Couple More From the Streets of Dallas (C&C)

[kdthomas]

Many thanks as always







NOTE: the last one, she looks kind of pissed, but she actually smiled after I took it.

 

[timor]

Honestly only the #1 works for me, others do not have a "decisive moment" for me.

 

[sleist]

^^^ This.

The subjects in 2 and 3 are interacting/reacting to you in a way that makes your photo seem too much like an intrusion.
Your limo driver photo (in another thread) does not suffer in the same way - perhaps because your perceived proximity to the limo driver imparts a certain level of acceptance. These 2 seem more voyeuristic.

 

[The_Traveler]

What do you see in these that you are trying to show us and, more important, why is that of interest?

 

[kdthomas]

I suppose if it's not clear enough that it comes across immediately, it's not effective

in the first I see a child fascinated with the world ...
I thought the second conveyed solitude ... but maybe not effective since he's connecting with the camera
In the third I like the contrast and the streaks in her hair really just caught my eye ... I thought it might make the viewer curious about the taking of the image itself. Maybe even unsettling.

In truth, I was tinkering with a technique (that I saw on a TV show of all places) of fixing the camera on the subject just until they notice the lens, then snapping the shutter. Maybe it's a strikeout, and if so, I want to quit doing it

 

[The_Traveler]

The first one seems the best to me, not fantastic because the gaze seems focused and there are people with the child. Not that those are eliminators but they fight a clean clear impression.

The second - you are right, he is fixed on the camera, his body language doesn't give much

The third - there are two things, the big blob of the coat without detail and the undefined look on her face - not much tension in the picture.

IMO, a street picture has the feeling that you are catching an instant, perhaps just before something definite happens. And it is that 'before' that gives a picture tension. You are catching an instant that will disappear forever.

 

[fotomonkey]

I'll concur.

I think #2 would've been great if he hadn't been looking at you.

 

[kdthomas]

I'll concur.

I think #2 would've been great if he hadn't been looking at you.

Isn't it strange how something so subtle can completely alter the meaning of an image? I've got some books coming on this subject ... maybe need to give them a good look before the next time out.

Does anyone have a specific technique (doesn't have to be formulaic, just I guess pointers). I've heard one, which I will definitely take to heart which was to dress professionally (essentially business casual) with say a collared shirt, and slacks, nice shoes, clean shaven etc., without a whole bunch of gear hanging off you like a combat marine.

Also thought of handing out business cards with an email address "Email if you want a free copy", etc., but dunno about that.

 

[The_Traveler]

I dress like the crowd is going to be dressed.
Here is a series on Lew Lorton Photography | The process of Street Photography - Part 1: Fishing as Metaphor

 

[fotomonkey]

Indeed it is, Kerry. I've certainly noticed that what I see at the moment of capture isn't what others see later.

I think T_T is spot on. I don't think it's necessarily about camouflage per se but certainly about blending in. I tried to get a bag that looked a little more "average". I don't care for backpacks but wanted to have more than just a single lens. I don't know that you'd have to be in slacks and a collared shirt so long as you don't look too out of place. I think the goal is to not be a blip on the radar (passed over more than anything) so you don't become a center of focus. I just look like a rough guy that stepped off the mountain after whacking a bunch of trees down so I'm sure I'd scare more people.

I like that idea of the business cards, actually. If you're going to capture their image at least it gives them the opportunity to enjoy it as well if they choose.

 

[kdthomas]

Indeed it is, Kerry. I've certainly noticed that what I see at the moment of capture isn't what others see later.

I think T_T is spot on. I don't think it's necessarily about camouflage per se but certainly about blending in. I tried to get a bag that looked a little more "average". I don't care for backpacks but wanted to have more than just a single lens. I don't know that you'd have to be in slacks and a collared shirt so long as you don't look too out of place. I think the goal is to not be a blip on the radar (passed over more than anything) so you don't become a center of focus. I just look like a rough guy that stepped off the mountain after whacking a bunch of trees down so I'm sure I'd scare more people.

I like that idea of the business cards, actually. If you're going to capture their image at least it gives them the opportunity to enjoy it as well if they choose.

Good advice ... I think next time out though, I'm going to follow Ken Rockwell's advice & take just the camera with one lens (the one mounted on it) and force myself to concentrate on composition, and moving around to get the frame the way I like it. Going to Atlanta in a couple of weeks, and take a spin downtown one day with the 85mm 1.8 and another day with the 50mm 1.4. I'll go in with simplicity & context in mind, and maybe armed with what I'll learn from the books I get. We'll see what happens!

Thanks everyone, even though a few of these might have been a swing & a miss

 

[Alexr25]

Most of the great street photo are taken with lens ranging from wide angle through to normal focal length (28mm to 50mm in Fx format). Using a telephoto lens puts you too far away from you subject so there is little connection between photographer and subject and give the results that look more like surveillance photos than human interest street photos.
I suggest you put your 18-55mm on the D3200 (the D810 is a great camera but IMO too big and heave to be a good street camera), leave the lens set on 18mm and try again. You will find that with a wide angle lens as long as your subjects are not in the centre of the frame they will assume you are shooting past them and so tend not to become self concious.
Robert Cappa knew what he was talking about when he said "If your pictures aren't good enough, you aren't close enough."

 

[fotomonkey]

I think next time out though, I'm going to follow Ken Rockwell's advice

Let's not get TOO carried away now.

 

[timor]

Good advice ... I think next time out though, I'm going to follow Ken Rockwell's advice & take just the camera with one lens (the one mounted on it) and force myself.....

Olympus 35-SP. Not the smallest, but you can hardly find better lens.