Sean Reid on Street Photography: Meaning?

[Guest malland]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Reading Sean Reid's article on street photography I started thinking about the meaning of this type of photography, particularly when I came across a posting somewhere complainign about seeinga lot of "meaningless" street photography on a Leica forum.

 

The question of meaning in the visual arts is a deep one on which much has been written. Taking the definition of street photography of Sean's article, photographs of people in public places, there is a lot of meaningless street photography on the web merely because of its quality: "Good photographs" are indeed rare — how many can excellent photographs can one make in a year? But street photography is no different than other visual arts; and the meaning can either come from form or content, or a combinaiton of the two, with form being, in my view, the primary basis.

 

I then started thinking about my own photographs. After getting my Ricoh GR-D in July I've been shooting more and more street photographs because this camera lends itself to a loosening of style that I find particularly useful for street photography. Looking at all the pictures that I've shot that I like with this camera — there are 98 of them now — at http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/ I think the meaning comes mainly from the form.

 

But of these pictures there are 55 that in the Bangkok Series set at:

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/sets/72157594271568487/

 

From these I intend to select about 40 to add to 52 other photographs that I have taken with the M6 for a book called Bangkok Hysteria © and to me, therefore, these pictures have another layer of meaning that comes form the structure of the book.

 

Any reactions? Oh, I've posted this on the Leica Digital forum because this is where Sean Reid seems to hang out, and also because I'm thinking of continuing this series with the M8 — but that depends on Sean's forthcoming review, and on whether I'll get to like the M8 as much as the GR-D.

 

—Mitch/Paris

[sean_reid]

That's an interesting post. Suzanne Langer's "Feeling and Form" really goes after these things in a very intelligent way. I think many of us have strong emotional and/or visual responses to subject in the world but turning those responses into strong pictures is very difficult. I think, however, that Winogrand did us a huge favor in re-emphasizing that every picture is a contention between form and content. Just understanding that can make it much easier for us to look at our own work and understand what to do next if we're not happy with what we're making.

 

What I tend to see often are pictures with strong (or at least interesting) content but sometimes weak form. This is where I think that there's so much we can learn not only from other photographers but also from painters and other visual artists. Breughel's painting at the beginning of that article is a very successful contention between content and form. Most painters, even the postmodernists, do not ever take form for granted. Photographers can tend to, however, and therefore the form in a lot of pictures is very much accidental. Part of the problem is perhaps that many of us talk about "capturing" pictures as if they already existed before the shutter was tripped. But we don't capture them, we make them from the raw materials in front of the lens. That, to my mind, is a very important distinction. Again from Winogrand (whom I quote often because I believe he understood this medium very well): "The picture is not the thing itself. It is a new fact."

 

I'm glad that the article was interesting to you.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Guest malland]

Sean:

 

I think many of us have strong emotional and/or visual responses to subject in the world but turning those responses into strong pictures is very difficult.

 

I'm glad you mentioned emotion because I did not write about that, keeping to form and content. I've heard a few people often speak about emotion when discussing their own or other photographs: they seem to equate the quality of a picture according to the emotion it contains or exudes. That's not an approach that I find useful because it tends to push toward the sentimental — and there is nothing that kills art as easily as sentimentality, because it tends to kill truth. Searching for form is, in my view, a lot more useful than trying to create emotion.

 

—Mitch/Paris

[sean_reid]

Sean:

 

I think many of us have strong emotional and/or visual responses to subject in the world but turning those responses into strong pictures is very difficult.

 

I'm glad you mentioned emotion because I did not write about that, keeping to form and content. I've heard a few people often speak about emotion when discussing their own or other photographs: they seem to equate the quality of a picture according to the emotion it contains or exudes. That's not an approach that I find useful because it tends to push toward the sentimental — and there is nothing that kills art as easily as sentimentality, because it tends to kill truth. Searching for form is, in my view, a lot more useful than trying to create emotion.

