PDA

View Full Version : Street with a tele



Pages : [1] 2 3

Markok765
08-03-2008, 09:41 PM
I went to a gallery in Torontos distillery district today. I saw some street done with just a tele 200mm lens. I spoke to the photographer, and he said that a wide limits you in street photos. He also said that Canon zooms are as good quality as Leica primes. He also said that digi black and white is the same as film black and white.

I can't believe this.

2F/2F
08-03-2008, 09:47 PM
Who cares?

Mick Fagan
08-03-2008, 09:48 PM
I cannot believe this either, but if the other person believes that, fine!

Mick.

david b
08-03-2008, 09:54 PM
If he has work in a gallery based on a system that works for him, great.

But I think he's full of sh*t.

Markok765
08-03-2008, 10:04 PM
He says that I should change my photographic style to suit the market. Should I release his name here?

david b
08-03-2008, 10:07 PM
sure what's his name.

I'd love to see this work.

And yes, you should change what you do to accommodate the public.

naturephoto1
08-03-2008, 10:07 PM
He says that I should change my photographic style to suit the market. Should I release his name here?

No to releasing his name.

Rich

Markok765
08-03-2008, 10:13 PM
David I wouldn't change my style. I DO have standards.

david b
08-03-2008, 10:15 PM
Too late.

I was kidding with you Marko.

Anupam Basu
08-03-2008, 10:32 PM
Just don't ask me to do it. Even 50 seems too long for me for street shooting. I don't thing I have taken the 25mm Biogon off for the last three months. Here's what I have been getting (http://www.flickr.com/photos/primelens/tags/zeiss25mmf28biogon/) - fortunately, as a hobbyist, I am in a position to ignore the "market."

david b
08-03-2008, 10:37 PM
Anupam, you should open a gallery in Toronto. Nice work.

AutumnJazz
08-03-2008, 10:44 PM
Well...Full-frame digital pretty much offers the same resolution as 35mm film, because lenses are so limiting.

Digital has noise...Film has grain. Which looks better?

I only shoot 35mm film because of the way it looks. Not because it is better or worse than digital. (And full-frame bodies start at $2k.)

mabman
08-04-2008, 12:03 AM
I'm a bit surprised "street" as we know it gets shown in Canada at all now. In Manitoba and Quebec (at least) you can *take* pictures of people in public places but showing them or selling prints requires the explicit consent of anyone identifiable in the picture (the Manitoba privacy legislation uses the slightly ambiguous phrase "for gain" as a determinant, which I'm assuming includes financial gain of any sort).

I would expect other provinces to follow suit in the not-too-distant future.

AgX
08-04-2008, 07:34 AM
Thus no photos by Cartier Bresson will be shown in Canada any longer?

mabman
08-04-2008, 10:55 AM
I should have specified "local street" :)

pesphoto
08-04-2008, 11:06 AM
Any chance he has a website? Did you google him? If he has a website I'd like to see the photos.

kristopher_lawrence
08-04-2008, 12:31 PM
I'm a bit surprised "street" as we know it gets shown in Canada at all now. In Manitoba and Quebec (at least) you can *take* pictures of people in public places but showing them or selling prints requires the explicit consent of anyone identifiable in the picture (the Manitoba privacy legislation uses the slightly ambiguous phrase "for gain" as a determinant, which I'm assuming includes financial gain of any sort).

I would expect other provinces to follow suit in the not-too-distant future.

Hi,

I live in Quebec, and from what I know, the law is more specific (remeber we are not on canadian common law). Actually, you don't have the right to sell or publish a picture of a person if the image can cause harm to his/her reputation. Otherwise, a person in a public place is not protected from photographers...

Here how this law become true: a couple years ago, a newspaper ĞLa Presseğ was doing a study about obesity. A photographer took a picture or a rather big woman eating a hamburger on the street. However, the women complaned because a lot of persons were making fun of her after seeing the pricture. She went in court and won.

I don't know about Manitoba, but, if I am not wrong, it is ok in Quebec to show or sell street photo if the pics cannot cause harm.

Kris

mabman
08-04-2008, 01:23 PM
Hi,

I live in Quebec, and from what I know, the law is more specific (remeber we are not on canadian common law). Actually, you don't have the right to sell or publish a picture of a person if the image can cause harm to his/her reputation. Otherwise, a person in a public place is not protected from photographers...

Here how this law become true: a couple years ago, a newspaper ĞLa Presseğ was doing a study about obesity. A photographer took a picture or a rather big woman eating a hamburger on the street. However, the women complaned because a lot of persons were making fun of her after seeing the pricture. She went in court and won.

I don't know about Manitoba, but, if I am not wrong, it is ok in Quebec to show or sell street photo if the pics cannot cause harm.

Kris

I can't find a reference to anything by La Presse, but the case I'm thinking of was about photographer Gilles Duclos in the late 1990's. From the Supreme Court's ruling (http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/1998/1998canlii817/1998canlii817.html): "The right to one’s image is an element of the right to privacy under s. 5 of the Quebec Charter. If the purpose of the right to privacy is to protect a sphere of individual autonomy, it must include the ability to control the use made of one’s image. There is an infringement of a person’s right to his or her image and, therefore, fault as soon as the image is published without consent and enables the person to be identified."

So, it's the court's opinion (majority decision) that Quebec's law governing the right to privacy includes the right to "control the use made of one's image" in general, no indication of whether harm was done or not.

Andy K
08-04-2008, 01:44 PM
The best zoom to use for street photography is your feet. I would say that guy uses a 200mm because he doesn't really have the 'nads for real street photography.

erikg
08-04-2008, 02:32 PM
I'm with Andy on that. I think one of the things that mitigates the intrusiveness of street shooting when you are using something wide is the fact that you are right there and people can see what you are up to and can react as they see fit. You are part of the whole mix too. Standing across the street with a tele? That seems creepy. But whatever, shoot with any lens that gets you what you are after, there are no rules you have to follow in that regard. Oh, and Canon zooms do not equal Leica primes and digital b&w is not the same as film b&w. But who cares, it's totally irrelevant to making art.