Traditional Street Photography

[phuketrichard]

AS it says," Its not the street, its the life on the street and where the street takes you, that's important"

Worth watching, http://everybodystreet.com/

[shaggy1969]

Paying the electric bill

[FracturedRabbit]

[thephotoman]

[MJP]

[FracturedRabbit]

P1070523-Edit by pattayadays.com, on Flickr

[sunshine51]

Old Friends...

[sunshine51]

[Fiddlesticks]

I have been doing my best to understand but I finally have to admit, I just do not get the whole street photography thing! There I said it and I just hope I do not step on someone's sensitive toes.

I have been reading and poring through Ming Thein's images and articles since I was made aware of his website from a posting here in our forum. Some of his stuff I like but the majority seems to be street photography and it simply puts me to sleep. Here are my observations and I hope someone can please tell me why it appeals to so many.

1) Most are B&W shots. OK, I like a good B&W as much as the next guy especially the great images by Ansel Adams. But wouldn't color make the street photography more realistic and interesting?

2) Most street images are (to me) boring. I see the same things almost every time I step out on the streets. What is so wonderful about taking a photo of the mundane? And then, to add to the boredom, they make it B&W. I don't get it.

3) In Ming's photos, I know that his compositions are good (leading lines, good light, shapes and so on) but the subject matter which may be the side of a building and a palm tree are not exciting, they're boring as hell. I don't get it! Should we try to take photos for the sake of compositional rules and really not be concerned if the subject matter is the corner of a building? Yawn!

I feel that I am really showing my ignorance of street photography here but I really would like to understand what makes it so appealing to so many people. I can imagine that many people will also say the same thing about landscape photography but at least I can argue that, in a good landscape image, the image has innate beauty.

Anyway, I will await the onslaught of feedback on this posting.

[MJP]

^^ Fiddles, you simply misunderstand the whole 'shooting' thing.

When people said "try shooting with a canon" they did not mean this . . .

There's no optics or sensor in this thing. It just doesn't work well as a camera. You could try fitting a plate and film at the back and a shutter in there somewhere, but it's still going to be too heavy to carry around. It will also cause mass breakouts of this peculiar phenomenon, where people dress up as civil war soldiers and cause themselves minor burn injuries on a Sunday . . .

I hope this clarifies traditional street shooting for you. Because beyond that I haven't a clue about it either.

[FracturedRabbit]

I have been doing my best to understand but I finally have to admit, I just do not get the whole street photography thing! There I said it and I just hope I do not step on someone's sensitive toes.

I have been reading and poring through Ming Thein's images and articles since I was made aware of his website from a posting here in our forum. Some of his stuff I like but the majority seems to be street photography and it simply puts me to sleep. Here are my observations and I hope someone can please tell me why it appeals to so many.

1) Most are B&W shots. OK, I like a good B&W as much as the next guy especially the great images by Ansel Adams. But wouldn't color make the street photography more realistic and interesting?

2) Most street images are (to me) boring. I see the same things almost every time I step out on the streets. What is so wonderful about taking a photo of the mundane? And then, to add to the boredom, they make it B&W. I don't get it.

3) In Ming's photos, I know that his compositions are good (leading lines, good light, shapes and so on) but the subject matter which may be the side of a building and a palm tree are not exciting, they're boring as hell. I don't get it! Should we try to take photos for the sake of compositional rules and really not be concerned if the subject matter is the corner of a building? Yawn!

I feel that I am really showing my ignorance of street photography here but I really would like to understand what makes it so appealing to so many people. I can imagine that many people will also say the same thing about landscape photography but at least I can argue that, in a good landscape image, the image has innate beauty.

Anyway, I will await the onslaught of feedback on this posting.

I feel that a lot of Ming Thein's shots are more exercises in composition than street photos. This one for example, although not a street shot, is great composition:

_RX10_DSC0078 copy by mingthein, on Flickr

Photo from Ming Thein's Flickr

It's just a bloody electric fan for goodness sake! But somehow, to me, he has created an interesting image.

