Street Photography Thread: Discuss and Share Your Images

[Xander202]

I have had my photography style put into question by a man who's job I would literally kill to have.

The bbc made an incredible programme titled Human Planet. Accompanying the filming team was a man called Timothy Allen who worked as the official photographer. Here is a link to a slideshow about the work he produced for the programme. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-12618167.
Anyone who has seen my photo's I am sure will understand why I look up to this guy as a role model, love his style and want his job

However, I went to his website and found a section he wrote for photography novices (I guess) titled How To Take Better Travel Photos. I read it out of interest to see what he had to say, but assuming it to be written for clueless beginners I thought I would learn nothing. Anyway, I was hit with his first point which essentially undermines a lot of what I do as a photographer.

Please read and let me know what you think.

1. When shooting people, stop using your long lens so much

After many years of perusing the portfolios of aspiring photographers, I can safely say that the single most common factor I see leading disillusioned travel photographers to accumulate huge collections of mediocre travel images is an unhealthy dependence upon using long lenses for shooting pictures of people. I hate to say it folks, but for most people the inconvenient truth about this addiction is the fact that it is born out of one thing and one thing only… fear.

I don’t think that it’s any coincidence that the English language has evolved the use of the verb ‘take‘ to describe the process of taking a picture. For me, this etymological hint serves as a reminder to us that when we photograph someone, maybe we shouldn’t overlook the fact that we are in fact taking something from them and that in just about every other aspects of our lives, when we take something from someone we normally ask first and say thank you afterwards.

Why should it be any different in photography? Asking and thanking involves connecting with people and long lenses make that a very easy thing to avoid. They tend to put a large distance, both physically and emotionally between you and the people you are photographing which does a fine job of insulating you from any potential intimate interaction.

I’ve seen it many times before. This lack of intimacy will show in your images.

Losing your big gun will mean that you will have to start connecting with your subjects again. I know all too well how nerve racking that process can be. Believe me when I say that even after all these years, I still get butterflies in my stomach when I have to approach a stranger in order to photograph them. That’s a fact of life for me but as far as I’m concerned a healthy and invigorating life involves addressing a lot of uncomfortable feelings like these, so if you recognize an aspect of yourself in what I’m saying then you will have to feel the fear and do it anyway if you want the power of intimacy to resonate within your images.

Don’t get me wrong. There is a place in this world for long lenses… I use a 200mm f2.8 and 400mm f5.6 but I would say that when I’m shooting people, I generally tend to use them in order to condense the background contents of my frame, often when I am photographing somebody in their environment. However, using a long lens to pick off people in a crowd like a sniper shooting his victims is certainly something that I don’t condone if you want to make your images stand out from the rest of the drones of travel photographers who are regularly shooting unexceptional head shots and portraiture on their long lenses.

“What about the fact that when you use a long lens you get more candid shots of people because they don’t know you’re taking their picture?”

Candid?.. Yes, possibly.. Dull? .. most definitely. I’ve often heard this argument used to justify hiding behind a camera, fostering laziness and producing bland, unengaging pictures IMO. Why not try and get a candid shot with a short lens?… now that’s a real skill.

Try this technique next time you decide to approach someone to take his or her picture. Instead of snapping them and bolting, try asking them if they wouldn’t mind if you accompanied them for a little while whilst you take some photos. If they say no, then thank them and move on. However, if they agree then in my experience before not too long they will have forgotten you are there, and your resulting images will have a far more intimate feel to them. This technique works particularly well when you are visiting people in their homes. Just make sure you can give the situation your full time and attention, which also means forgetting about your cameras . The quality of your images will be a direct reflection of the degree to which you engaged with both your subject and their environment… and in my experience, the biggest part of that is usually what happens when your cameras are packed away in their bag.

Now I agree with a lot of what he says. Intimacy in a shot is a great thing, and something which is evident when the photograph is viewed. And rest assured I don't always photograph with a long lens "like a sniper". Sometimes I ask, sometimes I take portrait type shots, I like to mix it up. I am however a big fan of a photojournalistic/ documentary type style, and I strive to portray places and countries which I travel in as natural a state as I can. I find the best portrayal is often to catch people acting naturally, doing what they do naturally, caught in the moment. Sometimes I don't want the photo to look to posed, which is why I try to take people's pictures whilst they are in their natural state.

