PDA

View Full Version : Street Photography: What dont you take photos of?



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4

Andy K
06-24-2006, 06:26 PM
I agree, if your not with your wife or something, ppl WILL consider you a pedophile.

Not necessarily. Personally I have no interest in photographing kids not related to me. But the prevailing paranoia surrounding 'the stranger' near kids just doesn't make it worth bothering to photograph anywhere that there might be kids. Which is a shame because, apart from Mum and Dad's proud snaps of Junior, there will probably be a large hole in the photographic record for future generations where children are concerned. No photographs of school plays/concerts, no photographs of children's sports, no photographs of children just playing in the street and being children.

Troy
06-24-2006, 08:32 PM
Because someone may not be aware of that fact, and may want to read through a much more extensive thread on that topic they may not be aware of. This generally happens to newer people, and they sit and wonder why this bunch of snobs don't chime in on their topics - all the while its because they already responded at length elsewhere on the same topic.
But I guess you can just ignore people - that'll learn 'em!
Of course, when the thread is almost exactly two lines down from the one you started... well, then I just do it to be a smart ass. Do you mind?
:D

Peter.

Yeah, I guess it's the smart-ass thing that bothers me. Especially when you intimate we have less of an attention span than a hamster on crystal meth. If you feel the need to point out another thread then do so, but leave the insults out.

I guess I'm feeling sensitive today.

Markok765
06-24-2006, 09:58 PM
Yeah, I guess it's the smart-ass thing that bothers me. Especially when you intimate we have less of an attention span than a hamster on crystal meth. If you feel the need to point out another thread then do so, but leave the insults out.

I guess I'm feeling sensitive today.
Yes, i agree

nc5p
06-24-2006, 10:55 PM
I too avoid photographing people. Too many bad experiences, even one lately and I wasn't even shooting people. I prefer the wilderness, or streets well after dark when nobodys around.

Doug

Markok765
06-24-2006, 10:57 PM
I too avoid photographing people. Too many bad experiences, even one lately and I wasn't even shooting people. I prefer the wilderness, or streets well after dark when nobodys around.

Doug
Im gennarly shy, but behind a camera, im not

Adrian Twiss
06-25-2006, 01:43 AM
Street Photography: What dont you take photos of?

Kids. Just isn't worth the hassle.


Couldn't agree more. I have virtually given up street photography because of the increasing number of suspicious people about. I used to enjoy candid photography in the 70s but its just not worth the risk any more.

I do enjoy photographing street performers especially during the Edinburgh Festival. I always make the effort to go up to Edinburgh for a few days during festival time. Many performers ask the audience for one pound after a show. I usually slip five pounds in to show my appreciation.

gnashings
06-25-2006, 04:36 AM
...I guess I'm feeling sensitive today.

We all have those days. But I guess you were feeling a bit sensitive - the comment was not directed at you.



Yes, i agree

Well, I was talking to you.

a) I don't think that comparing one's attnetion span to a rodent on drugs is all that insulting, especially since it was meant to be humorous.
b) I know you're enthusiastic, and I don't care how many threads there are on the same topic - its just you would actually learn more, and get more answers to a serious question if you just took a breath before hitting the "submit" button and noticed that a big huge thread, with some really experienced folks contributing exists already.

Usually I don't bother with these kinds of posts. But I like Marko and his (sometimes overt) enthusiasm, so I thought I'd point this out to him. Most of the people who just posted a thoughtful response on a subject will probably ignore your question or simply don't have the time and effort to repeat themselves. Its no skin off my back - you will simply get more out of this place if you bother to look first. And this was an extreme example... the thread was literally three or four posts below this one!
Marko - take a breath, think it over again, then post. I think you will find you will get better results that way.

Peter.

bjorke
06-25-2006, 12:28 PM
If you're bashful about shooting it, it isn't Street Photography

http://www.botzilla.com/photo/salon/bjorke_shop1.jpg

Daniel_OB
06-26-2006, 12:20 PM
What is wrong shooting homeless, sick ederly, or people with life struggling problems. It is some logic behind modern image culture mixed with manipulations and misinformation just anywhere, above, on, and under the earth. Money matter. And what is powerty? Powerty is other side of beeing satisied with life... (I think we talk about Western world and its streets).

The problem can arise not from photographer but from one that use the photographs, for which purpose he use it and how.
For all of that reasons I do not like to picture kids on street just because I do not want to melt their naïve and honesty with other “people”. I wish they never became part of todays world, but to build the world as they are while kids. Then I will photograph and smiling kids on streets.

Andy K
06-26-2006, 12:25 PM
What is wrong shooting homeless, sick ederly, or people with life struggling problems.

Because unless it is done to aid the homeless and disenfranchised, or as a photojournalist to highlight their plight, it can be seen as exploitation.

Bob Carnie
06-26-2006, 12:45 PM
Because unless it is done to aid the homeless and disenfranchised, or as a photojournalist to highlight their plight, it can be seen as exploitation.
I Agree with Andy, it is too easy and takes little effort.

Daniel_OB
06-26-2006, 01:09 PM
Andy
"Because unless it is done to aid the homeless and disenfranchised, or as a photojournalist to highlight their plight, it can be seen as exploitation."

Photojornalist do not do it. Art directors and editors make that sh*t contextualizing pictures. Photjournalist is just a pinion that gears to what is "ordered". He can do what he want but it is not magazines want, but if editor want it he (pj) again made what is ordered.

Pragmatist
06-26-2006, 05:56 PM
Because unless it is done to aid the homeless and disenfranchised, or as a photojournalist to highlight their plight, it can be seen as exploitation.