Anyway, back to street photography. " I see the same things almost every time I step out on the streets. What is so wonderful about taking a photo of the mundane? " Street photography is capturing the moments that you and I probably wouldn't see and creating something interesting out of the mundane. There are plenty of examples of real street photography on the web, Google is your friend. Here are some: http://121clicks.com/inspirations/the-best-street-photographer-portfolios-for-inspiration-part3

Mundane? Something you see when you step out on the streets? The sort of shots you could take?

Alternatively, additionally, just look at some of Henri Cartier Bresson's work.

I think that recognising and capturing a good street photo is very difficult, certainly beyond my capabilities. To improve I suspect you have to get out on the street and just watch and learn and shoot as much as possible; then one day you might get an acceptable shot.

Why black and white? Because the streets are full of colour which can often distract from the structure/texture/intention of the image. The photo of the lady that I posted further up the thread, had that problem. Her produce was a mass of colour, but her clothing was drab and the overall effect was that you ended up looking at the product and not the lady. B&W solved that; although I will admit that it is not a good example of street photography; just someone on the street.

Finally, back to Ming Thein. He has some guidelines on his perception of street photography: http://blog.mingthein.com/2012/11/02/what-is-street-photography/

[MJP]

^^ Sunshine posted a pic he took of a dirty old blue plastic chair in a truly awful setting.

It's a genius photo.

People like Sunshine, Ming Thein and even Rabbit . . . they've just got it. I don't know what it is. I guess it's this ability to 'see' and react in time with the correct camera settings.

My 3,500,000 estimated shutter count at randomized settings, does by means of mathematical probability, produce the occasional decent shot.

[Fiddlesticks]

I have been doing my best to understand but I finally have to admit, I just do not get the whole street photography thing! There I said it and I just hope I do not step on someone's sensitive toes.

I have been reading and poring through Ming Thein's images and articles since I was made aware of his website from a posting here in our forum. Some of his stuff I like but the majority seems to be street photography and it simply puts me to sleep. Here are my observations and I hope someone can please tell me why it appeals to so many.

1) Most are B&W shots. OK, I like a good B&W as much as the next guy especially the great images by Ansel Adams. But wouldn't color make the street photography more realistic and interesting?

2) Most street images are (to me) boring. I see the same things almost every time I step out on the streets. What is so wonderful about taking a photo of the mundane? And then, to add to the boredom, they make it B&W. I don't get it.

3) In Ming's photos, I know that his compositions are good (leading lines, good light, shapes and so on) but the subject matter which may be the side of a building and a palm tree are not exciting, they're boring as hell. I don't get it! Should we try to take photos for the sake of compositional rules and really not be concerned if the subject matter is the corner of a building? Yawn!

I feel that I am really showing my ignorance of street photography here but I really would like to understand what makes it so appealing to so many people. I can imagine that many people will also say the same thing about landscape photography but at least I can argue that, in a good landscape image, the image has innate beauty.

Anyway, I will await the onslaught of feedback on this posting.

I feel that a lot of Ming Thein's shots are more exercises in composition than street photos. This one for example, although not a street shot, is great composition:

_RX10_DSC0078 copy by mingthein, on Flickr

Photo from Ming Thein's Flickr

It's just a bloody electric fan for goodness sake! But somehow, to me, he has created an interesting image.

Anyway, back to street photography. " I see the same things almost every time I step out on the streets. What is so wonderful about taking a photo of the mundane? " Street photography is capturing the moments that you and I probably wouldn't see and creating something interesting out of the mundane. There are plenty of examples of real street photography on the web, Google is your friend. Here are some: http://121clicks.com/inspirations/the-best-street-photographer-portfolios-for-inspiration-part3

Mundane? Something you see when you step out on the streets? The sort of shots you could take?

Alternatively, additionally, just look at some of Henri Cartier Bresson's work.