What do you guys think on the matter?

[fishrose]

He sounds like a douchebag. Why do so many photographers profess that their way is the only way, and if you're not doing it their way you're doing it wrong and your photos suck? I've seen many beautiful, engaging candid shots taken with zoomed-in lenses or telephotos. Fuck some other guy's personal preference, even if he espouses it as fact. Just do your thing and work on your own style.

[toyota74]

Well said!!

[diskojoe]

You guys missed the point that he was trying to get across. Its not so much that he doesnt like people using zoom lenses but more of the fact that people are afraid to interact with one another. I know this is true because many people have told me they are scared to go talk to strangers and ask to take their picture.

If you have not seen this set of mine then check it out....

http://www.flickr.com/photos/diskojo...7626675467440/

These are complete strangers that I went and actually talked to and connected with. I didnt just hit them with my zoom lens from 2 blocks away. I asked them if I could take their pictures and they consented. The first picture went up on explore. Then I did a fashion shoot with the girl. Later I met some russian scientists. I talked to them for about 2 hours and still hit them up on facebook. The girl sarah turned out to be one of my friends cousins that I had never met. After that me, her and her boyfriend were instant friends.

So its cool to go up to people and interact. This guy is not the first advocate for this idea. The people that founded PhotoFest here in Houston were strong believers in this philosophy. They saw that there could be a lot of good found in the interaction between people in the artistic process.

get out of your comfort zone. stop stomping forward in ant mode. there are billions of people out there and some might be cool enough to be your friend. try talking to them before you snap a picture and scurry off.

a great example on here would be okayyou.

[photoLith]

I dont think you need to only use shorter lenses to capture good travel photos of people. When I was in China, I usually had my 70-200mm on my camera and got tons of awesome portraits of people. But, I also used an 18mm to get closer and got some good photos. The guy that wrote that kinda seems stuck up imo.


18mm


200mm

Dont change your style if you think or know it works. Photographers should strive to achieve their own style. Thats why I dont read any of those instructional manuals and other things telling you how to take better pictures. You dont want your photos looking just like some other guys stuff. Stick with your style and youll be much happier. Its much easier to interact with people though in foreign countries, especially places like small town China or Africa when people dont usually see white people that much, let alone white people with big cameras. So, they usually come up to you anyways and wonder what you are doing. Its much harder to take peoples portraits though when you are not in places like that. Although, Diskojoe knows how to photo pimp the girls here in Houston pretty well, a talent I lack.

[mr.John]

Originally Posted by fishrose

He sounds like a douchebag. Why do so many photographers profess that their way is the only way, and if you're not doing it their way you're doing it wrong and your photos suck? I've seen many beautiful, engaging candid shots taken with zoomed-in lenses or telephotos. Fuck some other guy's personal preference, even if he espouses it as fact. Just do your thing and work on your own style.

because he's an artist so that gives him the right to critcize all you poor amateur smucks, reminds me of these so-called professionals you claim that equipment is not important in taking great shots, yet these windbags run around with $20,000 of equipment in their camera bags

[Xander202]

Originally Posted by diskojoe

If you have not seen this set of mine then check it out....

http://www.flickr.com/photos/diskojo...7626675467440/

I had a feeling you would bring up your 100 strangers project (which I love by the way). It seems you have become very proud of your increased confidence in approaching people, which is great, and the results have also been fantastic (I have been following them). However, don't forget you took some equally brilliant people shots that had a far more candid approach before you began your project.

I need to reiterate, I AGREE that human interaction is a wonderful thing, and I take plenty of shots which I have asked for permission for, and I really don't get nervous about approaching people. It's just like I said, often I genuinly prefer the atmosphere of a candid shot, especially when it comes to travel photography. It's got nothing to do with being afraid of being out of my comfort zone. Being the only white face at an intense backstreet cockfight in the hills of Bali, THAT was out of my comfort zone. I wanted to try to capture that moment in its natural form, to document it as if I wasn't there.

Also, even when I am photographing people i know, family and friends etc, I almost always wait until they are not expecting me to shoot to take their picture, I just find people in a more natural state when they are not expecting it.

