Catharsis

[The_Traveler]

I was looking through a street photo thread on another web site and truly 9 out of 10 (or more) were so totally empty of meaning or intent that it made me queasy.
(and 8 out 10 of the 1 out of 10 were mediocre).

So I started a bit of reading to see what had been said and written about the genre (although other people's opinions won't change what I feel) and ended up writing a blog post on it - What is Street Photograph - and what it isn't.

and would be quite interested in your response - preferably on my blog, but here is ok - or even double posted.

 

[amolitor]

A guy I like and respect and who knows some stuff wrote some articles on "street" which give a somewhat different viewpoint.

On Street Photography

Untitled Document

 

[Ilovemycam]

Street photography on the forums is usually garbage. Most pix are just random snapshots of people on the street that have no meaning. It is 'look at me...I took some pix of strangers with or without them seeing me.'

You had a photo something like that recently. The girl with her legs out sitting down. I liked her legs...that was why I 'liked' it. The pix was xlnt for black and white conversion and presentation, but beyond that is said nothing to me. A street pix can be a still life a posed pix or a candid. Pretty much anything on the street. Bresson didn't like posed pix much, yet he had books on posed shots as well. We just do the best we can to ask or not ask. Nowadays lots of hostility towards photogs shooting on the street, so we have to weigh the risks we take.

Now, a good street pix for me does not have to be on the street exactly. Many of Eliott Erwitt's pix are not on the street but are shot in museums. But they are still of the street pix genre to me. Bruce Gilden has crapped up street pix that are a mess...but he still has some fantastic images. Same with Mark 'Grim Street' Cohen, interesting but messed up pix...I like em. So a poor technical street photo can still be a great one. Street can be color and does not have to be die hard BW images. Mcurry has many fantastic color street images.

http://www.the-curator.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/steve-mccurry-11.jpeg

OK, not on the street, but it is a street pix genre to me none the same.

We can't just pin this problem of producing junk with the forum street photogs either. Much of what is on the forums falls under the same category as I said above...meaningless photos that only say...look how happy I am with the crapper I just shot. We all have to learn though, so I don't say anything. If a shot is relatively sharp, half ass exposed, color balanced and is framed OK...I 'like' it to encourage the person.

Now, I shot crap as well when I started. I still shoot tons of crap (when I get the time to shoot.) Only diff is I trash my crap and I don't rejoice in it.

I have a few pix I saved from other fourms that are decent street pix, but can't post them here because of the forums rules. Suffice it to say, I've only found maybe 15 or 20 nice ones on the forums I liked enough to keep in the last 1-1/2 years.

 

[Ilovemycam]

This guy had a shot I liked...ONE

Paris with Preetam and Hadley 6-23 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

I found a guy on the Rangefinder forum. (They banned me since I was not a kiss-ass to film) But I lost his details. He had a few nice street shots.

Kevininparis had a few nice shots I liked on the street and in a pub from the MU43 forum. Also some kid on the MU43 that took a bus trip to NY and had a handful of nice shots.

Streetzen on Tumblr has some nice chiaroscuro pix in the style of Ray Metzker

http://petapixel.com/assets/uploads/2012/12/raymetzker-5.jpg

If you dig around on the forums there is some nice street pix. But I only find a handful here and there. Not enough for them to make a book. But at least it is something and I enjoy viewing them.

Here is one...not on the street..but nice shot and street enuf for me.

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kxyhrw9zRS1qzpuq2o1_500.jpg

 

[sleist]

I like the piece Lew. I agree much of what I see people calling "street" on the interwebs is really pretty poor.
Street photography is like Porn. I can't tell you what it is, but I know it when I see it.

Another equally difficult genre to shoot well is banal. Banal photography and street can overlap at times I think.
But while a good street photo can stand on it's own, banal photography often needs to be seen as a set to appreciate that there was intent behind the image.

 

[Derrel]

I'm not sure what this thread's title "catharsis", is all about. Are you depressed that so much "street" photography is utter rubbish? What, exactly are you trying to get at? I know you've written in the past about what a glorious form of photography street shooting is, and how tedious and boring and non-challenging you think landscape and wedding and portraiture genres are, but what, exactly, are you trying to get at here, in this thread?

Do you pity the people who practice bad street photography? Is that the catharsis you speak of?

I read your blog article on what street photography is. While you wax rhapsodic about Ming Thein's definition, you seem to gloss over (neglect) the 14 different considerations which he attaches to how "street" photography is done. The 14 Ming Thein distinctions...wow.

I know you're literate, Lew, but I cannot tell what it is you're trying to get at here. Is it that you see a lot of rubbish street pictures? And that makes you feel like throwing up?

 

[amolitor]

I thought Lew's remarks on Ming Thein meant that Lew found that one sentence to resonate particularly, and that he chose to remain silent on pretty much everything else Ming Thein said. I have to admit, a lot of what Ming Thein said was either redundant or silly, and I don't event agree with the "must aim to say something" quote.

"Street Photography" used to mean something pretty specific, which the links I pointed at seem to get to pretty well. It now means something quite a lot broader, and the meaning is somewhat variable. And it's a jolly fun topic to argue about, everyone gets to spit a bit of fire. It's a bit like deciding who the "fascists" are that need to be taken out and shot - everyone's pretty sure it's someone else, but someone thinks everyone's a fascist.

 

[The_Traveler]

These responses are sort of interesting.
Andrew and Sleist respond, Derrel wants me to explain why I wrote it and explain myself, Ilovemycam continues to talk about himself - unceasingly.
Well thanks to Andrew, I'll read your friend's articles tomorrow.
Sleist, thanks for the response.
Derrel, you seem to be angry and what to get at something. That's OK but I don't have to and won't explain any more about my motives or my feelings than what I wrote.
Ilovemycam - your every post is about yourself and disparaging of others. Since you haven't shown either knowledge or experience or skill here, I've stopped paying much attention to them.

 

[Designer]

It is possible that differing levels of skill in photographers coupled with each viewer's own prejudices leave the "correct" or "preferred" interpretation of an image to chance, and not a very sure one.

(I double-posted this)