I think that recognising and capturing a good street photo is very difficult, certainly beyond my capabilities. To improve I suspect you have to get out on the street and just watch and learn and shoot as much as possible; then one day you might get an acceptable shot.

Why black and white? Because the streets are full of colour which can often distract from the structure/texture/intention of the image. The photo of the lady that I posted further up the thread, had that problem. Her produce was a mass of colour, but her clothing was drab and the overall effect was that you ended up looking at the product and not the lady. B&W solved that; although I will admit that it is not a good example of street photography; just someone on the street.

Finally, back to Ming Thein. He has some guidelines on his perception of street photography: http://blog.mingthein.com/2012/11/02/what-is-street-photography/

FR,

Thank you for taking the time to reply with an articulate response. I understand what you are saying but I guess I lack the capacity to appreciate the images of the street photographer. Let's take the fan image that you posted that was taken by Ming. I see an interesting image that captures good light, shapes and lines and I think it is successful in that respect BUT once I have seen it, I have no desire to dwell on it or to go back to it again and again as I would an image captured by Steve McCurry. I could (and do) go back and admire his images again and again and again and . . .

Perhaps it's personal taste. Based upon your explanation I guess I can say I sorta get it, I just can't truly appreciate it.

Edited January 6, 2014 by Fiddlesticks

[MJP]

Fiddles,

Go out and try and replicate the streeties work. Have a go, could be interesting.

[Fiddlesticks]

Fiddles,

Go out and try and replicate the streeties work. Have a go, could be interesting.

You may be right but my heart would not be in it I am afraid. I have learned quite a bit from reading Ming's stuff and much of what he espouses pertains to all genres of photography. I know that I can apply what he teaches in my pursuit of landscape work as well as travel photography. I would rather expend my efforts there. I would be more apt to focus on a McCurry type of image (strong color, environmental portrait) than a Thein image.

[MJP]

Fiddles,

Go out and try and replicate the streeties work. Have a go, could be interesting.

You may be right but my heart would not be in it I am afraid. I have learned quite a bit from reading Ming's stuff and much of what he espouses pertains to all genres of photography. I know that I can apply what he teaches in my pursuit of landscape work as well as travel photography. I would rather expend my efforts there. I would be more apt to focus on a McCurry type of image (strong color, environmental portrait) than a Thein image.

Doesn't matter, just give it a go, find your own unique style. If you're just looking at a bloke called Steve's pics then you might as well just download them instead and save yourself some $12,000 on cameras and lenses.

And landscape is okay, but there's all manner of photographic genres like low light and bokeh, macro, street, portraiture, black and white and of course . . . .People and their pick-ups in Thailand . . . which is a very popular genre in professional photography.

I have my own unique style.

[samuijimmy]

^ Just what I said at the beginning of this whole "Traditional street photography" thread... I never quite got it either!

I know that comment may offend a few photo enthusiasts around here... but this forum is not for only professionals...(IMHO) ... there are many people who get intimidated about joining or posting images... because they don't think their images are good enough....

We have seen many members improve their images since I first started being a regular poster and it all about that... not "world class photography" !

To me, this should be and for the most part is a site for novice as well as semi or full time professional photographers ... It gives many of us a "hobby" for want of a better word to express their part of Thailand with their images... It's not National Geographic!

We've come a long way in the past year, when this forum really seemed to take off, with the alphabet game... We've lost a few good members for one reason or another, ... but gained some new ones too!

Some of us are regular and some occasional posters, it does not matter! .... At least I don't think so... it's one part of Thai Visa that is usually free of idiotic comments let's keep it that way !!!

[MJP]

^ Just what I said at the beginning of this whole "Traditional street photography" thread... I never quite got it either!

I know that comment may offend a few photo enthusiasts around here... but this forum is not for only professionals...(IMHO) ... there are many people who get intimidated about joining or posting images... because they don't think their images are good enough....

We have seen many members improve their images since I first started being a regular poster and it all about that... not "world class photography" !