 

—Mitch/Paris

 

This gets tricky. I better come back to this when I'm less tired.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[larry]

Mitch,

 

I found many of your photos to be evocative, compelling and to an extent a bit sterile. (I don't mean that in a bad way, I think you're effectively accomplishing your photographic objectives. The human subjects have a quality of being at arm's length and become part of the architecture.) Being as analytical as you are about your approach seems to work -- I'll have to look at them again.

 

Thanks,

 

Larry

[Guest malland]

Larry:

 

Interesting about the sterility despite the pictures being "evocvative" and "compelling". It would be interesting to hear more about this.

 

A lot of this comes down which pictures one selects to print. While one makes a photograph as Sean states, photography is very much an art of selection: selection at the time of making the exposure and selection again, from a contact sheet or from a "strip" in software such as Lightroom, which frame to print.

 

—Mitch/Paris

[larry]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Mitch,

 

Yes, the words I used are a strange dichotomy. I found myself being drawn into the scenes as though I was there, but somehow invisible. Even when the subjects make eye contact, there's a strange dispassionate quality. I need to let it sink in for awhile.

 

Larry

[Cindy Flood]

Edit ABr

 

I find Sean Reid's web site very informative. I think it is rude to generalize like this. Sean's reviews are well received by many because he is fair in his evaluation of products.

[stunsworth]

 

Rod Stewart made an album in the early 70'ties called "Every image tells a story" boy was he wrong...

 

Perhaps he should have called it 'Every picture tells a story' instead. Wait, he did!

[John Maio]

Edit ABr

 

I happened to see a debate with Sumner Redstone the other evening on C-SPAN. It was before an assemblege of intellectuals and other activists who believe that all of mankind would benefit if nothing was copyrighted - if everything was free; especially on the internet.

 

Redstone, in case you've forgotten, is the Chaiman of Viacom; owner of Paramount Studios, CBS, and numerous web outlets. In his talk, he argued that those who do not support the concept of the artist's or creator's right to own his or her content - and be rewarded for their hard work - will, in fact destroy writing and art over the long term. What would be the point of researching, generating, and producing content just so others could use it without restrictions and without payment of any kind. I mean, why do it? Its obvious that anyone who posts what they think is a nice image or piece of writing on the internet opens themselves up for critisim and nit-picking by those who get it for free in the first place. Again, why do it?

 

Redstone's point was that, regardless of the technological platform, content is still king. Sure, he's a billionaire and some might argue that Viacom is one of those dreaded media conglamorates that rule the world and shape cultures in wrong-headed ways, but the fact remains that people all over the world pay to see that content, and the creators of it are encouraged to create more.

 

Of course, if you'd rather watch some free expression of idiocy on YouTube, rather than pay $2.00 to rent and watch "Casa Blanca", or some other creative master classic, that's your choice.

[sean_reid]

Edit ABr

 

You obviously haven't read the article which talks about how there really is no such thing as "Street Photography" and begins with Garry Winogrand's challenging of the idea. What you've written is a personal attack and it is specifically against the rules of this and many other forums.

[sean_reid]

I find Sean Reid's web site very informative. I think it is rude to generalize like this. Sean's reviews are well received by many because he is fair in his evaluation of products.

 

Thanks Cindy.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[smokysun]

findus,

 

how can you comment on something you haven't read? especially since sean starts the article with 'there is no such thing as street photography?'

 

i suggest you join his site and educate yourself. also, there's a wonderful book called 'bystander' a history of street photography which puts such discussions in perspective.

 

 

wayne

[square_one]

Yes! Form and emotion are the certain elements of a really good photograph or digital image and without both, the picture will certainly fail - be it 'street', studio or landscape.

 

... oops! I got out of the loop. What's happened here?

 

... and findus, I feel your cynicizm of commercialism but this forum is WAY down the food chain! Hope you found your O-serie and are about to get on with your project and will tell us about it, I'm curious!

[Ukko]

A long but pertinent quote, if I may.

 

The author's terminology: "visual design" means what we usually call "composition".