Originally Posted by diskojoe

a great example on here would be okayyou.

okayyou is a wonderful photographer, and one who has a fairly similar style to me I suppose. But look at his threads, there are a load of non-posed, candid shots as well as more traditional portrait shots. In my opinion that is exactly why his threads are so great, there is a healthy mix. I also mix it up. I just don't think it is really correct to completely slate the art of taking great documentary style candid shots.

[Doady]

I totally agree with him. And I've said said it here before too and I'll say it again. I don't like photographs of people on the street done with ultra-telephoto lenses.

It is not necessarily that a photographer should be as much participant in the scene. There are ways to take photos of people up close without them noticing and these techniques shouldn't be ignored. The important thing is that the photo should not make it seem like the photographer is a spy or something, which is what the use of telephoto lenses do (imo).

[Okayyou]

Thanks guys. Xander, when I first saw your threads they reminded me a lot of mine. I came across the same interview with Timothy Allen a few months ago, he has some fantastic work. I thought he came across a bit conceited. Take into consideration:

He was traveling and working for the BBC. He needs to get permission to take peoples photos a) for liability, and b) it's pretty hard to blend into the background with a full camera crew and documentary staff loitering about. If you check out his site I think most of his work displayed is from his time as the Human Planet photographer (his photos are even hosted on human planet's website). He's overlooking the fact that due to this, he was participating in unusual and, photographically speaking, luxurious circumstances that the rest of us usually don't experience when we travel. Of course he can get the intimate, low light, up close shot of some tribal ritual because the whole point of him tagging along with the BBC was to take exactly those shots. Easy for him to ask for permission and get up close when that's his job.

A major point his skips in his 'Better Photo Guide' is the use of a fixer. He had a giant media company, with all their resources, helping him get into foreign places and greasing the wheels so he could get some unreal shots. When you are traveling solo with limited resources, things like this are much more difficult. Some of the places I've traveled to I have used local guides and they make it easier to break the ice with the locals. This is more true the more rural and foreign places you visit. A gringo does not simply walk into some tribal village and start snapping photos. You need a fixer that has a relationship with the people to break the ice. My point is Allen had the BBC and their resources setting all this up for him.

Given, one could have all the resources in the world and still take crappy shots if they didn't know what they were doing. Allen is a pro that has some unbelievable images in his portfolio, he obviously has photographic talent. However I think it is a bit disingenuous for him to talk down on methods that other people use because they aren't fortunate enough to have the same resources he so importantly utilized.

For what it is worth, I usually try and blend in and stay subtly in the background when I am shooting. I prefer the candid, natural scenes of people which usually disappear when the camera is spotted. To be fair, as Doady stated, street shots with ultra zoom lenses don't capture the street in the same manner as a 35-50 mm. Regardless, it simply isn't practical or possible to get to know all your subjects, especially when traveling.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, one could just go around taking photos like this:

• Video Link

pretty sure this was posted here before a while back

[Xander202]

Okayyou, thanks for your input, means a lot. Its interesting you know Allen too considering, like you said, we have a similar style. For people like us Allen really is quite ultimate and something to aspire to.

BUT you hit the nail on the head. He has so much in the way of resources. Like you said, he can just sit at home and wait until the bbc call him saying "you are going to see a tribe in the middle of Papua New Guinea, everything is paid for and arranged, and here are a few new cameras and lenses". I would kill for that!

Incidently, I wasn't really arguing about the use of massive zoom lens, I also agree with that (to an extent), I was more concerned with his attitude to candid shots. For my travel shots I don't use anything longer than 135mm, and it is not great so I tend to use a 50mm 1.4, or 17-50mm 2.8.

[diskojoe]

Originally Posted by Xander202

I had a feeling you would bring up your 100 strangers project (which I love by the way). It seems you have become very proud of your increased confidence in approaching people, which is great, and the results have also been fantastic (I have been following them). However, don't forget you took some equally brilliant people shots that had a far more candid approach before you began your project.

Very correct. I think people should do both. I love taking long range candids still but there is something great about going up and meeting new people. I dont really agree with the way that guy presented his point but he brings up some good points. But theres no way im giving up my 70-210mm. You can pry it from my cold dead hands. but ive used it for portraits. its great.