To me, this should be and for the most part is a site for novice as well as semi or full time professional photographers ... It gives many of us a "hobby" for want of a better word to express their part of Thailand with their images... It's not National Geographic!

We've come a long way in the past year, when this forum really seemed to take off, with the alphabet game... We've lost a few good members for one reason or another, ... but gained some new ones too!

Some of us are regular and some occasional posters, it does not matter! .... At least I don't think so... it's one part of Thai Visa that is usually free of idiotic comments let's keep it that way !!!

It's the best photoforum on the net. I've seen others and they take it all too seriously.

This is just fun and we're lucky to have a few real professional togs here too.

[FracturedRabbit]

Degrees of communication

P1230057 by pattayadays.com, on Flickr

[MJP]

^^ There's one to fit every budget down there.

[Tingnongnoi]

I have been doing my best to understand but I finally have to admit, I just do not get the whole street photography thing! There I said it and I just hope I do not step on someone's sensitive toes.

I have been reading and poring through Ming Thein's images and articles since I was made aware of his website from a posting here in our forum. Some of his stuff I like but the majority seems to be street photography and it simply puts me to sleep. Here are my observations and I hope someone can please tell me why it appeals to so many.

1) Most are B&W shots. OK, I like a good B&W as much as the next guy especially the great images by Ansel Adams. But wouldn't color make the street photography more realistic and interesting?

2) Most street images are (to me) boring. I see the same things almost every time I step out on the streets. What is so wonderful about taking a photo of the mundane? And then, to add to the boredom, they make it B&W. I don't get it.

3) In Ming's photos, I know that his compositions are good (leading lines, good light, shapes and so on) but the subject matter which may be the side of a building and a palm tree are not exciting, they're boring as hell. I don't get it! Should we try to take photos for the sake of compositional rules and really not be concerned if the subject matter is the corner of a building? Yawn!

I feel that I am really showing my ignorance of street photography here but I really would like to understand what makes it so appealing to so many people. I can imagine that many people will also say the same thing about landscape photography but at least I can argue that, in a good landscape image, the image has innate beauty.

Anyway, I will await the onslaught of feedback on this posting.

I feel that a lot of Ming Thein's shots are more exercises in composition than street photos. This one for example, although not a street shot, is great composition:

_RX10_DSC0078 copy by mingthein, on Flickr

Photo from Ming Thein's Flickr

It's just a bloody electric fan for goodness sake! But somehow, to me, he has created an interesting image.

Anyway, back to street photography. " I see the same things almost every time I step out on the streets. What is so wonderful about taking a photo of the mundane? " Street photography is capturing the moments that you and I probably wouldn't see and creating something interesting out of the mundane. There are plenty of examples of real street photography on the web, Google is your friend. Here are some: http://121clicks.com/inspirations/the-best-street-photographer-portfolios-for-inspiration-part3

Mundane? Something you see when you step out on the streets? The sort of shots you could take?

Alternatively, additionally, just look at some of Henri Cartier Bresson's work.

I think that recognising and capturing a good street photo is very difficult, certainly beyond my capabilities. To improve I suspect you have to get out on the street and just watch and learn and shoot as much as possible; then one day you might get an acceptable shot.

Why black and white? Because the streets are full of colour which can often distract from the structure/texture/intention of the image. The photo of the lady that I posted further up the thread, had that problem. Her produce was a mass of colour, but her clothing was drab and the overall effect was that you ended up looking at the product and not the lady. B&W solved that; although I will admit that it is not a good example of street photography; just someone on the street.

Finally, back to Ming Thein. He has some guidelines on his perception of street photography: http://blog.mingthein.com/2012/11/02/what-is-street-photography/

FR,

Thank you for taking the time to reply with an articulate response. I understand what you are saying but I guess I lack the capacity to appreciate the images of the street photographer. Let's take the fan image that you posted that was taken by Ming. I see an interesting image that captures good light, shapes and lines and I think it is successful in that respect BUT once I have seen it, I have no desire to dwell on it or to go back to it again and again as I would an image captured by Steve McCurry. I could (and do) go back and admire his images again and again and again and . . .

