Street shorts - C&C welcome

[LazyFrog60]

​

 

[The_Traveler]

These are all ' look at the poor, sick, fat people' pictures.
Street pictures need to do more than use the subjects as objects of curiosity or pity.

 

[amolitor]

The first one is a little bit street. There's some ambiguity about the subject, here. We think it might just be a homeless person, but maybe it's a jogger, or something else. It's not a BIG mystery, but there's a little ambiguity, and a little something we might try to write a narrative on top of.

The other two are pretty ordinary "look at the freaks" photos, which far too many people think is what "street" is about. Lew is perfectly correct about those.

The second photo is the same person as the first? You seem to be using quite a long lens here, as well. This is not traditional, and for pretty good reason. We lose any sense of intimacy and connection, and your photographs gain a little taste of "look at the freaks that I am standing well away from, and spying on" which doesn't help them at all.

Technically they're pretty good. A little hot for my taste, but this high contrast look it popular these days.

The third one has the echoed grouping of people, which gives it a nice little compositional touch.

The second one has the garbage cans and the sleeping person pretty well placed in the frame for balance (notice that it is exactly the same balancing of forms as in the third one), but the background is busy and uninteresting.

The first one.. there's just not a lot going on in terms of composition. If you'd shot it 30 seconds earlier or so, to contrast the skater with the bench-sitter, you might have had something here. The lines of the curb are not bad geometry, but don't lead anyways. It doesn't feel horribly unbalanced, but the subject and visual center are only made clear because you've rendered the person almost black. There's very little in the layout of forms that supports the subject as the visual center.

 

[manaheim]

These are all ' look at the poor, sick, fat people' pictures.
Street pictures need to do more than use the subjects as objects of curiosity or pity.

Wow. Cut right to the bone there. I was sort of struggling with what about the pictures bothered me, but yup... you nailed it.

 

[HughGuessWho102 17]

Poor, sick and "fat people" are people too.

 

[manaheim]

Poor, sick and "fat people" are people too.

Sure... though are you implying you therefore shouldn't shoot them? Or are you saying that they therefore make viable street photography subjects? Or are you just lamenting the use of the labels?

 

[amolitor]

To digress from the current photographs (sorry, OP). I have two basic problems with this sort of photography.

#1:
The first is that there's no easy way around the problem of exploitation. You're using people who already have it pretty tough, and you're using the fact that they are having it pretty tough as a subject of photography. Sure, you can pay them, you can be buddies, you can buy them a sandwich, or you can do none of those things. The bottom line is that you are turning what is bad in their lives into a photograph for your own satisfaction.

#2:
The second problem is that we're awash in these photographs. Homeless people are just so interesting to look it, you basically get a moderately interesting photograph for free. Point it at the guy, get it in focus, click. Poof, you have an interesting-to-look-at image. You have, frequently, contributed basically nothing to the image. You might kid yourself that you're Recording Important Social Commentary, but realistically you're not Walker Evans, and anyways this commentary (while genuinely Important) is being recorded far too much. It no longer registers as Important Social Commentary, really, because we see so much of it. This is part of a larger problem of being awash in lazy images. There's lots of stuff that's easy: flowers, macro photographs of.. stuff, the moon, hired models, and we see lots and lots and lots of all of it, and I pretty much hate all of it at this point.

 

[HughGuessWho102 17]

Sure... though are you implying you therefore shouldn't shoot them? Or are you saying that they therefore make viable street photography subjects? Or are you just lamenting the use of the labels?

I'm saying that they are part of everyday life and shouldn't be excluded simply because they are imperfect. However, they should not be singled out because...

 

[LazyFrog60]

Understand your comments but just for your information I have a family member who is "larger" than the guy in the first photo. To me it's just a nice couple enjoying a day in the sun, she's taken her shoes of and is enjoying a relaxing day. Whatever we look like, or are built like we're all part of the street view and very honestly I get tired of only seeing the so called "beautiful" people pictured!! As for the homeless, they are more and more to be found everywhere, in every city, all over the world. We have many, many homeless and refugees in my home city and we do what we can to help, especially now during the winter when they suffer the most. At least in Florida they have it warm!

 

[The_Traveler]

Nope, doesn't sound right.

The pictures don't show them in any way but as fodder for the camera.

 

[DiskoJoe]

You have any more shots?

 

[LazyFrog60]

Below are some more shots. I simply enjoy taking pictures of people while they're either unaware or "surprised", whether they are family, friends or strangers. A person with character in their face, person, body language... is more interesting to me than a staged photo shoot, but that's just me. In People photography - I like photographing kids & old people the most.

1


2


3


4


5

 

[gsgary]

Below are some more shots. I simply enjoy taking pictures of people while they're either unaware or "surprised", whether they are family, friends or strangers. A person with character in their face, person, body language... is more interesting to me than a staged photo shoot, but that's just me. In People photography - I like photographing kids & old people the most.

1 http://www.flickr.com/photos/lazyfrog60/8205558310/


2 http://www.flickr.com/photos/lazyfrog60/8205565372/


3 http://www.flickr.com/photos/lazyfrog60/8205575826/


4 http://www.flickr.com/photos/lazyfrog60/8204488865/


5 http://www.flickr.com/photos/lazyfrog60/8204502581/

These are worse than the first ones, there just point and shoot
Take a look at Garry Winogrand, Joel Meyerowicz, Bruce Gilden

 

[rexbobcat]

I have to agree. There is no connection between you, the camera, and the subject. These are very voyeuristic, which in my opinion makes them boring.

The photo should not ride solely on the subject. It also has to have content of substance that is effectively conveyed to the viewer. I cannot do street photography. I've taken one decent street photo ever.

I think to make street photos that aren't so snapshotty you have to look at the world (literally) like an artist, and apply that "vision" to you photos.

(Well, it looks like I've had my snooty booty artsy fartsy rant for the week. lol)

 

[amolitor]

I quite like #4 and #5 from the most recent set. #4 is in particular somewhat striking, you've caught a moment and a reaction. #5 is just a niceish formal composition.