The Other Side of the Six Months with X-Pro2 Story

On 6/16/2016 9:53 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:34:38 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 6/16/2016 1:41 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 09:28:31 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2016-06-16 16:19:25 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/16/2016 11:34 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-16 13:49:44 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/15/2016 5:45 PM, Savageduck wrote:
As I indicated in my 'Six Months with the X-Pro2' post, Piet Van den
Eunde is a pro-photographer and there was more to his shots in India
than going for a tourist walk-around seeking out subjects of
opportunity.
Here is another chapter in taking those shots.
http://www.morethanwords.be/blog//flash-fuji-dramatic-lighting-varanasi



I don't care if those shots were posed, they are interesting and well
done.

Question for Tony Cooper: Since in some manner of sense they are
posed, would you classify these as "street?"

I would not call these "street", they are pretty much "prepared
portraiture". If they had been naturally lit, and shot spontaneously I
might have called them "street", but they are missing a candid element
with the posed, positioned, and in at least one shot, reshot at a
different time.

So definitely not "street". Perhaps a documentary record of local color.


I was interested in exactly what the folks here call "street," as
compared with my concept. After reading Tony's response and yours, I
understand why Tony does not ask permission to photograph.
Here is an image taken at the Mermaid parade in Coney Island. It was
naturally lit and not posed. But it seems to me that anyone who does
body painting on a public sidewalk is posing, but only in the most
technical sense. I do not consider this to be a candid moment.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/_DSC5121_4844.jpg

Event photography is not "street". However, events can be rich in
opportunities for candid shots, and still not be "street".

That's really not clearly defined by those who label themselves
"street photographers". Street photography is photographing life as
it is. It's capturing people in the daily course of human events.

People go to events and participate in events. I don't see why people
photographed at an event are any different than people photographed
elsewhere.

I consider this street photography although the subject is clearly
part of an event:

https://photos.smugmug.com/AUE-Temp/...03-07-1-X2.jpg

Well done, you captured a nice slice of the clown's life. moment.
I like the way you used the vignette to focus attention on the clown.



and this, too, even though these girls are there for an event:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Candids/i...1-28-81-XL.jpg


This is also well exposed, but I have no clue as to why those girls ar
there. Sorry, the image just didn't communicate anything to me.

The girls are waiting to be admitted to a club that is not yet open.
These girls are also waiting for the doors to open at the same club,
but it was taken on a different day:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Candids/i...07-09-2-XL.jpg


OK! Perhaps it's me. But I just didn't feel anything.


There are people in photography forums who don't like the term "street
photography" and prefer "documentary photography" because it is a
genre that documents life. That includes people at events.

Where I personally draw the line is that I wouldn't photograph a band
on stage and call that street photography, but I will photograph
people in the crowd of the event and call it street photography. Like
this:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Candids/i...11-18-8-X2.jpg

The kids seem to be indifferent to the musicians however, I suspect if
the music stopped, they kids would just drift off.



Back to the changed subject, I am still uncertain whether there is a
discrete category of street.


--
PeterN

On 2016-06-17 02:56:58 +0000, Tony Cooper said:

On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 19:17:36 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

Reread what I wrote above; "...events can be rich in opportunities for
candid shots, and still not be "street"."

Just because a shot was candid does not necessarily meet what I would
understand as "street".

As for the example from the Chinese New Year celebration you posted
above, it might well have started out as a candid shot and you took it
as a candid shot. However, with the crop you have employed, you have
changed the street context and the candid element, and you have turned
it into a full face portrait. Out of context it doesn't even represent
the celebration.

I agree. Whether candid or not, the image isn't street by any
definition.

This happens be a shot at a Chinese New Year parade, but nothing about
the shot itself shows that it is.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Candids/i...2-10-60-X3.jpg

;-)

Perhaps there is a distinction between private and public happenings.

Sure, but there is activity within both, and candid images can be
captured at both.
Would you call a candid shot captured at a wedding an example of
"street" because it was candid?

I would, but it would depend on the photograph and the conditions. If
you are part of the wedding party or an invited guest, it's not
street. But, if you are walking down the street with your camera and
see people spill out of a church wedding, and you capture that image,
it's street.

That is when a private event morphs into a public event and becomes fair game.

Would you call a candid shot extracted from the crowd at a political
rally "street" because it was candid?

I do. And have done so.

From a Tea Party rally showing the effectiveness of fear-mongering
propaganda:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Candids/i...02-13-06-L.jpg

A good candid shot, and one could easily classify it as "street".
However, even with the few trappings of the Tea Party rally, with
ballons and bunting, there is no event context with that particular
shot. So, yes, a candid "street" shot.

Would you call shots of participants marching in a parade "street"
because they were marching on a street?
Those I would call event photography.

From one of the street parades during the Travon Martin trial here.
The kicker in this photo is the street sign name. Travon was killed
because Zimmerman presumed someone in a sweatshirt with a hood was a
thug.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Sanford-2...3-26-025-L.jpg

Here

I would say this is a shot documenting the protest, an event, not a
candid, nor "street" street shot.

