What do we photograph on the streets?

[masjah]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Paul, I've found this and other recent posts of yours very thought provoking; specifically the concept of the photographer attempting to be empathetic with the subject by means of his/her choice of equipment. That is to say, one should try in one's choice of equipment not to demonstrate too explicitly one's economic superiority (which, let's face it, is evidently the case) and how this then modulates the photographer's approach to the subject.

 

I find this particularly interesting when I try to analyse my own approach to my choice of subject matter - in brief, I almost completely avoid doing people, and choose static subjects such as architecture. Hitherto, I've assumed that my motivation for doing this is that I feel that my photographs of people would be either posed (if consensual) or intrusive (if non-consensual) but I think I should drill down and examine further why I feel so uncomfortable with the latter. In this regard, I suspect that your comments might prove insightful for me!

 

[Steve Ricoh]

35 minutes ago, paulmac said:

Hi Steve - good to hear from you.

I think that you are absolutely correct in what you say and I agree. We are at a level with digital photography that there is no real difference in the final result. To me and this is of course only my opinion I think that the Leica M8 especially is the vey best of all digital cameras in the way that it makes images that are later converted to B&W. I even think that the M8 is better than the Monochrom!

I have moved to using LTM film cameras because I have always been attracted to photographing the darker and less prosperous side of life. I was influenced like many by Don McCullin, specifically by his work in the East End of London and once I had seen his work back in the 1970's I thought that was how I was going to photograph from then on. Now I know this is nonsensical but when I was pointing, say a Leica M240 or Monochrom with a 50mm Summilux Asph lens at somebody who hadn't "two halfpennies to rub together" it just made me feel like a rich person (which I'm not) exploiting the situation.. 

After thinking about all this I came to dislike myself for as it were profiting from all this and for a couple of years I gave up and concentrated on documenting my home town and would look away and walk past what I would once have photographed as my priority. 

Lately though I have thought about all this and to me I square it all with using the most basic of kit - my 111A and 50mm Elmar which I have other than the cost of a CLA, only £270 outlay in, seem much less ostentatious and more in keeping with what I want to record. This is from in me and is not a general pronouncement on using expensive cameras.

Regards Paul Mac

 

Thanks for your insightful reply, Paul, I found it interesting and resonating somewhat with me. I still own and use the M240 and sometimes feel held back when deciding whether to use it or not in certain quarters. I chose a black M240 for a degree of stealth, but I picked up a silver summilux asph f1.4 in a sale and together with the red dot the combo does stand out somewhat.

Like you I also use film and digital, liking both. The 240 provides a nice raw file which is quite malleable, producing pleasant colour and B&W, so I should be satisfied I would have thought. But you know what photographers are like, we're always chasing something to get an improvement. In using film I'm looking for an output being totally different to digital, and chose the film and equipment accordingly, eg one of many film cameras being the half frame Pen F that enhances grain when the output is enlarged. I will run a roll of Delta 3200 shortly, so that should be fun.

Regards Steve

[colint544]

15 hours ago, paulmac said:

Council sells houses off for just one pound each - Burnley, Lancashire, UK. Leica M8 with Voigtlander 15mm original non rangefinder coupled and Leica 21mm viewfinder.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Paul - this series of images is wonderful. Really nice to hear the philosophy behind your thought process too. I agree that it's nigh-on impossible now to tell the difference between digital and film images. I tried to guess with some of Lambda's shots earlier in this thread, but got it totally wrong. What I do like with film, though - is that you get a negative, a physical artefact.

[Wonzo]

MM1, 0,95 Noctilux

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Wonzo]

Drummer

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Steve Ricoh]

23 hours ago, colint544 said:

Paul - this series of images is wonderful. Really nice to hear the philosophy behind your thought process too. I agree that it's nigh-on impossible now to tell the difference between digital and film images. I tried to guess with some of Lambda's shots earlier in this thread, but got it totally wrong. What I do like with film, though - is that you get a negative, a physical artefact.

