Street Shooting

[Brian Moore]

I was thinking about this last night and then, seeing Alfie's street portraits got me thinking about it again this morning. Thought I'd make a post and get your thoughts if you're inclined to answer.

Street shooting can be "a buzz" as Alfie said. But sometimes people don't like you getting their picture. So I have a couple of tactics:

• Shoot from an angle they can't see you from.
• Use a wide angle lens to get people in the frame even though you appear to be aiming away from them.
• Shoot "from the hip" or any place other than from your eyeball, which of course is a dead give-away that you're taking a picture.

Images taken using the tactics above can certainly have merit assuming the aesthetic is right. But lately I've been laboring under the perception that the odd POV that sometimes betrays a photo as having been shot in such ways may render that photo less meaningful because of the surreptitious, even sneaky, nature of its creation.

What are your thoughts?

 

[Lesley Jones]

I'm glad you raised this Brian. As with any other subject, people do street photography in their own way. I found a link to a well known guy at work - it was on the Digital Photography School I think. He strapped a little video camera to his head and then set out to show how he worked. I must admit that I was appalled. He strode around and pushed his lens into people's faces without a second thought. OK - in one he made a comment like "nice dress" after the shot, but in my world that doesn't make up for the fact that it is rude. No wonder the art is getting a bad name.

Personally I would never shoot from the hip - tried it in Bolivia and I'm rubbish. It wouldn't put me off a great shot though. A different angle is fine if... as you say... it fits with the image. If you have someone gazing into the distance, then being side-on isn't a problem. Even shooting from behind can work in some cases - I'm sure I can dig out some examples.

I sometimes go for wide angle lens and so close they don't think you can fit them in. I haven't posted any/many of mine like this, but I have some. My own preference is for more arty type images where an interesting looking person fits into their surroundings. I have one of an old brick wall covered in rugs for sale. I could well have been just photographing the rugs and taking my time, but I was waiting for the right person. When he arrived, I took it, but stood my ground as though waiting for him to get out of the way. It's a method that works for me and the person involved remains unaware.

Another one is taking photographs of people involved in something else - at work or reading a paper. Sometimes shooting from above works if you can find the right spot. Very rarely I will interact and shoot up close before attempting to melt away - it doesn't happen often though. I do have an example of what can happen when it all goes wrong. I'll see if I can dig out some more images tonight. And to answer your question, no... I don't think it looks sneaky. I would rather say the photographer is being respectful

 

[Lesley Jones]

Oh... and just to add to the discussion - a favourite no-no of mine. I would never photograph anybody in a bad situation or down on their luck. It's just not right

 

[Brian Moore]

Lesley,...thank you for your responses. I agree that the guy with the camera on his head was being rude. You say you never shoot from the hip. Is that only because of the quality of the images you have produced? (I am sure you are being far too hard on yourself when you say you are "rubbish" at it.) By the way, I'd love to see the other images you allude to.

About your second response,...I respect and admire your sensitivity and your point of view, but I wouldn't subscribe completely to that ethic. Taking such shots in a voyuersitic or expoitational manner is certainly not good. But I think that photos of people down on their luck, created with respect for the individual and done tastefully, can serve as powerful and meaningful social criticisms, and many well-known photographers have produced iconic images of the poor and destitute. (Dorothea Laing jumps readily to mind.)

I thank you for your responses, Lesley.

 

[Lesley Jones]

The native people of Bolivia and to some extent in Peru, really don't like having their photograph taken. We passed through a village where they had obviously been celebrating for days and a drunken procession was winding through the streets. Yes - I tried shooting from waist level, but the slides turned out at a bizarre angle - even more drunk than the subjects! I didn't press the shutter at the right time either, so there is clearly something that only happens for me when I'm looking through that little hole.

You think of Dorothea Laing and I think of Sebastiao Salgado - yes, very true, but if every budding street photographer pointed their DSLR at the local tramps, then it would make me very sad. I have worked with the homeless doing Crisis at Christmas for several years. They are vulnerable and already feel on the very edge of society. What they need is for the general public to treat them as human beings once in a while. I would rather buy a couple of cups of coffee and some pastries and spend time talking to them - I have done in the past and I will continue to do so.

I'll see if I can dig out some more images...

 

[Pete Askew]

This is a subject that interests me a lot and I will join the discussion tomorrow. I have today flown back to Berlin / Potsdam and my eye is tired so I am only doing a quick scan. But, as your last governor once said Brian, "I'll be back!".

 

[Brian Moore]

You think of Dorothea Laing and I think of Sebastiao Salgado - yes, very true, but if every budding street photographer pointed their DSLR at the local tramps, then it would make me very sad. I have worked with the homeless doing Crisis at Christmas for several years. They are vulnerable and already feel on the very edge of society. What they need is for the general public to treat them as human beings once in a while. I would rather buy a couple of cups of coffee and some pastries and spend time talking to them - I have done in the past and I will continue to do so.QUOTE]

Point well-taken and your sensitivity applauded. Thanks Lesley.

