The Myths of Streetshooting - explained and mostly busted

[gsgary]

I think that good street photographs should show the photographer's intent. Either in the original composition of the re-framing in post, what the photographer is trying to make you look at should become obvious.
If not, then a street photograph becomes not too much more than a random set of things that the viewer must sort out rather than a statement of some sort.
In the original of the picture above, there are three interactions that are unrelated, not really in any hierarchy and aren't at all similar (so they don't work in synchrony to make a coherent point.) So, for me, I don't know what the photographer's point is.

In the crop, I chose to frame around the interaction that seemed the most important.

This is where we differ i never crop my street photos

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

 

[The_Traveler]

This is where we differ i never crop my street photos

I never pick my nose.

 

[gsgary]

This is where we differ i never crop my street photos

I never pick my nose.

I do

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

 

[The_Traveler]

But you do edit in other ways, yes.
So not cropping is a sort of artificial hurdle you pose on yourself and you would rather have a less good image than touch those sacrosanct borders.

OK, I understand how it works.
For myself, I refuse to use the least significant bit.
Where others might make images with 14 bits, I only use 13.
But if I post 8 bit images, I make a decision based on the time the picture was actually taken - in minutes.
If the minute is even, I spin around clockwise, before pressing the carriage return.
If the minute is odd, I don't spin at all but I stand on my left foot - and tehn press the carriage return.
That's my rule.

 

[manaheim]

^ wtf?

 

[DanOstergren]

But you do edit in other ways, yes.
So not cropping is a sort of artificial hurdle you pose on yourself and you would rather have a less good image than touch those sacrosanct borders.

OK, I understand how it works.
For myself, I refuse to use the least significant bit.
Where others might make images with 14 bits, I only use 13.
But if I post 8 bit images, I make a decision based on the time the picture was actually taken - in minutes.
If the minute is even, I spin around clockwise, before pressing the carriage return.
If the minute is odd, I don't spin at all but I stand on my left foot - and tehn press the carriage return.
That's my rule.

Clearly we all have our own opinions and ways of doing things. If we all did it by what one person says is the right way then everybody's photos would look the same.

 

[gsgary]

But you do edit in other ways, yes.
So not cropping is a sort of artificial hurdle you pose on yourself and you would rather have a less good image than touch those sacrosanct borders.

OK, I understand how it works.
For myself, I refuse to use the least significant bit.
Where others might make images with 14 bits, I only use 13.
But if I post 8 bit images, I make a decision based on the time the picture was actually taken - in minutes.
If the minute is even, I spin around clockwise, before pressing the carriage return.
If the minute is odd, I don't spin at all but I stand on my left foot - and tehn press the carriage return.
That's my rule.

Anything that i see in my rangefinder should be there even legs and feet going in and out of frame

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

 

[gsgary]

But you do edit in other ways, yes.
So not cropping is a sort of artificial hurdle you pose on yourself and you would rather have a less good image than touch those sacrosanct borders.

OK, I understand how it works.
For myself, I refuse to use the least significant bit.
Where others might make images with 14 bits, I only use 13.
But if I post 8 bit images, I make a decision based on the time the picture was actually taken - in minutes.
If the minute is even, I spin around clockwise, before pressing the carriage return.
If the minute is odd, I don't spin at all but I stand on my left foot - and tehn press the carriage return.
That's my rule.

This is one of my latest shots how would you crop it

 

[The_Traveler]

We all make choices in how we make images. Some shoot film, some shoot large format, some make platinum prints, some shoot rangefinders, some shoot certain focal lengths only, some convert everything to B&W, some display SOOC, some don't crop, some always use additional light -

These are all only choices and no special value attaches to any of the resulting images because of the way one chooses to get images.
The images are what they are and any choice by the maker doesn't make them any better or worse.

 

[DanOstergren]

We all make choices in how we make images. Some shoot film, some shoot large format, some make platinum prints, some shoot rangefinders, some shoot certain focal lengths only, some convert everything to B&W, some display SOOC, some don't crop, some always use additional light -

These are all only choices and no special value attaches to any of the resulting images because of the way one chooses to get images.
The images are what they are and any choice by the maker doesn't make them any better or worse.

I completely disagree.

 

[kundalini]

We all make choices in how we make images. Some shoot film, some shoot large format, some make platinum prints, some shoot rangefinders, some shoot certain focal lengths only, some convert everything to B&W, some display SOOC, some don't crop, some always use additional light -

These are all only choices and no special value attaches to any of the resulting images because of the way one chooses to get images.
The images are what they are and any choice by the maker doesn't make them any better or worse.