From recollection Lambda uses digital, an M8 and an MM1, but without scouring every shot I could indeed be incorrect. (If you look at his website he lists his equipment as digital, ie the M8 and MM1, which stacks up.)

For me, the way I see things in the digital v film thing, it's the grain of film rather than the orderly structure of noise produced by digital that differentiates. But it's true, digital can be manipulated to emulate the film aesthetic. Digital however has many virtues in terms of being cheap once the camera purchase is out of the way, and the near instant results. But sometimes it's better to wait for the film to be developed, the anticipation can be likened to waiting for Christmas as a child. The anticipation can be more rewarding than the outcome.

 

[Steve Ricoh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

22 hours ago, Wonzo said:

Drummer

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Nice shot Wonzo!

[Wonzo]

Thank you, Steve !

[mikozia]

Blue Bus Stop.

TL2 w/55/1.4 7artisans.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Laurentß]

Leica Q

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited March 7, 2019 by Laurentß

[Likaleica]

Great discussion above on the ethics of street photography, punctuated by those two pictures by Wonzo that sort of drive the point.  And great photos, Paul.  If a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound?  If a photograph is made on the street does the subject know he/she is exploited?  Where is the ethical line?  Homeless?  Mentally impaired?  Children?  Personally, I love the freedom most countries give to photographers to photograph people, and if my subject is aware that I made a photo of them I generally will show them the back of the camera (one advantage of digital) to let them know what I'm doing and even give them my card if they want to email me (assuming they have a device) for a small file.  

I'm not a prolific street photographer but I can only remember a couple of times when a person was upset I took their picture, and I was able to diffuse it by just talking with them.  I do think that street photograph is important to show future generations what our world was like, just as we go back and look at street photographs from the early 20th century, although I always feel uncomfortable looking at Paul Strand's photograph of the blind woman.

As for the other aspect, disparity of income, I am reminded of Steve McCurry's photograph of the Afghan girl, Sharab Gula.  He made that with her implicit consent then profited an undisclosed but presumably high amount.  When he went back to see her, National Geographic spent a ton of money finding her and she still was destitute.  Is that fair?  A photographer and a magazine made a fortune off of this woman and I cannot find any account where they tried to help her financially.  If they did, it probably was disproportionate to what they made.  To me, that is exploitation.

[Likaleica]

On 3/4/2019 at 12:05 PM, paulmac said:

Burnley, Lancashire, UK.   Leica M8 28mm Elmarit v3

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Paul, I just looked through this series.  I remember the days when I disliked grain.  You use it masterfully.

[Le Chef]

On 3/4/2019 at 1:11 PM, paulmac said:

Council sells houses off for just one pound each - Burnley, Lancashire, UK. Leica M8 with Voigtlander 15mm original non rangefinder coupled and Leica 21mm viewfinder.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

If you’re old enough you can see Ena Sharples and hear the music from Coronation Street...

[Le Chef]

1 hour ago, paulmac said:

Thank you for your comments in both your posts - very interesting and ones that fit with my way of looking at photography.

Like many I was when digital came along,  blown away by the convenience and the grain free nature of the image and embraced it wholeheartedly. 

I began though to feel a bit uneasy about using it for my personal work that is always in B&W. I thought that a grain free image was the way to go and would regularly marvel at how much better digital was in this respect. I went out and bought a Monochrom - which is a fantastic camera BUT after using it for a year or so along with an M9, I began to bore of the TO ME soulless images that I was getting and started to put everything though Silver FX using a TRI-X preset to give that film look back.

I then thought to myself - Why not just forget the digital aspect and shoot only film again as I was only wanting a B&W output and wanting to make the digital look like film!

I also had a bit of an epiphany because I decided that I didn't like all the hype and merry-go-round of this digital and this sensor and that digital etc. I also wanted to be rid of the "chocolate box" look of digital B&W (even in Silver FX)  and wanted to return to the rawness of a basic camera using film. For me it was LTM Leicas and basic Elmar lenses. Yes I have MP's M6's M2's M3 M4P's BUT I wanted out of all this gear based photography and figured that if David Douglas Duncan could photograph the Korean War on a 111B and basic lenses then walking around my home town with a 111A and 111F was no challenge.