 

Ukko Heikkinen

 

 

"The Fusion Theory

 

The answer given by what we shall call the Fusion Theory is that there can be so close a connection between design and subject matter that the recognition of the subject and the perception of the design become unified, and fuse together into a single experience.

 

The general principle underlying the Fusion Theory may be formulated in this way: A design and a subject are coherent when the qualities of the subject are presented by the design ... We might want to extend it a little and add that unity might be present if the design presents some qualities usually connected with the qualities of the subject as represented, not necessarily the same ones ... The design contain presentational equivalents of its subject ... In a painting of a group of people at a dance or a party, the people may be represented as smiling and laughing and in general having a happy time, and at the same time the design itself may be of a cheerful and lively character.

 

Another sort of connection between design and subject is the principle of compositional support. In a painting that informs us by means of representation which person in the painting is the most important, or the central one from the point of view of the subject, the area that represents that person may also be a focus of the design.

 

It is noteworthy that the connections of design and subject go both ways. Perspective, perceptual mass, and compositional convergence back up the subject by focusing attention on important characters, but also recognition of the subject helps in some cases to intensify and stabilize the qualities of the design itself ... The color that is perceived as the color of something - plush, silk, corduroy - may appear slightly different from the way it appears when it is just a colored patch. This slight difference may make a very considerable difference to the compositional balance and coherence of the design, just as a design.

 

It follows from the Fusion Theory that there are three dimensions of form in a representational painting. Consequently, when we consider the form of such a painting, there are three distinct groups of questions we can ask about it.

 

First, we can ask about the design itself: is it complete and coherent? How much complexity does it encompass? What are its regional qualities, and how intense are they?

 

Second, we can ask about the subject. When it is an event or a situation involving psychological relationships among different people, it can be regarded as the fragment of a drama. Is the character as represented psychologically consistent? Is the action in which he is engaged consistent with his character as depicted? Is the setting psychologically suited to the actions, as - to give a crude example - a stormy night or a blasted heath to a murder? ... Pieter Brueghel the Elder's painting Christ Carrying the Cross tells a marvelously complicated and dramatic story, with its distant ring of people on the hilltop, waiting with morbid curiosity for the spectacle to begin.

 

The third question is about the relation between subject and design; to what degree does the design cohere with the subject by offering presentationla equivalents of it?

 

To the third question we may get any of three answers. In many designs there is a notable unity of design and subject. In others, there is irrelevance. Usually, in magazine illustrations and advertisements, there is very little connection between the design and the subject; they fall apart ... In other designs, there is a positive incoherence. The gravity, stateliness, and quiet dignity if design in many if Poussin's paintings comports very well with the royalty, classic divinity, or noble rusticity of the characters depicted and idealizes in them. But in his Massacre of the Innocents the violence of the depicted action is strangely at odds with the relative stability of the design. And this is especially evident when the painting is compared with the cartoon-study for it, which is far more vigorous and lively as a design.

 

This sort of incongruity may give rise to a new quality, whether the ainter intends it of not: if the subject is trivial or familiar, the incongruity may appear absurd, and thefore funny; if the subject is serious, the incongruity may appear ironic. But perhaps irony is a kind of coherence too; at least, it will not do to be overbearing in analyzing a painting.

 

All three questions about coherence arise in making a value-judgement of a representational painting, but that does not mean that they automatically settle questions of value. Critics of the visual arts are deeply divided on the problem here. Some hold that representational painting is of a higher order of value than nonrepresentational painting, and that a painting with important and coherent dramatic subject can be a great painting whether or not it contains much in the way of presentational equivalence. Others say that the presentational aspect of the painting is the essential one, the representational aspect peripheral. Thus, they would say that a painting can be great even id it represents nothing; that a painting that represents but lacks presentational equivalents and unified design us mere "illustration", not fine art at all.

