Cuthbert Posted April 14, 2015 Share #1 Posted April 14, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 14, 2015 Posted April 14, 2015 Hi Cuthbert, Take a look here Is this street photography? . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
dunos Posted April 14, 2015 Share #2 Posted April 14, 2015 That all depends on your definition of street photography - for which there are many different interpretations.. Take a look at this article recently posted on the Leica blog: http://blog.leica-camera.com/photographers/guest-blog-posts/knut-skjaerven-looking-at-street-photography-part-2/ But that is just one interpretation and other street photographers will have different views. Do you think it is street photography? What is your definition? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted April 14, 2015 Share #3 Posted April 14, 2015 I am happy to have a dialogue with you about this. Let's start, though, with what you think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuthbert Posted April 14, 2015 Author Share #4 Posted April 14, 2015 That all depends on your definition of street photography - for which there are many different interpretations.. Take a look at this article recently posted on the Leica blog: http://blog.leica-camera.com/photographers/guest-blog-posts/knut-skjaerven-looking-at-street-photography-part-2/ But that is just one interpretation and other street photographers will have different views. Do you think it is street photography? What is your definition? That's my point: I think that for what I've seen in this section everybody has different opinions on what SF is, what is for me a portrait or a machinery pic for others is SF, but however the question is for you guys, does this pic fill your definition? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted April 14, 2015 Share #5 Posted April 14, 2015 there IS no "definition," so the question is moot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuthbert Posted April 15, 2015 Author Share #6 Posted April 15, 2015 I am happy to have a dialogue with you about this. Let's start, though, with what you think. Hey, I asked the question first! You have to answer...and then motivate on the basis of your definition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted April 15, 2015 Share #7 Posted April 15, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) LOL. I really think about this topic very broadly. If I had a gun to my head and was forced to invent a definition, I would define ST as any type of photography that (i) has the potential have broad public interest and that (ii) generally takes place in a public venue. As broad as it is, I personally would not include the photo above within this definition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunos Posted April 15, 2015 Share #8 Posted April 15, 2015 I think the genre as a whole is very broad covering everything from urban landscape to portraiture and everything in between. The real defining characteristics being that it is generally performed in an urban or semi-urban environment and is mostly not pre-determined. I think the sub genres of street, especially those formed from social media based collectives, are often the opposite of the broad definition above - a very narrow focus and often a group defined style where anything falling outside that style is ostracised to the extreme. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuthbert Posted April 15, 2015 Author Share #9 Posted April 15, 2015 Good answer, so you don't think the presence of a human element in the picture is essential for the definition of street photography? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted April 15, 2015 Share #10 Posted April 15, 2015 nope Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tookaphotoof Posted April 16, 2015 Share #11 Posted April 16, 2015 Street photography... Take a photo of a walking couple holding hands on a path in the woods and you'll most like get to hear it's not street photography. Do the same with a couple walking past a shop in NYC and somehow it might become a street photograph. Personally I really have no idea when you can or cannot classify a photo as a street photograph. I just happen to like to photograph everything and everyone I like. Always with a bit more in the frame most would like. The photo posted above, if taken in the city centre of Rome, with tall buildings behind and people walking by, would that make it into a street photograph? if so, why not now? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuthbert Posted April 16, 2015 Author Share #12 Posted April 16, 2015 The photo posted above, if taken in the city centre of Rome, with tall buildings behind and people walking by, would that make it into a street photograph? if so, why not now? So you think the pic I posted is not SP because...it wasn't taken in Rome? And any picture, even the more prosaic, taken in NY is automatically Street PhotographyTM ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted April 16, 2015 Share #13 Posted April 16, 2015 if this photo were taken in NYC, I still wouldn't think of it as SP. Reason is that it simply doesn't hold my interest. Others my have a different view, in which case it may meet their own definition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tookaphotoof Posted April 16, 2015 Share #14 Posted April 16, 2015 No Cuthbert. The opposite. To me it could well be. Others might disagree. They would need more action and / or subjects around it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted April 16, 2015 Share #15 Posted April 16, 2015 Cuthbert - I think that I have now earned the right to ask you a question. Does this photo interest you, if so, how much and why? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted April 16, 2015 Share #16 Posted April 16, 2015 I wouldn't call the photo 'street' but I don't doubt that my idea of what street photography is, isn't going to be the same as other peoples. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuthbert Posted April 16, 2015 Author Share #17 Posted April 16, 2015 Cuthbert - I think that I have now earned the right to ask you a question. Does this photo interest you, if so, how much and why? Yes, otherwise I wouldn't have shot it. I liked that kind of modernistic fountain, I wanted to take an architectonic pic then I saw this worker doing...well I don't, probably some service or maintenance to it I thought it would be interesting to add a human element to it. For me it's more street than for instance this one...or the one of your avatar with a guy crossing a street. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cuthbert Posted April 16, 2015 Author Share #18 Posted April 16, 2015 No Cuthbert. The opposite. To me it could well be. Others might disagree. They would need more action and / or subjects around it? I like people at work, they are always interesting and I prefer to shoot them at the back because I'm not interested in who they are but what they are doing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A miller Posted April 17, 2015 Share #19 Posted April 17, 2015 Yes, otherwise I wouldn't have shot it. ___________________________________ Not necessarily. It may be that the scene interested you in some way but the way it was framed, composed and/or exposed produced a result that wasn't in line with your expectation. This happens to me every day. Make no mistake, though. If this type of subject matter interests you, you should by all means shoot it until you heart is content. It is what makes you happy that matters. It shouldn't matter what other people think. I feel that by putting it up for consideration as "street photography" you are implicitly concerned what other people think. This really is irrelevant at the end of the day. It could be that other people's viewpoints could cause your own tastes to evolve. This is perfectly fine, and I think even important. But at the end of the day it is between you and yourself.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pauledell Posted April 17, 2015 Share #20 Posted April 17, 2015 While I think there is a reason for having a category for the genre of a picture, It is a mistake to be so rigid that a picture in a grey area might be discounted from posting. I feel the ultimate aim of the forum is to recognize the excellence of the picture and not which pigeon-hole it fits in. Paul Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.