the Web. I'll need to get over that little hangup, I think.

[Nesster]

Thanks Nesster, but trully I put no thought into those pictures. I looked, I saw and I snapped. Infact, that is part of my problem. To often I just shoot what I see.

that's precisely the point - oh wait, there's a quote somewhere ...

"There are two kinds of photographers: those who compose pictures and those who take them. The former work in studios. For the latter, the studio is the world…. For them, the ordinary doesn‘t exist: every thing in life is a source of nourishment." -Ernst Haas

These 'snapshots' if made by a photographer famous for this sort of thing, would be inspected the way I did with your photos, we dig the additional meaning out afterward.

Meanwhile we're just shooting what we like at the moment.

[Blue]

"Street photography" or "social photography" shares some elements with nature photography. First off, the photographer has to be at the right place at the right time when something or someone appears that is interesting and or doing something interesting. Sometimes that requires serendipity. Serendipity favors those that are prepared. That allows one to get lucky more often that the average person. The final thing is that most of the time the photographer has to be ready to take the picture when the opportunity arises. These opportunities may be very fleeting and composition has to have been thought out in advance before the "event" occurs.

That my friends is why many photographs aren't "snap shots." Even if the perfect vantage point wasn't used or the perfect shutter/aperture combination on the perfect medium at the time when the image was captured.

George S. Patton once said that a good plan applied efficiently and enthusiastically NOW, is better than the perfect plan applied too late.

That's why when self proclaimed experts make fun of some shots, I just laugh AT them.

When I was working for one of the University of California campuses, I had shot a behavior video of an infamous insect, the professionals were putting together a training video and they intended to re-shot every thing as is typical with UC and their IPM photo collection. However, they had to use the video I took because they couldn't get the "Professional" shot. Sure, they could have done it better because they had 10x better equipment and more gear. The moral of the storey, sometimes it isn't all of the so called pizazz, but what the image IS.

[Blue]

Or I could have just said I like what I like.

[Ratmagiclady]

I wouldn't be too discouraged by online critiques, especially on artistic grounds, ...this can be one thing where not being there in person can make it a little difficult to sound constructive, even if it's operative. Street photo, especially, is usually quite spontaneous, and is generally a matter of 'how fast can you take your time,' so to speak. A lot of that charm *is* the spontaneity, and that's part of what's always associated with that area of phot.o.

[jgredline]

Thanks Nesster, Thanks Blue..

Let me explain a little bit further. When I first discovered a photo forum it was the pop photo forum...I very quickly got labeled a ''snap shooter'' and in truth, what I was taking back then where truly snap shops...But it hurt my feeling and unlike others, I would stand up for myself and for others who where called snap shooters. The thing is I realized that these so called ''photographers'' where jealous more than anything and after a while, I stopped listening to them and found out that there are far more ''snap shooters'' than there are photographers. So for me, I told myself, if they, those who only know how to criticize are photographers, then I never want to be one. I will be happy to be and be known as a snap shooter who puts out better snap shots than their photographs...

[Blue]

This house is abut 80 miles from my home. I drive by it about 3 or 4 times of years. I have watched it deteriorate over the past 4-5 years. During the 1st few days of April, I was heading back to Tally and there was enough daylight to get these shots. I didn't have permission to enter so I have no interior shots.

[Blue]

Its amazing at the creepy reflections that you can capture around places like this.
Here is a crop of the window area from the 1st pic above.

[Andi Lo]

This house is abut 80 miles from my home. I drive by it about 3 or 4 times of years. I have watched it deteriorate over the past 4-5 years. During the 1st few days of April, I was heading back to Tally and there was enough daylight to get these shots. I didn't have permission to enter so I have no interior shots.

Permission to enter? Who needs those? I think you're just scared of actually going in.

Joking aside, that is one creepy house... I wonder if the old owner still remembers it. Is the owner dead I wonder?