This is what I have done - gone back to basics with Fomapan 400 and occasionally Fomapan 100 - the Fomapan 200 is a lovely film that gives superb results but in my system, however careful I am it scratches really badly with only the most careful handling and processing. 

I like the immediacy of film and I like the physical grain that it gives and MOST importantly I like the LOOK and FEEL of the image from it far more than a digital conversion.

We are all different though and I fully realise that to some this would be codswallop - it probably is but for the moment film and basic gear will be my way of working.

Reagards Paul Mac. 

 

Thanks Paul for your series of images. When my family first came back to England and the East Riding of Yorkshire, Britain was already in decline. In some ways the camera doesn’t matter: if you see poverty do you attempt to engage in an empathetic way, or do you look away? Walking around as you have done also raises another question: if you photograph people in poverty do you have a duty to share and inform, or do you keep for yourself? I also wonder about “purposeful” vs “improv” shooting particularly in environments like yours. Maybe too much philosophizing for a Sunday morning!

I like your minimalist approach to equipment: I have gone from a confusing bag full of bodies and lenses to one camera with fixed lens, to a CL with two lenses. I suspect I will end up talking one lens out and just leaving the other at home to remove an unnecessary decision from the process. The clarity/composition of your images would lead me to believe this is how you might approach things too.

[Likaleica]

10 hours ago, paulmac said:

Thank you for your comments in both your posts - very interesting and ones that fit with my way of looking at photography.

Like many I was when digital came along,  blown away by the convenience and the grain free nature of the image and embraced it wholeheartedly. 

I began though to feel a bit uneasy about using it for my personal work that is always in B&W. I thought that a grain free image was the way to go and would regularly marvel at how much better digital was in this respect. I went out and bought a Monochrom - which is a fantastic camera BUT after using it for a year or so along with an M9, I began to bore of the TO ME soulless images that I was getting and started to put everything though Silver FX using a TRI-X preset to give that film look back.

I then thought to myself - Why not just forget the digital aspect and shoot only film again as I was only wanting a B&W output and wanting to make the digital look like film!

I also had a bit of an epiphany because I decided that I didn't like all the hype and merry-go-round of this digital and this sensor and that digital etc. I also wanted to be rid of the "chocolate box" look of digital B&W (even in Silver FX)  and wanted to return to the rawness of a basic camera using film. For me it was LTM Leicas and basic Elmar lenses. Yes I have MP's M6's M2's M3 M4P's BUT I wanted out of all this gear based photography and figured that if David Douglas Duncan could photograph the Korean War on a 111B and basic lenses then walking around my home town with a 111A and 111F was no challenge.

This is what I have done - gone back to basics with Fomapan 400 and occasionally Fomapan 100 - the Fomapan 200 is a lovely film that gives superb results but in my system, however careful I am it scratches really badly with only the most careful handling and processing. 

I like the immediacy of film and I like the physical grain that it gives and MOST importantly I like the LOOK and FEEL of the image from it far more than a digital conversion.

We are all different though and I fully realise that to some this would be codswallop - it probably is but for the moment film and basic gear will be my way of working.

Reagards Paul Mac. 

 

I'm going to Las Vegas then NYC on business soon and have been thinking of bringing the IIIc or the M3 and a 50, and take advantage of the great NY labs for processing (I sold my darkroom gear years ago).  I ask myself if I'm brave enough not to also bring a digital body. 😬

[HighlandLeica]

The Meeting Place • Highland Scotland • Leica Q

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Keith (M)]

Ripe for renovation.  M7, 50mm C-Sonnar f1.5, Tri-X, Rodinal.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Keith (M)]

Underpass Bedding. MP, 35mm Summaron f2.8, Tri-X, Rodinal.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[dalehuang]

Night Lights, Tanjong Pagar, Singapore

Leica M9-P, MS-Optical Sonnetar 50/1.1

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[ropo54]

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!