[Via Chicago]

I agree with him. I really dont do street photography, but look at the greats. Just about all use compact cameras/primes and get close to their subjects. Zooms have always felt like a crutch to me. It feels like a one-sided act. When you get close, theres a certain physical dialogue and conversation that takes place with the subject and photographer. Its raw and real, and thats what makes great photography.

The single best thing anyone can do for their photography is to step out of their comfort zones. This style of shooting forces you to do that.

[fishrose]

Originally Posted by Via Chicago

I agree with him. I really dont do street photography, but look at the greats. Just about all use compact cameras/primes and get close to their subjects. Zooms have always felt like a crutch to me. It feels like a one-sided act. When you get close, theres a certain physical dialogue and conversation that takes place with the subject and photographer. Its raw and real, and thats what makes great photography.

The single best thing anyone can do for their photography is to step out of their comfort zones. This style of shooting forces you to do that.

It's not about a comfort zone for me. When people notice me taking their picture I talk to them and sometimes ask if I can take a few more. I don't feel weird about it, but I don't go out looking for "portraits." I approach street photography like nature photography. I want to be a passive, invisible bystander capturing the everyday activities of people in their natural habitat. THAT'S raw and real.

I don't always use a telephoto, in fact, until recently I didn't have one to use. Lens/camera selection for me is about scouting my surroundings and understanding the right tool for the job. If I'm in New York City, I can use my 18-55mm kit lens on my D40 or my 50mm f/1.8 on my AE-1 because people won't pay me any attention. If I'm here in Detroit, a longer lens can be useful because people take notice of someone walking around with a professional-looking camera and try to be "polite" and get out of my shot. If I can sit somewhere with my 75-205mm zoom lens, I can be more discrete and capture images of people interacting with their urban environment.

It all comes down to artistic vision, really. We all have our own eyes to see, our own minds to think, and our own hearts to feel. This is a beautiful thing, because it gives each photographer's work its own, unique vibe. I'd be willing to bet that professional photographer you idolize didn't become what he is today by copying others. He figured out what he wanted to show the world, and how he wanted to show it, and he practiced and honed his technique until his style turned into something extraordinary. Take what you will from his photos and his statements, but don't be afraid to do your own thing.

[LSyd]

Originally Posted by Robert Capa

If your pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough

Originally Posted by Gary Winogrand

There is nothing as mysterious as a fact clearly described I like to think of photographing as a two way act of respect. Respect for the medium, by letting it do what it does best, describe. And respect for the subject, by describing it as it is. A photograph must be responsible to both

and i think this is definitely true and describes my happy medium:

Originally Posted by diskojoe

Very correct. I think people should do both. I love taking long range candids still but there is something great about going up and meeting new people. I dont really agree with the way that guy presented his point but he brings up some good points. But theres no way im giving up my 70-210mm. You can pry it from my cold dead hands. but ive used it for portraits. its great.

personally, i love being in close to medium range, and i like showing the person in his or her environment/surroundings as opposed to a close-up. i've only had two people in almost a decade get pissed off.

-

[flar]

I don't usually ask to take photos of people. I like to take completely candid shots, as if the people are simply part of the scenery.

Shorter lenses usually get better results. I walked right up to this woman and took her picture. If I had asked, do you think she would have agreed?



So what if people object? I don't care. When you walk outside in public you are videotaped and photographed almost everywhere you go.

The downside of not asking is that you can't use photos for commercial purposes without a release. You can still use it for editorial or artistic purposes.

I don't recommend photographing kids without asking the parents, but adults are fair game, especially if they have an appearance that begs for attention.

[diskojoe]

I agree with the point about no photographing kids. When Im out kids pop up in the pics alot but usually the only i post are of my own kids.

[mr.John]

Here's a few candid shots I took the last couple of years, but I must admit I haven't taken anything decent for quite awhile, I'm on a major losing streak

[photoLith]

Last guy looks like hes done way too much chew in his life.

[mr.John]

Since everyone seems to be too lazy to post their shots here's a few more oldies

[diskojoe]

Dont want John to be the only one posting.....








POSTER WALL BLOWNOUT by DiskoJoe, on Flickr