I completely disagree.

In what manner? I haven"t read the previous page to see if this is a run-on dialogue, but the staement "I completely disagree." leaves a void. Many images I've taken are enhanced to some degree by post production. The choices I make in post are usually minimal, but an adjustment of tilt or a slight crop to enhance the Subject has often yielded a better final result. I would show an example of a severe crop to add to the discussion, but the original is not close at hand.

 

[The_Traveler]

We all make choices in how we make images. Some shoot film, some shoot large format, some make platinum prints, some shoot rangefinders, some shoot certain focal lengths only, some convert everything to B&W, some display SOOC, some don't crop, some always use additional light -

These are all only choices and no special value attaches to any of the resulting images because of the way one chooses to get images.
The images are what they are and any choice by the maker doesn't make them any better or worse.

I completely disagree.

I have no idea what you are disagreeing with.

 

[DanOstergren]

Allow me to rephrase.

We all make choices in how we make images. Some shoot film, some shoot large format, some make platinum prints, some shoot rangefinders, some shoot certain focal lengths only, some convert everything to B&W, some display SOOC, some don't crop, some always use additional light -

These are all only choices and no special value attaches to any of the resulting images because of the way one chooses to get images.
The images are what they are and any choice by the maker doesn't make them any better or worse.

I disagree with this statement.

I put a lot of thought into how I create an image, such as the direction of light, the amount and type of light, what focal length I use on my camera, the model/subject, the styling, the location, the shutter speed, ISO and aperture I choose to set my camera at, or even the time of day that I choose to shoot. All of these decisions on my part effect the final outcome of the image with or without post production, and these decisions on my part in fact do have a large part in whether the image is no good or great in my opinion. These decisions by myself or any other photographer make our art unique to the artist, and are why clients seek out individual photographers for their style or talent in being able to make the choices that result in better images. Even in street photography the artist can make the simple choice to position himself in a spot where he or she will have better light on their potential subjects, in turn resulting in a better image.
I just don't see how the choices we make in how we capture these images don't have any result in the image being any better or worse, because in my experience these decisions have every part in making the photo better or worse.

 

[Derrel]

Allow me to rephrase.

We all make choices in how we make images. Some shoot film, some shoot large format, some make platinum prints, some shoot rangefinders, some shoot certain focal lengths only, some convert everything to B&W, some display SOOC, some don't crop, some always use additional light -

These are all only choices and no special value attaches to any of the resulting images because of the way one chooses to get images.
The images are what they are and any choice by the maker doesn't make them any better or worse.

I disagree with this statement.

I put a lot of thought into how I create an image, such as the direction of light, the amount and type of light, what focal length I use on my camera, the model/subject, the styling, the location, the shutter speed, ISO and aperture I choose to set my camera at, or even the time of day that I choose to shoot. All of these decisions on my part effect the final outcome of the image with or without post production, and these decisions on my part in fact do have a large part in whether the image is no good or great in my opinion. These decisions by myself or any other photographer make our art unique to the artist, and are why clients seek out individual photographers for their style or talent in being able to make the choices that result in better images. Even in street photography the artist can make the simple choice to position himself in a spot where he or she will have better light on their potential subjects, in turn resulting in a better image.
I just don't see how the choices we make in how we capture these images don't have any result in the image being any better or worse, because in my experience these decisions have every part in making the photo better or worse.

Whoa,whoa,whoa Dan...ease up on all the logic buddy! Stop making so much sense. You're being far too rational dude!

 

[The_Traveler]

We all make choices in how we make images. Some shoot film, some shoot large format, some make platinum prints, some shoot rangefinders, some shoot certain focal lengths only, some convert everything to B&W, some display SOOC, some don't crop, some always use additional light -

These are all only choices and no special value attaches to any of the resulting images because of the way one chooses to get images.
The images are what they are and any choice by the maker doesn't make them any better or worse.

Perhaps I can be a little clearer and more easy to understand.

When you show an image, to any person, that image has some final level of quality.
Should it make any difference in the evaluation that you chose to use film or chose to use platinum printing or chose to go without cropping?

I think not.
The quality of an image should be judged without regard to how it was produced.

Yes photographers seem to think that their choices in production should somehow count extra; if the picture is good, somehow knowing that it was done without any cropping (for example), should somehow make it extra good.

How it was created should only be of importance to the photographer as he/she works; the 'how' should be irrelevant to the viewer in judging the image.

I don't care why people do certain things, make certain choices, and I certainly don't think that my impression of their work should be affected by the manner in which it was done.


Understand now?