Street Shooting with Peter Turnley

[robsteve]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Roger:

 

Of the pictures I posted (shot on film) the first was a 35mm, the second a 24mm, third a 75mm and the last a Noctilux.

 

I don't think you need that wide of an angle ortherwise the coposition gets cluttered. With film I shot most with 35mm and 50mm lenses.

[glenerrolrd]

Roger:

 

Of the pictures I posted (shot on film) the first was a 35mm, the second a 24mm, third a 75mm and the last a Noctilux.

 

I don't think you need that wide of an angle ortherwise the coposition gets cluttered. With film I shot most with 35mm and 50mm lenses.

Rob Thats actually consistent with my experience. Most of my images were shot with the 24 or the 35 ..which are almost the traditional 35 /50 on film. The emphasis on wide is less important than building context for the subject....I think each of your images lets the viewer know something about the location and the images are not cramped . I also found that working on my images with the WATE improved all my photographs and provided I think some additional interest .

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Guest malland]

...I don't think you need that wide of an angle ortherwise the coposition gets cluttered. With film I shot most with 35mm and 50mm lenses.

Anything from 21 to 50mm EFOV works for me. For example Moriyama Daido shoot mainly with the Ricoh GR1 and GR21, which are tiny 35mm film cameras. I found, now, that I'm doing mainly street photography at least 70% of my shots are at 28mm, while previously about 80% were at 50mm and I very rarely went below 35mm. But I find that shooting with at 21mm it helps when you "close up" the back plane somewhat of the composition somewhat, rather than letting lines run off to infinity, as in the following pictures, if you don't want the look to be too extreme:

 

 

 

 

 

The last picture is shot with the 21mm ASPH on Tri-X.

 

—Mitch/Paris

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/

[Guest stnami]

.dog shots are easy... pre focus and put your camera a few feet off the ground ..he thought my Luigi Case was a "treat".

 

...most dogs prefer bones as a treat but they will gnarl a Luigi if desperate............note do give them Turkey bones through a car door window............bad karma that!!!!........

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!

[Guest Bernd Banken]

50 mm (on film here) does the job but I prefer a wider angle lens

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!

[Jager]

Roger, in the workshop did you have any language difficulties - especially given that you were working alone for many hours every day? I know that many Europeans speak English as a second language, but still I would expect there would be many who don't?

 

I'm kind of idly wondering about one of Peter's Paris workshops next year and was just wondering how that might work...

 

Also, just wondering if anyone shot film. The program indicates that film would be processed overnight and contact sheets made vailable for proofing (I assume the workshop makes those arrangements, at extra cost). Just seems like the editing/review sessions would be very different (and difficult) for anyone working with film. I always found working with slides and a loupe easy enough (and similar enough to the digital paradigm of reviewing images on a computer screen). But working with B&W and contact sheets would be tough in that setting (not being able to dash off a quick 8x10 print for something you think might work, for instance). Just wondering how that worked, if anyone was shooting film.

 

TIA.

 

Jeff

[kidigital]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What I find intruiging about the whole topic ... and this is indeed a very interesting thread ... is that "street photography" gives you (the viewer of the resulting image) some sort of insight into the recognition or thought that flashes through the mind of the image taker. It's all about instinct in that "instant". What appeals most to that image taker ... emotion, storytelling, composition? Why that moment in time? So many storytellers ... so many interpretations to be "seen" and an infinite amount of stories to capture.

 

Kurt

[glenerrolrd]

Roger, in the workshop did you have any language difficulties - especially given that you were working alone for many hours every day? I know that many Europeans speak English as a second language, but still I would expect there would be many who don't?

 

I'm kind of idly wondering about one of Peter's Paris workshops next year and was just wondering how that might work...

 

Also, just wondering if anyone shot film. The program indicates that film would be processed overnight and contact sheets made vailable for proofing (I assume the workshop makes those arrangements, at extra cost). Just seems like the editing/review sessions would be very different (and difficult) for anyone working with film. I always found working with slides and a loupe easy enough (and similar enough to the digital paradigm of reviewing images on a computer screen). But working with B&W and contact sheets would be tough in that setting (not being able to dash off a quick 8x10 print for something you think might work, for instance). Just wondering how that worked, if anyone was shooting film.

 

TIA.

 

Jeff

Film was obviously the media of choice for most of the great images shown by the four experts and there was a quality (or maybe lack of unformness) that added a lot of appeal to the images..particularly the prints. However it would make learning from the edit sessions much more difficult. Peter could project your unedited images (and all photographers could attend the edit sessions) this allowed him to select say maybe your best 20-25% . Then at the end he woul work with you to put together a portfolio of 15 . If you went with film you would need an overnight lab that would produce proof sheets. I expect that is becoming more difficult to find in each location. No one shot film in the workshop in Pargue/Budapest.

[glenerrolrd]

Language was only a small problem for me and this only occured when I was attempting to communicate with possible subjects. In prague and budapest many spoke english or at least understood my sign language. If your style is to talk with your subjects then language may be a barrier. It was not for me.

[Jager]

Thanks Roger. If I end up going I'd certainly take my M8. But one would obviously want a back-up camera in such a situation and, inasmuch as I only own one M8, the choice would either be my M7 or my Nikon DSLR. The thought of schlepping a DSLR kit which I'd likely never use doesn't appeal (because of its size and weight); and my personal experience has been that a DSLR is less than ideal for street shooting - its size tends to bring attention to itself far more quickly than does a rangefinder. And my M7, though much-loved, is, well, film. Not what I'd want to be dealing with in that kind of circumstance.