 

[Brian Moore]

This is a subject that interests me a lot and I will join the discussion tomorrow. I have today flown back to Berlin / Potsdam and my eye is tired so I am only doing a quick scan. But, as your last governor once said Brian, "I'll be back!".

Looking forward to it, Pete.

 

[Gavin Robert]

Brian, I think its time to take another tack on the whole street candid approach and steer away from the norm.

I would position myself with the camera mounted on a tripod regardless where I was and claim my spot. I would then keep my hands away from the camera or even step away from it and count people into the frame from a noted spot, say 3 seconds to centre of frame from lamp-post X as an example. I'd then use a wireless remote with the trigger in my pocket and wait for the right person to come along and then count them in from the spot X whilst looking the other way, even if stepped back from the camera. In fact, a lone camera on a tripod will attract more gazes than one with a guy stood at it with finger on trigger or your regular Joe with a camera on his hip, so the positives are already mounting.

This could be taken to another level. As an example draping a cartoon costume over the camera and tripod and stepping back again. If you have a parent come along with a child the child will be drawn to the costume whereas if you lift your arm and point at the camera with the remote the parent will think you're weird and tug the child on. Nothing like an image with a disappointed child's face to pull the heart strings Just make sure the tripod is well weighted down!

I challenge you to take a tripod with you next time Brian and not take a single hand held image!

 

[Brian Moore]

Brian, I think its time to take another tack on the whole street candid approach and steer away from the norm.

I would position myself with the camera mounted on a tripod regardless where I was and claim my spot. I would then keep my hands away from the camera or even step away from it and count people into the frame from a noted spot, say 3 seconds to centre of frame from lamp-post X as an example. I'd then use a wireless remote with the trigger in my pocket and wait for the right person to come along and then count them in from the spot X whilst looking the other way, even if stepped back from the camera. In fact, a lone camera on a tripod will attract more gazes than one with a guy stood at it with finger on trigger or your regular Joe with a camera on his hip, so the positives are already mounting.

This could be taken to another level. As an example draping a cartoon costume over the camera and tripod and stepping back again. If you have a parent come along with a child the child will be drawn to the costume whereas if you lift your arm and point at the camera with the remote the parent will think you're weird and tug the child on. Nothing like an image with a disappointed child's face to pull the heart strings Just make sure the tripod is well weighted down!

I challenge you to take a tripod with you next time Brian and not take a single hand held image!

LOL! Ain't gonna happen, Gavin. But it's a very cool idea. In fact I love the notion of a stationary camera fired remotely. But I don't use a tripod anyway. (Parkbenchpod, pitcherpod, wallpod, fencepod, car-roofpod, treepod<--closest I've come to using a tripod in some time--discarded4x4blockpod, pavementpod, two-fingerstabilizerpod--sometimes one or thumb--setofkeysoncarroofpod, tablepod, tumblerpod, winebottlepod, beercanpod, chairpod, sumdayelse'sshoulderpod, sidewalkpod, carwindowpod, coffeecuppod--sometimes tea--rockpod, boulderpod, balletbarpod, beerbarbarpod, etc. I've used all of these as stabilizers in recent months but not a tripod.

 

[alfie Wright]

I can see this being a very interesting thread with legs!

My thoughts on Brians original question are...

Use whatever shooting style you feel comfortable with that allows you to get the shot you are looking for. Shooting from the hip or distance or whatever, makes no difference IMO as long as it allows you to get the shots you want. I think the hard bit is managing to stay on the right side of respectful, but where this becomes a problem is people have different morals & views on what respectful means to them. My Father drilled into to me from an early age to "Treat others as you wish to be treated". This has served me pretty well through out my life, but it is dependant on my moral code. I.e. If I don't mind someone getting pretty close & taking a photo does that mean that it's OK for me to get close & take photo's of others?

I'm pretty new to photography & had very little knowledge of 'street photography' other than watching the odd documentry about Henri Cartier Bresson etc, but after doing a fair amount of reading lately, it seems to mean different things to different people. Yes, it will always be about documenting the lives of everyday people in a 'Street' setting, it's real world, it is life & in its self must be living. I think It's also very personal, it has to be, because the eye behind the camera is telling his or her story on how & what they see & documenting it with various amounts of skill. The world that 'streettogs' are documenting is changing so streetphotography will also change, it's living, it has to. Yes, some will always look for the 'decisive moment', the funny or interesting scenes & try to capture them as artfully as they can with good camera craft, use of light, or whatever techniques they want to use or expand upon to try & add something new to SP. Some though will look to more gritty type stuff & it will be as gritty as their morals allow them & in this changing world & I'm not so sure there is so much respect being offered in general, by some subjects & some photographers. Whether this is right or wrong or how it sits within ones moral code is again very personal & sometimes seems secondary to the evolution of the world & of street photography, again this seems both good & bad.

