I tried "some street"... it didn't go well!

[tirediron]

This is a scene I pass frequently; these folks are set up on a street corner diagonally across from a "woman's health clinic". No prizes for guessing what the nature of most of the treatments are... anyway, I've driven past it so many times and thought that there were some great street images... unfortunately, it would appear that this is NOT my forte... HOWEVER, I would appreciate any input on what (if anything) might make them better.

For:

Against:

The whole scene:

 

[RichieT]

They all look really bored which doesn't help. Sometimes honking your horn as you go by fires them up and adds a little life (no pun intended) to the scene.

 

[Gary A.]

Robert Capa stated that If the picture isn't good enough then you're not close enough.

 

[tirediron]

Robert Capa stated that If the picture isn't good enough then you're not close enough.

If Robert wants to stand in the middle of a very busy street to get the shot, he's welcome to do so! I waited probably five minutes to get these care-free shots.

 

[The_Traveler]

Robert Capa stated that If the picture isn't good enough then you're not close enough.

If Robert wants to stand in the middle of a very busy street to get the shot, he's welcome to do so! I waited probably five minutes to get these care-free shots.

Welcome to street shooting where the keeper rate is <5%.

No emotion, no mystery, no mood
No photo

 

[tirediron]

...No emotion, no mystery, no mood. No photo

Pretty much, yeah... it's one of those cases where I know there are some good images to be had, but I can't seem to get them.

 

[Gary A.]

Robert Capa stated that If the picture isn't good enough then you're not close enough.

If Robert wants to stand in the middle of a very busy street to get the shot, he's welcome to do so! I waited probably five minutes to get these care-free shots.

Robert would have crossed the street.

 

[tirediron]

Robert Capa stated that If the picture isn't good enough then you're not close enough.

If Robert wants to stand in the middle of a very busy street to get the shot, he's welcome to do so! I waited probably five minutes to get these care-free shots.

Robert would have crossed the street.

Then I would have been too close...

 

[TheStunch]

need long glass and a good vantage point lol also bored is ok, if you play up that angle

 

[JoeW28]

I have to agree (generally) here with Gary A. Here's my take:

People often think that street photography is about going out with a camera and taking pictures of people. I don't think that's it. I think it's primarily one of two things. Either (a) you're waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting for the sudden moments of emotion or events to synchronize and hopefully you're lucky enough to capture them. The waiter at the outdoor cafe who slips with a tray full of food and the patrons who look up in horror as they see the food descending on them and you capture just that moment. The couple re-uniting after 6 months apart and the obvious joy in both of their faces. The two people debating some issue and one rolls her eyes with such disdain. The point is, events happen and you're prepared and observant so you capture it.

Or the second approach is that you create a shot. You look at the situation and you choose a vantage point or perspective to make a statement with the photo. You edit reality by selecting your story and the elements. Maybe instead of being across the street you're on the same side so we see a line of signs and people. Maybe you shoot them from the back so we see signs (can't tell what they say) but get the reaction (or non reaction) of passer-bus. Maybe you focus solely on the expressions (which appear mostly bored) and you show just enough of the signs so we get the juxtaposition of a passionate position and a bored position-holder. Maybe you have a very narrow DoF so we see just one face in-focus and everything else is a blur of signs and people (implying that it's all a mess of positions and counter positions). Think of this second approach to street photography as trying to tell a story. So think ahead...what's the story here? What's the statement you want to make with your picture? Then go create that message.

I don't think Capa (and Gary A) were saying you were too far away in terms of a focal point and you needed to zoom in...you can use a zoom lens for that. Rather, Capa is saying "if your picture is 'blah' than it's b/c you aren't taking enough risks (and no, that doesn't necessarily mean standing in front of cars) and aren't close enough to the story to be able to say 'here's the picture!'"