 

When we try to recall paintings in which design and subject are most fully fused, while each is unified and intensely qualified in itself, we think at once of Giotto and Rembrandt ... The sadness of the event in Giotto's Lamentation over Christ and the sadness of the spectators is borne out in the drooping folds of garments, the curves of the bent backs, the slanting angle of the composition. In the great Rembrandt portraits of the forties and fifties there is a remarkable concentration of light that gives the faces their intensity; the designs have the qualities of repose, seriousness, meditativeness, timelessness, gravity, and a fixedness of focus, and also an inner coloristic glow that reflects the vitality and psychological depth of the portrait-subjects; and the surrounding darkness from which the figures emerge is an enclosing envelope that shuts them off from the world, as though they were alone with their souls."

 

Monroe C. Beardsley: "Aesthetics. Problems in the Philosophy of Criticism." Second Edition, 1981 ISBN 0-915145-08-1

[square_one]

Wow, Ukko, am I a lightweight!

 

Bruce

[smokysun]

hi ukko,

 

wonderful and straight to the heart of the matter.

 

wayne

[Guest malland]

The Beardsley quote states that the emotion can come to a large degree from form. which is what I was saying. But I wish the form of the writing would reflect the simplicity of the idea!

 

—Mitch/Paris

[abrewer]

Just a reminder....

 

Personal attacks are not a part of this Forum's culture and will not be tolerated. Read the Forum rules if you have any doubt regarding the propriety of what you're about to post.

 

Thanks.

 

Allan

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[frc]

A stupid mistake just made me lose a contribution that I've been working on for over half an hour. :-( damn ( excuser les mots ) I'll try to repeat it more briefly.

it's on Findus' remarks on aswell the genre of streetphotography as Seans commercial pay-site.

Street or rather documentary in the street photography is to often seen as a defined and fixed way of practice. This is mostly because it is most commonly performed by aspiring but insight missing amateurs. Nowadays everybody can aquire pictures with cameras having a P-mode or worst landscape and flower mode. Getting satisfying images from the camera that thinks for you already gives away where I'm aiming at. Even more harmfull to the genre are the ones that bought a Leica MP3 with retro style lens. These dwell this forum diplaying their streetshot next to Brassai and others, disregarding PeeWee because he cheates using a flash.

The documentary content of the old masters pics gets completely out of sight while searching for the decisive thing. Form is resembled, content is often completely missing. This despite the effort put in making such pictures.

How come the sparetime photographer is at present time the dominant factor in streetphotography?

In this time of planes, trains and automobiles hardly anybody has a view limited to the neighbours garden. Remote cities, other cultures, you can go there yourself. Take the camera with you and come back with something you do not need HCB for anymore.

Since there is hardly any demand for such pictures anymore with possibly the exception of travel brochures, its now the field of tourist compac-tcam shooters.

On the other hand we do see an adaption to more a human interrest style in tenced region pictures, if we look at the image-language an content of the work of Salgado, Nachtwey or Boulat we see far less explicit bloodshed than in the Vietnam and Korea war era, and a general shift towards a depiction of the civilian suffering.

People such as Weeks, Nemeth or Parr ( yes Parr to ) are either doing the steet photography next to their profitable business or on a more academic level.

Why am I including Parr, his pics do not resemble Frank's or Doisneau's images. As the old "masters" were influenced by their predecessors, so are the present ones. The images content does not differ that much from the old school, still human interrest, but their form, their language is of these days. Weeks perhaps excluded, he stayes deliberatly close to the anciant tradition but he knows this and mentions it in his writings.

An other thing is the accessibility of images, now everyone plucks everything from the WWW without considdering the rights of the ones that have put it there. Mp 3 music, movies for a bargain, how do you make a living in this turbulant and uncertain time. Expose and you're snatchedThis is where Sean, I think, is treated unfair with the comment about his pay-site made by Findus. There is a distinction between $$$-signs in the eyes and asking people to donate money to have access to your work.

 

PS. edit, just discovered Findus has been thrown out, this makes some of my sayings less relevant, but i'm tired of typing now so I won't rewright my contibution. ( sometimes we can cope by ourselves Allan but sometimes it's good you're there to remind some of us to not just the forum-rules but to decency in general ;-)

 

 

regards to all.

 

 

Fr.