This one was a later anti-gun rally. There was a parade, but I shot
this image because of the contrast between the protesters and an
obviously unconcerned woman walking her dogs. Life goes on for some of
us who are not affected by certain current events.

https://photos.smugmug.com/AntiGun-R...07-17-09-L.jpg

That was an opportunistic "babe & dogs" shot. ;-)


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2016-06-17 03:38:38 +0000, Tony Cooper said:

On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 20:10:48 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

From a Tea Party rally showing the effectiveness of fear-mongering
propaganda:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Candids/i...02-13-06-L.jpg

A good candid shot, and one could easily classify it as "street".
However, even with the few trappings of the Tea Party rally, with
ballons and bunting, there is no event context with that particular
shot. So, yes, a candid "street" shot.

In this case, as in my Travon Martin shots, there was an entire
gallery of photos. It was the gallery, not the individual
photographs, that told the story.

The street photographer me wants to be in downtown Orlando this week.
But, there's something about the nature of the horrific event that
took place here that discourages me. It would seem ghoulish to
capitalize on the grief of so many people just because I like to
document events.

Most of my photographs taken during the George Zimmerman trial where
of the photographers and journalists from all over the world that
descended on Orlando. That was the story I wanted to show.

This is an example:
https://photos.smugmug.com/Sanford-2...-03-23-4-L.jpg

This

crew was scouring the streets of the black section of Sanford
looking for interviews of local residents. As a stand-alone
photograph, it has no particular interest because the viewer doesn't
know that the barber sent them packing.

Team dorkishness captured. ;-)

This was a competing crew around the corner. The "talking head" posed
on the church's steps while being filmed and giving his report, and
the film report was sent out to Australia or some place that wouldn't
know that neither George nor Travon had any association with this
church other than that sign in the lower right.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Sanford-2...-03-23-5-L.jpg

I

am surprised there wasn't more activity there as it is an AME Church.



--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:20:22 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 6/16/2016 7:20 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 09:49:44 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 6/15/2016 5:45 PM, Savageduck wrote:
As I indicated in my 'Six Months with the X-Pro2' post, Piet Van den
Eunde is a pro-photographer and there was more to his shots in India
than going for a tourist walk-around seeking out subjects of opportunity.
Here is another chapter in taking those shots.
http://www.morethanwords.be/blog//flash-fuji-dramatic-lighting-varanasi


I don't care if those shots were posed, they are interesting and well done.

Question for Tony Cooper: Since in some manner of sense they are posed,
would you classify these as "street?"

They are studio photographs where the studio has been moved out into
the street.


I don't see anything wrong with that. They are very well done images.
His ability to capture those poses is a skill I lack and respect. I have
been unsuccessful in getting natives in Panama to look natural. Even
when though were paid, they would just stiffen up and try to pose.
Unfortunately, I could not find a translator to explain that I wanted
them just to do their thing, and look natural.

I made what I thought to be a statement of fact. There was no intent
on my part to include a value judgement.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 6/16/2016 10:17 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-17 01:52:36 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/16/2016 12:28 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-16 16:19:25 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/16/2016 11:34 AM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2016-06-16 13:49:44 +0000, PeterN said:

On 6/15/2016 5:45 PM, Savageduck wrote:
As I indicated in my 'Six Months with the X-Pro2' post, Piet Van den
Eunde is a pro-photographer and there was more to his shots in India
than going for a tourist walk-around seeking out subjects of
opportunity.
Here is another chapter in taking those shots.
http://www.morethanwords.be/blog//flash-fuji-dramatic-lighting-varanasi



I don't care if those shots were posed, they are interesting and well
done.

Question for Tony Cooper: Since in some manner of sense they are
posed, would you classify these as "street?"

I would not call these "street", they are pretty much "prepared
portraiture". If they had been naturally lit, and shot spontaneously I
might have called them "street", but they are missing a candid element
with the posed, positioned, and in at least one shot, reshot at a
different time.

So definitely not "street". Perhaps a documentary record of local
color.


I was interested in exactly what the folks here call "street," as
compared with my concept. After reading Tony's response and yours, I
understand why Tony does not ask permission to photograph.
Here is an image taken at the Mermaid parade in Coney Island. It was
naturally lit and not posed. But it seems to me that anyone who does
body painting on a public sidewalk is posing, but only in the most
technical sense. I do not consider this to be a candid moment.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/_DSC5121_4844.jpg

Event photography is not "street". However, events can be rich in
opportunities for candid shots, and still not be "street".


While the Mermaid Parade, is clearly an event, and images of
participants in the event during, preparing for, and after the parade
can be event photography, I had not thought of parades as "event
photography." I have not thought of the images Tony posted as event
photography. If you shoot candids of people during an air show, I
would think of that as street, not event photography. Similarly for
candid images of people at any of the hundreds of planned happenings
near where we all live, such as this taken during a Chinese New Years
celebration.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/97242118/Chinatown%20Cold.jpg

Reread what I wrote above; "...events can be rich in opportunities for
candid shots, and still not be "street"."