I find the question on whether one should photograph the homeless quite difficult, as they deserve their privacy just the same as anyone else, but they are infact a bigger part of the street than most, so probably should be documented. I also think by not photographing them we are treating them differently to others, which perhaps may be worse. Incidently I choose not to photograph them, but if a really strong image presented itself I may take the shot, it would have to be very a powerful image though.

I don't think there can be a right or a wrong in SP. As for the images, some we will like, but perhaps alot we won't. As for the capture it can only be whatever fits in to your own moral code.

 

[Chris Dodkin]

My initial thoughts are...

It's all in the comp and the timing - any of the methods can work, some have more control than others, but you will indubitably develop skills in aiming and timing shots using all methods given enough practice.

 

[Brian Moore]

Alfie thanks for the response. You've weighed in on several meaningful issues there (documenting the homeless, respect for the subject, moral code in photography, etc.) any of which could justify a discussion thread of their own. As with Lesley's response I applaud your sensitivity. I believe we are thinking much alike.

 

[Brian Moore]

My initial thoughts are...

It's all in the comp and the timing - any of the methods can work, some have more control than others, but you will indubitably develop skills in aiming and timing shots using all methods given enough practice.

I think I am gaining a little more control over my shots from the hip. It's not easy to judge, though. I think much of the timing in street photography is due to luck (or laying in wait for the "decisive moment" Alfie alluded to). Would you agree with that Chris?

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Absolutely - luck is key, but then you'll also begin to see the frame as you look out into the street - you'll know where the edges will be, the relative positions of the subject and background objects.

You'll imagine what the camera is seeing from it's position, and you'll anticipate the moment when something will look interesting.

That's what I'm striving for - I find that sticking with one prime lens for a while helps - as you start to get a real feel for what the camera 'sees'.

With film the feedback will be slower, and you'll have fewer frames to learn with (probably).

So digital scores here as you can shoot away with gay abandon

And review during the day, to hone your timing, angle of dangle, etc etc.

 

[Allan Batchelor]

Im not sure im rubbish at street photography its more I still not figured out what makes a good photo

 

[Brian Moore]

With film the feedback will be slower, and you'll have fewer frames to learn with (probably).

So digital scores here as you can shoot away with gay abandon

Thanks, Chris. I agree with everything you said almost. Not sure digital wins quite so easily though. As you point out, with film you'll have fewer frames to learn with. I think that would force you to apply more care to your shot selection, and perhaps--just perhaps--produce better results a bit quicker.

 

[Brian Moore]

Im not sure im rubbish at street photography its more I still not figured out what makes a good photo

I'm pretty sure I understand your attempt at English here, Allan. Your point about what makes for a good photo is another of those issues that deserve a discussion of its own. Often I've posted something that I considered interesting and yet got no response (thus suggesting it was less interesting--maybe far less--to viewers). On the other hand, occasionally I've posted something that I do not consider very good--perhaps I posted it to illustrate a discussion point or whatever--and then get positive remarks. Its confounding and also unsettling to realize that one's own ability to judge what makes a good picture is less sound than one would expect or prefer.

 

[Chris Dodkin]

Thanks, Chris. I agree with everything you said almost. Not sure digital wins quite so easily though. As you point out, with film you'll have fewer frames to learn with. I think that would force you to apply more care to your shot selection, and perhaps--just perhaps--produce better results a bit quicker.

Well played sir, well played!

 

[Darren Turner]

taking pics of people in the street isn't easy, especially if your taking the discreet approach. I Love doing it but find it very hard and i find timing is the key, take the shot before the person you are aiming your camera at has noticed.

This doesn't matter IMO if the person is black, white, male, female, child, adult or homeless as i try not to attract the attention of the person so in most cases they wont know they have been photographed. I also find this to be far easier in larger cities where its busy as almost everyone has a camera anyhow or are that busy running around & shopping to notice you pointing your camera at them.

I have be known to use a my 70-200mm F2.8 this ie the easy option, i dont see that as an issues as long as you get some decent photos at the end of the day.

I am trying to use my 24-70mm more often now, this is harder approach as i need to be much closer. I find taking the pics of people quite easy. But what you need to find is people who are different, inserting or doing something a little out of the ordinary to get a more interesting photo, this i find to be the hard bit.

My results with fire from the hip has always been a complete fail, i have tried with 7D & Fuji x10 and out of 200 shots with x10 every ones was rubbish lol

I have noticed quite often people sat down on benches in cities with cam on tripod and remote in there hands, this would be a great, discreet and probably very effective method waiting for the subject to walk into the frame then snap away discreetly.

Few Of My Samples

#Fail, Spotted, Nice Smile I am Happy

Manchester City Supporters, Kinda Boring photo if you ask me.

Discreet as she didnt spot me, colourful & a bit different, I am happy with this

@ Night, good timing, colourful, musicians, movement / motion of the passer by & funny character with a great "do" to the right.
probably my best street style shot i have taken to date.

Daz