Some very nice shots in there Brodie. That first one is a wonderful portrait. It would be even stronger I think if you cropped it in tighter, to just above his hat. I can imagine he would love that picture. But, I guess he is a stranger. And that I suppose is the problem (and, in part, the pleasure) in street photography: you usually don't know who these people are and what they are doing. So you always end up treading a fine line between documenting everyday life (for prosperity possibly) and intruding into someones private life. And it's a dilemma we all face when we take pictures in public. I know we are allowed (in the UK at least) but where are the boundaries?
Now, I'm certainly not picking on you or your pictures Brodie, they just made me think again about what we are doing when we take pictures 'on the street'. Partly because of the that wonderful first shot and the feeling that the 'sitter' would love a copy but will never get one (well unlikely anyway). I think much of what is in my mind is said by Steve Mc'Curry in his 'One Minutes Master Classes' (
http://www.realphotographersforum.com/content/470-steve-mccurry-s-one-minute-masterclass-1.html) and books. When we shoot in the street what are we doing - or trying to do? Are we showing everyday life? Are the people just compositional elements? Are we intruding? Is something important or interesting happening? Have we deliberately taken something out of context to create an effect (I'll use an example here from your series if you don't mind Brodie)? For example, in your forth shot (guy with tambourine) it is not obvious what is going on at first and why you took the shot until you see the tambourine and the 'beat box' he is sitting on. So here you have taken a street performer (he has already put himself on display - I hope you gave him some change!
) and made us look harder to understand the image. The little lad with his scooter is a super shot - what on earth is he looking at. But why did you take it? Not a sinister question I assure you, I am just curious - was it his look? Could you see what had grabbed his attention and would the shot have been stronger if you could have included something of that in there? And it is a very different sort of picture to the young girl. The waiter is another lovely shot - the stack of glasses and the wineglass belt - would more of his surroundings have helped (I guess it was busy around him anyway)?
The shots of the pier and the promenade are different again. With the promenade you capture an unusual view of an iconic building but one that shows people enjoying the surroundings. The gulls and the sense that you are watching people who are watching people all come together nicely in the composition. The pier shot is different. You have tried to single a couple out. Why? Was it there bare feet? They are almost (but not quite) a compositional element - maybe a slightly wider view would have worked better here again so it is not a picture of them but the place.
And there is the picture of the couple taking pictures. This I really like and has a lot of story to tell. The people themselves, while easily recognisable', become secondary. This is a bit like Brian's shot of folks taking shots of the view at the Getty Centre, a capture of an everyday event made interesting. And even more so because these two appear to be a couple but they are both taking a picture of the same thing (we presume - they may just be friends) - do they need it for their Facebook pages? There is social commentary buried in here. What will we make of this in 50 years time (well what will you make of it - I won't make anything of it, I'll be long gone!!
)?
I find this whole topic very interesting. What makes one image taken in the street a great (maybe even iconic) photograph but another just seems to be an intrusion into someones life? When should we push the button and when should we just look? I usually have a little rule in my head which I use either before I shoot or when I edit that asks, "if this were me in the picture would I be happy to see in in a magazine or on a web site?". And part of that process is whether the content or composition needs those people. Are the events of sufficient importance or do they tell / reveal enough to justify me recording them and publishing them?
As I said at the start, I really like these images of yours Brodie (you do have a great eye for a shot I think) and they made me think (or at least articulate) more about this whole area. I'm sure I'm not right about all of this, and I can think of historic images that we now consider to be wonderful that maybe would not have been taken if we all used the same principles, but I am interested to hear what you and others think. But no matter what, you are the one with the camera in her hands so keep pushing that button Brodie, it results in super and thought provoking shots!!