Just because a shot was candid does not necessarily meet what I would
understand as "street".

As for the example from the Chinese New Year celebration you posted
above, it might well have started out as a candid shot and you took it
as a candid shot. However, with the crop you have employed, you have
changed the street context and the candid element, and you have turned
it into a full face portrait. Out of context it doesn't even represent
the celebration.

Perhaps there is a distinction between private and public happenings.

Sure, but there is activity within both, and candid images can be
captured at both.
Would you call a candid shot captured at a wedding an example of
"street" because it was candid?
Would you call a candid shot extracted from the crowd at a political
rally "street" because it was candid?
I
that might be PJ


Would you call shots of participants marching in a parade "street"
because they were marching on a street?
Those I would call event photography.

Agreed. But what would you call candid shots of the parade watchers,
prior to, and after the parade?
And what about shots of someone stuffing their face at a food festival.

I am suggesting that there is no clear and meaningful definition of
street as a genre.



--
PeterN

On 6/16/2016 10:56 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 19:17:36 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

Reread what I wrote above; "...events can be rich in opportunities for
candid shots, and still not be "street"."

Just because a shot was candid does not necessarily meet what I would
understand as "street".

As for the example from the Chinese New Year celebration you posted
above, it might well have started out as a candid shot and you took it
as a candid shot. However, with the crop you have employed, you have
changed the street context and the candid element, and you have turned
it into a full face portrait. Out of context it doesn't even represent
the celebration.

I agree. Whether candid or not, the image isn't street by any
definition.

The connection to context is subtle. Look at the reflection in her
sunglasses. I am not arguing that it is street, just pointing out what I
saw, and why I shot the picture with that crop.




This happens be a shot at a Chinese New Year parade, but nothing about
the shot itself shows that it is.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Candids/i...2-10-60-X3.jpg


To my eye it is a shot of a very happy couple. All the guy seems to care
about is is SO and the soon to be born baby. They are showing only mild
interest in what is going on about them. If it was my shot I would have
put a mild Gaussian vignette around that couple.


Perhaps there is a distinction between private and public happenings.

Sure, but there is activity within both, and candid images can be
captured at both.
Would you call a candid shot captured at a wedding an example of
"street" because it was candid?

I would, but it would depend on the photograph and the conditions. If
you are part of the wedding party or an invited guest, it's not
street. But, if you are walking down the street with your camera and
see people spill out of a church wedding, and you capture that image,
it's street.

Would you call a candid shot extracted from the crowd at a political
rally "street" because it was candid?

I do. And have done so.

From a Tea Party rally showing the effectiveness of fear-mongering
propaganda:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Candids/i...02-13-06-L.jpg


Would you call shots of participants marching in a parade "street"
because they were marching on a street?
Those I would call event photography.

From one of the street parades during the Travon Martin trial here.
The kicker in this photo is the street sign name. Travon was killed
because Zimmerman presumed someone in a sweatshirt with a hood was a
thug.

https://photos.smugmug.com/Sanford-2...3-26-025-L.jpg

This one was a later anti-gun rally. There was a parade, but I shot
this image because of the contrast between the protesters and an
obviously unconcerned woman walking her dogs. Life goes on for some of
us who are not affected by certain current events.

https://photos.smugmug.com/AntiGun-R...07-17-09-L.jpg



--
PeterN

On 6/16/2016 11:38 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:


point snip


The street photographer me wants to be in downtown Orlando this week.
But, there's something about the nature of the horrific event that
took place here that discourages me. It would seem ghoulish to
capitalize on the grief of so many people just because I like to
document events.


I can relate to your statement. When construction on the WTC memorial I
went to the site, but couldn't press the shutter. I just sat on a bench,
with moist eyes, thinking of the people i knew who were affected by 9/11.


--
PeterN

On 6/17/2016 5:14 AM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 21:20:22 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 6/16/2016 7:20 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 09:49:44 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 6/15/2016 5:45 PM, Savageduck wrote:
As I indicated in my 'Six Months with the X-Pro2' post, Piet Van den
Eunde is a pro-photographer and there was more to his shots in India
than going for a tourist walk-around seeking out subjects of opportunity.
Here is another chapter in taking those shots.
http://www.morethanwords.be/blog//flash-fuji-dramatic-lighting-varanasi


I don't care if those shots were posed, they are interesting and well done.

Question for Tony Cooper: Since in some manner of sense they are posed,
would you classify these as "street?"

They are studio photographs where the studio has been moved out into
the street.


I don't see anything wrong with that. They are very well done images.
His ability to capture those poses is a skill I lack and respect. I have
been unsuccessful in getting natives in Panama to look natural. Even
when though were paid, they would just stiffen up and try to pose.
Unfortunately, I could not find a translator to explain that I wanted
them just to do their thing, and look natural.

I made what I thought to be a statement of fact. There was no intent
on my part to include a value judgement.


K


--
PeterN