Perhaps it's personal taste. Based upon your explanation I guess I can say I sorta get it, I just can't truly appreciate it.

This documentary featuring some of the legendary New York street photographers is well worth a look if you are interested in this style and showcase some stunning images

[FracturedRabbit]

^ Just what I said at the beginning of this whole "Traditional street photography" thread... I never quite got it either!

I know that comment may offend a few photo enthusiasts around here... but this forum is not for only professionals...(IMHO) ... there are many people who get intimidated about joining or posting images... because they don't think their images are good enough....

We have seen many members improve their images since I first started being a regular poster and it all about that... not "world class photography" !

To me, this should be and for the most part is a site for novice as well as semi or full time professional photographers ... It gives many of us a "hobby" for want of a better word to express their part of Thailand with their images... It's not National Geographic!

We've come a long way in the past year, when this forum really seemed to take off, with the alphabet game... We've lost a few good members for one reason or another, ... but gained some new ones too!

Some of us are regular and some occasional posters, it does not matter! .... At least I don't think so... it's one part of Thai Visa that is usually free of idiotic comments let's keep it that way !!!

I don't think this forum is for professionals at all. Professionals are too busy trying to make a living out of photography, and there is no money to be made hanging around here. I think most of us are enthusiastic amateurs who enjoy the hobby; and as part of that we are all trying to improve (at least that's the way I see it).

Whereas there should be, and are, threads where people can load snaps on a wide variety of subjects, I also see nothing wrong with discussions and images related to various types of photography, in this case street photography. I don't see this as being overly "serious", or "professional"; we are just trying to learn and ultimately take better photos; and we can't do that unless we have some discussions and share some links and images on the subject.

If we are wanting to achieve your stated aim of helping "members improve their images", then let's have more threads like this and not less. Then maybe some more people will join in, put more work and thought into their images; and become better photographers. We don't have to be very serious, but neither do we need to be flippant and trivial; there is much joy to be had in finally achieving a great image (so I am told, I have yet to manage it).

[MJP]

^ Just what I said at the beginning of this whole "Traditional street photography" thread... I never quite got it either!

I know that comment may offend a few photo enthusiasts around here... but this forum is not for only professionals...(IMHO) ... there are many people who get intimidated about joining or posting images... because they don't think their images are good enough....

We have seen many members improve their images since I first started being a regular poster and it all about that... not "world class photography" !

To me, this should be and for the most part is a site for novice as well as semi or full time professional photographers ... It gives many of us a "hobby" for want of a better word to express their part of Thailand with their images... It's not National Geographic!

We've come a long way in the past year, when this forum really seemed to take off, with the alphabet game... We've lost a few good members for one reason or another, ... but gained some new ones too!

Some of us are regular and some occasional posters, it does not matter! .... At least I don't think so... it's one part of Thai Visa that is usually free of idiotic comments let's keep it that way !!!

I don't think this forum is for professionals at all. Professionals are too busy trying to make a living out of photography, and there is no money to be made hanging around here. I think most of us are enthusiastic amateurs who enjoy the hobby; and as part of that we are all trying to improve (at least that's the way I see it).

Whereas there should be, and are, threads where people can load snaps on a wide variety of subjects, I also see nothing wrong with discussions and images related to various types of photography, in this case street photography. I don't see this as being overly "serious", or "professional"; we are just trying to learn and ultimately take better photos; and we can't do that unless we have some discussions and share some links and images on the subject.

If we are wanting to achieve your stated aim of helping "members improve their images", then let's have more threads like this and not less. Then maybe some more people will join in, put more work and thought into their images; and become better photographers. We don't have to be very serious, but neither do we need to be flippant and trivial; there is much joy to be had in finally achieving a great image (so I am told, I have yet to manage it).

[FracturedRabbit]

(Where's the emoticon for a middle finger gesticulation when you need it?)

[sunshine51]

Degrees of communication

P1230057 by pattayadays.com, on Flickr

F--in Brilliant!