So in this instance, how Capa is relevant is....besides asking yourself what the story is that you could tell (or want to tell) with this setting, ask yourself what you could have done to have gotten more knowledgable or closer to the possible picture. Do something to draw their attention (and move them from boredom)? Accompany a visitor to the clinic (so you're photographing the signs and protesters from the POV of the visitor/patient? This is about privacy and limits. Capa is saying that if the picture isn't good enough, then you need to know more about the situation, take more risks, get more involved. And to be honest, there are lots of times where I personally am not willing to get "closer." Let me give you an example...I was in Arlington National Cemetery in Section 60 (where the Afghan and Iraq war dead are buried). I saw two women on the ground in from of a headstone. It was an okay shot but nothing notable about it. If I'd intruded on their pain and found out more about who they were and the headstone they were in front of, or if I'd made it obvious I was photographing them, all things that would have gotten me "closer" I'd have gotten a better photo. I'd also have felt like an a-hole in that situation. I chose to respect their privacy and dignity. So getting "closer" gets you a better photo but some times we all may decide a better photo isn't worth getting closer.

 

[tirediron]

Fair comment... I realize that these images didn't work, and I'll have to think some more about how to approach it. I don't want to change the mood, since in my mind, that would make it something other than what the scene actually was.

 

[Derrel]

People who are passively sitting, holding polite signs signs don't generally make for good photos. Signs propped up by stone walls with backpacks to hold the sign up do not make good street fodder. Until there are protestors yelling, gesticulating, shouting, and or carrying provocative signs, there just isn't much to see. One woman, sitting, with a sign held by a backpack, and two signs propped up against a stone wall...there's not much to get closer to. This isn't like the protests Lew has shown here, with a cross-drerssing man in hot pink mesh and signs decrying ,"Jesus hates fags!" and other distasteful, inciteful, unsettling crap like that...this is a quiet, respectful example of less than a handful of people holding polite, informative signs advocating one point of view, and a single female, and a backpack too! holding polite signs representing the opposing view.

These show what was happening...very calm, peaceful, static, roadside expression of political views. Not a demonstration, not a march, not a riot, not a confrontation, not a protest...just some calm sign-showing. If it "didn't go well," it's because this has about the same amount of drama as me making a ham sandwich...it's not even as spirited as a high school football game with two different crowds, one cheering for the home team, the other cheering for the visitors. It's accurate and honest, but it's not the cliche "protest or demonstration street photo" you'll see where big crowds gather, and the protestors are amped up on adrenaline and coffee and political hatred.

The seated, static, passive body posture is a clue that this is very peaceful, non-active expression. The fact that one sign is being held up by...a backpack is a good gauge for how "active" this activity actually was. I doubt much could have been done with this scene, really. Those who disagree are free to come by this weekend to make some exciting pictures while I make multiple ham sandwiches for the Stanford/Oregon football game.

What would have made this better would be some people around the sign-holders, a crowd, some real emotion, some people who were angry, excited, active, standing up and moving around. It's not your fault that these are boring: this is a VERY quiet, reserved, polite, respectful, non-confrontational sidewalk display. It's calmer than a school football game. It lacks hatred, disrespect,loathing, and all the other stuff that is the cliche of the protest photo.

 

[tirediron]

Agreed; the idea that I want to get across is the "pros" on one side and the "cons" on the other, but at the same time, they don't really seem to care about it. IF that makes sense to anyone but me...

 

[Derrel]

Agreed; the idea that I want to get across is the "pros" on one side and the "cons" on the other, but at the same time, they don't really seem to care about it. IF that makes sense to anyone but me...

It TOTALLY makes sense...their body language is apathetic...totally passive. The woman with the sign, and then the backpack holding up a handled sign, and then two signs propped up against a stone wall? OMG...four signs and only the ONE, individual woman, representing a whole political point of view? That is apathy of the highest order! Can't even get another person? This isn't your fault John--this is simply a bad situation. I've seen more emotion around the uncorking of a wine bottle. I disagree with your idea that there are "good images to be had." I disagree with that, totally.

You up for a photo shoot of me makin' a plate of ham sammiches???

 

[tirediron]

...You up for a photo shoot of me makin' a plate of ham sammiches???

On white or whole-wheat?