And the point is??? I can't speak for the rest of the world, but in the US, once you walk out the door to your house or office into public space, the only protection one has is against unwarranted search or seizure. I suppose that those who dont want to show their faces or social status should wear a burka :cool:

There is no right or expectation to "privacy" once in public. Likely, there are certain considerations. Let's say I photograph you taking a dump behind a bush. A minor embarassment for sure, but as long as I dont sell it or post it on the internet, I really do not have to worry about getting a release from you. On the other hand, if you take a dump in the middle of a crowd, that might be considered by some "news", and by virtue of the fact you are in a crowd a release is not necessary.

Homeless or not, it boils down to the simple fact that taking a public photo of anyone might be considered by our post-modernist or marxist friends as exploitation; what difference does it make?

unregistered
06-26-2006, 06:11 PM
What I dont you take photos of in street photography is naked people.

Mostly because there are none.

firecracker
06-26-2006, 06:23 PM
What I dont you take photos of in street photography is naked people.

Mostly because there are none.

Really? A friend of mine was once approached by some lady (or a lady-looking guy is what I think) in the street in South Philly. She asked him to take pictures of her, and they went into the alley. Then she started to undress in front of him, and he snapped a few photos of her naked.

There are opportunities like that. ;)

Roger Krueger
06-26-2006, 07:39 PM
I don't shoot the homeless mostly because it's a cliche. But exploitation? So what? Some schmuck with a camera is about 532nd on the list of people they should be aggrieved with.

The most powerful, haunting picture I can think of is Winogrand's shot of the legless vet. I don't think I've got enough sociopath in me to take that kind of shot, but I envy those who do.

Not, however, that I'd likely want someone like that as a neighbor or friend. Many talented folks you really don't want to get too close to--just saw "Tom and Viv" the other night about how T.S. Eliot dumped his wife in an asylum and ignored her for the rest of her life, living off her inheritance. Even when menopause cured her hormone-imbalance-related problems, no one was interested enough to get her out.

unregistered
06-26-2006, 11:06 PM
Really? A friend of mine was once approached by some lady (or a lady-looking guy is what I think) in the street in South Philly. She asked him to take pictures of her, and they went into the alley. Then she started to undress in front of him, and he snapped a few photos of her naked.

There are opportunities like that. ;)

Guess I need to move to Philly.

joneil
06-27-2006, 09:50 AM
a couple of meandering thoughts, in no particular order..

1) There is a homeless daytime drop in shelter right across the street from my house. Seriously - right across the street. Anyhow, when and if they sit on my property, I feel I have the right to take their picture - but seldom do.

2) IN addition to the shelter across the street from my house, theres is also a meth clinic, a second daytime homeless drop in shelter exactly one block due north of my house, a youth jail on the same block I am on, a mens homeless mission (for overnight stays) two blocks west, another two blocks west past that a Salvation Army homeless shelter, the police station is across the street to the east (same block the one homeless shelter is on), - well, you get the point, there's a few other social agencies that have stores and other such places in my immediate vincinity.

My point is - try and take a local picture in my neighborhood and NOT get the homeless in it. Heck, I've even taken family snaps of the kids in the side yard, and inadvertently gotten the homeless in the background, walking down the sidewalk in front of my house.

..and you guys are all debating the ethics of shooting the homeless.. Grrr. if I sound angry - I am. At least you people have the choice to do it or not.

3) as per above, I make a point of NOT shooting the homeless when away from home, or travelling. One exception in the past however. I was shooting in Key West once, and a homeless guy came up to me, and offered to let me shot him for a day, if I bought him a beer. But, if I wanted to shoot him the next day, it cost another beer. The day was hotter then hell, and i kinda liked the guy - being up front and all. So I gave him beer money,a nd had a nice chat with home. A lot of homeless people know the streets very well, and can be an amazing source of information for many different topics.

Well, last point on the soapbox for now. :)

I guess my point is, maybe you all should be grateful that you have the choice to begin with. Kinda like the debates you see pop up here and on other photo boards and mailing lists about B&W vs colour. I'm colour blind, so I cannot shoot colour anymore than a guy in a wheelchair can do a Stairmaster. Maybe instead of debating ad nauseum which is the right choice, occasionally take a deep breath, step back, and thank whomever you hold responsible that you have the ability to make a choice to begin with. It makes you see the world in a different light when you do that. That kind of outlook on life might even improve your photography a wee bit, regardless of medium. :)

have a good one everyone

joe

bjorke
06-27-2006, 03:37 PM
Just one more comment

Thinking about how you will not take pictures doesn't sound like a very productive way to find and make The Good Pictures. Sounds like the same old "confirm and conform" to me.

Rule of thirds, anyone?

kb

Troy
06-28-2006, 09:40 AM
Just one more comment

Thinking about how you will not take pictures doesn't sound like a very productive way to find and make The Good Pictures. Sounds like the same old "confirm and conform" to me.

Rule of thirds, anyone?

kb

I agree. There's nothing I wouldn't shoot if I thought it was interesting and I could get away with it. If you're street shooting and editing in your head before you even attempt a picture you're really limiting yourself. It's what happens to the picture later that's important.

Think of all the great pictures from the last 100 years of photojournalism. Almost all of them are hard to look at because there's someone in distress in them, let alone just plain homeless or a child. Hell, HCB used to hide his camera under a hankie and sneak up on people. Doisneau's great pictures are almost all kids.

I know times are different, but don't give in to the pervs. Let the world know photography is not a crime. Stand up for yourself and your art. Incidently, most kids who are abused are abused by someone they know, not strangers with cameras.

Goethe said something like, "Be bold and mighty forces will come to your aid."