The couple on the right tells the whole story....

however one wants to interpret it.

[sunshine51]

I have been doing my best to understand but I finally have to admit, I just do not get the whole street photography thing! There I said it and I just hope I do not step on someone's sensitive toes.

I have been reading and poring through Ming Thein's images and articles since I was made aware of his website from a posting here in our forum. Some of his stuff I like but the majority seems to be street photography and it simply puts me to sleep. Here are my observations and I hope someone can please tell me why it appeals to so many.

1) Most are B&W shots. OK, I like a good B&W as much as the next guy especially the great images by Ansel Adams. But wouldn't color make the street photography more realistic and interesting?

2) Most street images are (to me) boring. I see the same things almost every time I step out on the streets. What is so wonderful about taking a photo of the mundane? And then, to add to the boredom, they make it B&W. I don't get it.

3) In Ming's photos, I know that his compositions are good (leading lines, good light, shapes and so on) but the subject matter which may be the side of a building and a palm tree are not exciting, they're boring as hell. I don't get it! Should we try to take photos for the sake of compositional rules and really not be concerned if the subject matter is the corner of a building? Yawn!

I feel that I am really showing my ignorance of street photography here but I really would like to understand what makes it so appealing to so many people. I can imagine that many people will also say the same thing about landscape photography but at least I can argue that, in a good landscape image, the image has innate beauty.

Anyway, I will await the onslaught of feedback on this posting.

I shall do my best wordsmithing and try to get a reply to you sometime

today/night. Mind you...your work is good and if you feel that "streets"

is a waste of your time then don't waste your time on it. You do have

other "genre's" in which you excel...exploit that & try streets when you

feel like giving it a go.

[Fiddlesticks]

Sunshine,

Looking forward to your smithing of words!

Just to be clear, I do not say that street photography is a waste of time, I simply am saying, that I don't understand the strong appeal that it seems to have for many. In particular I mentioned that work of Ming Thein who many feel is currently in the forefront of the street work. I have looked at many of his images and can't 'understand' the appeal. Often to me it looks like he's taking snaps of anything with good lighting and some compositional elements. What I can't seem to find is the soul or purpose of these images.

[Tywais]

Sunshine,

Looking forward to your smithing of words!

Just to be clear, I do not say that street photography is a waste of time, I simply am saying, that I don't understand the strong appeal that it seems to have for many. In particular I mentioned that work of Ming Thein who many feel is currently in the forefront of the street work. I have looked at many of his images and can't 'understand' the appeal. Often to me it looks like he's taking snaps of anything with good lighting and some compositional elements. What I can't seem to find is the soul or purpose of these images.

I've been rather busy and have missed this transition into a discourse on street photography. I don't think I've submitted a single photo in this topic which is unusual as I try to participate in all of them as it gives me ideas. Suspect I also am not sure of what really comprises 'street photography' technically and limits in my time to go out specifically looking for such.

As for liking or disliking, nothing wrong nor unusual about that. I'm an art fan but I don't like Picasso but do like Renoir. The difference between their work versus street photography and, let's say, landscape photography are comparable in you get people falling into camps. One abstract, the other impressionist and not suited to everyone's taste. Same as you can't expect everyone to like every photographic style.

Probably a rare photographer that likes every type and style of photography.

[MJP]

This short piece about Bruce Gilden really is worth a watch . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRBARi09je8

Watch the YouTube clip first then read this . . .

http://erickimphotography.com/blog/2013/08/24/5-lessons-bruce-gilden-has-taught-me-about-street-photography/

Edited January 7, 2014 by MJP

[FracturedRabbit]

This short piece about Bruce Gilden really is worth a watch . . .

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRBARi09je8

Watch the YouTube clip first then read this . . .

http://erickimphotography.com/blog/2013/08/24/5-lessons-bruce-gilden-has-taught-me-about-street-photography/

Right, off to Walking Street to flash Russian tourists in the face. What could possibly go wrong...