 

A second M8, like you, would be the obvious solution... ;-)

 

Jeff

[landrover4444]

Just returned from two weeks in Prague and Budapest attending a very interesting workshop on street shooting. The workshop was organized by The Maine Photographic Workshops ,theworkshops.com, and was lead by a very accomplished photo journalist Peter Turnley,peterturnley.com. Preparing for this workshop I organized my two M8s and the following lenses 16-18-21 WATE, 24/2.8 Elmarit , 35/1.4 Summilux, 50/2.0 Zeiss Planar and the 90/2.0 Summicron. In addition I also lugged my R9/DMR and several telephoto lenses. During the workshop we had 12 days on the street and could shoot most days from dawn until after dark. We had discussions with several Czech and Hungarian photo journalist and had work sessions to review our work daily. Generally these were between 9am and 1pm so we had easy 8 plus hours a day on the street . During this workshop I shot 3000 images . From the start I new this would be a "learning experience". Peter established up front some ground rules (he called them "the contarct"). (1) you had to decide to shoot everything in Color or BW ..but not both and you could not change...I chose BW even thru I shoot almost eveything in Color. (2) you can not carry a camera bag..in fact he recommended carrying one body and one wide angle lens...I almost went into Shock (3) no zooms or telephotos....nothing longer than a 50mm equivalent ..he made the Nikon users tape their zooms at the widest setting (4) no editing of images ..he was to see every image. You know with all that equipment ..I wasn t going to follow the rules completely . The M8s performed flawlessly..in all types of weather..indoors and out . This was an exceptional learning experience . I will post a few pictures after I resize them to meet the guidelines. Any questions?

 

Peter is a good photographer but what has he done in the way of street photography? I have gone through his book, Parisians, as well as looked at his website, and the guy is a photojournalist. Sure, he has some nice shots of Paris. Great. But Garry Winogrand or Richard Kalvar he is most certainly not. It looks like he is teaching techniques about taking pictures like any good photojournalist, but I just don't see that he has an eye. Go look at Kalvar's stunning work or Winogrand. Want to learn about street photography and save yourself $5,000 ? Watch Winogrand on Youtube.

[danyves]

Gary Winongrand

 

you tube winogrand*-*Google*Vidéos

 

Effectively, the best workshop.

 

Parisians by Peter Turnley are no more than nice tourist snapshots.

[fotografr]

It looks like he is teaching techniques about taking pictures like any good photojournalist, but I just don't see that he has an eye.

 

Parisians by Peter Turnley are no more than nice tourist snapshots.

 

No eye? Tourist snapshots? You guys crack me up.

 

Parisians by Peter Turnley - The Digital Journalist

 

I'd suggest others look at these and make up their own minds.

[sc_john]

 

Parisians by Peter Turnley are no more than nice tourist snapshots.

 

I should be so lucky to produce "tourist snapshots" like Peter Turnley. For that matter, 99% of Leica owners should be so lucky. His work is exquisite (imho).

 

John

[jsrockit]

First a couple of images of Peter Turnley demonstating "getting close"

 

or getting too close... I would've slapped that fool if he came up to me like that with a camera. Obnoxious.

[shaunmadden]

No eye? Tourist snapshots? You guys crack me up.

 

Parisians by Peter Turnley - The Digital Journalist

 

I'd suggest others look at these and make up their own minds.

 

These photographs are fantastic, thanks for the link.

[danyves]

No eye? Tourist snapshots? You guys crack me up.

 

Parisians by Peter Turnley - The Digital Journalist

 

I'd suggest others look at these and make up their own minds.

 

I do persist, there are effectively 3 good photos took inside cafes, that's all for me.

 

The one in Longchamp is weak, not near enough, as is the one apparently took during a demonstration.

 

Cyrille Rabiller // Longchamp 2009

Edited November 21, 2009 by danyves

[stunsworth]

No eye? Tourist snapshots? You guys crack me up.

 

Parisians by Peter Turnley - The Digital Journalist

 

If those are tourist snaps tourists must have been a lot better in the last century than when I lived in Paris.

 

The only issue I have with the book - which I have - is that there are too many photographs taken in the brasserie on Ile St Louis. Other than that I think it's a wonderful evocation of my favourite city and I would recommend it to anyone with an interest in street photography.

[gesper]

A mix in my view. The image needs to be telling (or at least suggesting) that there is a story being told. We really don't need any more pictures of people sitting, standing, walking, gazing wistfully, etc. I would say he has an eye for taking pictures but not necessarily for editing down to what is worthwhile.

 

Also agree he gets obnoxiously close to his subjects. I think that is one reason Winogrand's technique results in truly spectacular (as opposed to good) pictures.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[phatnev]

Peter is a good photographer but what has he done in the way of street photography? I have gone through his book, Parisians, as well as looked at his website, and the guy is a photojournalist. Sure, he has some nice shots of Paris. Great. But Garry Winogrand or Richard Kalvar he is most certainly not. It looks like he is teaching techniques about taking pictures like any good photojournalist, but I just don't see that he has an eye. Go look at Kalvar's stunning work or Winogrand. Want to learn about street photography and save yourself $5,000 ? Watch Winogrand on Youtube.

 

 

Definition of Photojournalism:

is the craft of employing photographic storytelling to document life: it is universal and transcends cultural and language bounds.

 

Sounds a lot like street photography huh?