-
Thank You For Visiting... Please Click Here and sign up to contribute
What Is It?
- Thread starter Tommy
- Start date
just great tones in this - like it for that alone
If you discard any awareness of meaning and just accept it as an abstract it still works , and thats the appeal for me
If you discard any awareness of meaning and just accept it as an abstract it still works , and thats the appeal for me
Doesn't need a title it tells its own story, well captured and processed. Not keen on the frame though.
Norman
Norman
Tantalising shot, brilliant PP work and tones,-- superb picture Tommy,
Geoff
Geoff
A nicely processed image Tommy and I mean no offence but I have to declare my hand in that I personally really dislike this kind of photography as I consider it rude and an intrusion of privacy so I hope you guys will forgive me if I don't comment on the like. I have no objection regarding general street shots but when individuals are deliberately targetted then I draw the line.
how do you mean deliberately targeted Keith?
Iv'e shot loads like this at fairs etc so Im interested in your objections to such shooting
This is purely a personal thing and I mean no disrespect to the photographer so I'll try and explain.
These three people are engaged in a personal activity which does not concern anyone else as far as I can see and as they are are in a public place (presumably) they will no doubt have been subject to passing glances, which is only natural. Here, the photographer has invaded their privacy by capturing this moment and potentially displaying it world-wide - almost certainly without permission, and this is the difference - a passing glance is just that, gone in a flash, a digital image will exist somewhere almost indefinitely whether the subjects like it or not.
Let me ask a question: would you have walked this close up to the group and just stood there watching and listening to what they were doing? I hope you would have more good manners than that so why do you think it's ok to do it photographically?
These three people are engaged in a personal activity which does not concern anyone else as far as I can see and as they are are in a public place (presumably) they will no doubt have been subject to passing glances, which is only natural. Here, the photographer has invaded their privacy by capturing this moment and potentially displaying it world-wide - almost certainly without permission, and this is the difference - a passing glance is just that, gone in a flash, a digital image will exist somewhere almost indefinitely whether the subjects like it or not.
Let me ask a question: would you have walked this close up to the group and just stood there watching and listening to what they were doing? I hope you would have more good manners than that so why do you think it's ok to do it photographically?
I'm a bit with Keith on this. I appreciate one has to be discreet, but sometimes I just find it best to say hello and ask if it OK to take some pictures. And, like the first picture in my opening post, it might cost 50p for a cup of tea. It was worth it, I'd have given the chap £1. The problem is I just don't like the back of people's heads. I do like the structure, but I'd like to know the subject matter.
I took a picture last summer, b&w, a load of monks sitting around and it sort of lined up to the main guy reading a letter, the letter being a small but the key part of the image. I find it difficult to get these sorts of images right - composition, subject, light, all at once and often in a fleeting moment. The good thing about monks is that they are quite slow.
I took a picture last summer, b&w, a load of monks sitting around and it sort of lined up to the main guy reading a letter, the letter being a small but the key part of the image. I find it difficult to get these sorts of images right - composition, subject, light, all at once and often in a fleeting moment. The good thing about monks is that they are quite slow.
I personally have no compunction whatsoever about shooting people in such an environment. (assuming it's some sort of 'fair' or market and not their back garden).
I ask myself if it would bother me if I had been in the shot - the answer's no, not a bit
-
well within the accepted tradition of street photography IMO
I ask myself if it would bother me if I had been in the shot - the answer's no, not a bit
-
well within the accepted tradition of street photography IMO
What can I say.
Well this comes as a bit of a surprise and to be very honest I was annoyed when I read Keith's post. I have just had a quick look through quite a few hundred photos I have taken quite recently and yes there is a very large percentage of them of street type photography. Perhaps it is because people fascinate me in different walks of life and when I capture an instance I consider it as just a moment in time which improves in its form as time progresses and the only people who ever see my photos are this forum members.
When I read phrases such as; lack of good manners, rude, intrusion of privacy and deliberately targeted when relating to one of my photos, it has made me sit back and think about my life long hobby which I now consider is in need of a rest as I clearly do not know what is socially acceptable in this digital age.
Well this comes as a bit of a surprise and to be very honest I was annoyed when I read Keith's post. I have just had a quick look through quite a few hundred photos I have taken quite recently and yes there is a very large percentage of them of street type photography. Perhaps it is because people fascinate me in different walks of life and when I capture an instance I consider it as just a moment in time which improves in its form as time progresses and the only people who ever see my photos are this forum members.
When I read phrases such as; lack of good manners, rude, intrusion of privacy and deliberately targeted when relating to one of my photos, it has made me sit back and think about my life long hobby which I now consider is in need of a rest as I clearly do not know what is socially acceptable in this digital age.
I'm sure no offence was meant by Keith or anyone. It was certainly my long held view that it is extremely difficult to take a good picture of people without their knowledge, unless they are asleep or dead, especially with a 35mm or 50mm lens. Small, quick, discrete manual focus cameras, like little Fujifilm and Leica models, make it easier. It is a matter of judgement if you think you were interfering and I don't think that you were on this occasion. I've taken pictures in restaurants, I can think of some recent examples, and either I am a terrible photographer (probably the case) or there is a lot of luck involved. Marches, demos and riots have good pickings. My wife gets used to it and my camera is discreet (black, no badges, no flash, small). The other problem is, of course, isolating the subject matter, which it really helps to do wide open and close, but I think you have done well.
I posted a shot of a tramp lying eyes closed on the pavement propped against the wall once and got lots of negative comments. People said he might be dead and how could I etc. They weren't there. I was . I felt it was fine and it was. (and I had seen him round for years )
The commentors weren't there - and I think it is that which maters
You judge these situations as you find them and you just cannot know or especially feel whether something is right or wrong if you're not there at the time.
We humans are sensitive creatures, more so the aesthetic types like us arty photogs, so I am 100% confident you were aware of your surroundings and if there was a reason not to take it then you wouldn't have done so.
When we see a pic we feel uncomfortable with, it may be that we visualise ourselves in that situation being shot and decide we would have felt uncomfortable in it and there fore the actual subject would likely feel the same way, but we can't know that , at all.
Hasn't put me off taking shots of tramps, or anything else for that matter.
In fact I am now more insistent that I , me, be the judge of what I want to shoot rather than anyone else nowadays as we have the "you might be a terrorist" squad hassling us at every turn. So Krickers to that I say - Unless it's a military base or kids I'll shoot what I like , when I like and argue for my right to do so .
Having said thatI am also respectful of the VIBE the feeling I have when taking a pic and respond to that as much as the photo opportunity I see before me so I weigh it all up in a split second and my INSTINCTS tell me whether it is ok or not
So I'm not being bossy about my right to shoot all and everything , just that it is my call, and if Im happy with it I may well post it. After all our own judgement is all we have to go on unless we are going to accept censure at avery turn, so I would encourage you to stick with your instincts and to TRUST them
Last edited:
Tommy its the other persons comments only and not a personal attack on what you do, we talked about this last week, you know my feelings, I am unsure if its right or wrong to intrude on privacy when it comes to photography, in most circumstance its not breaking any laws its a matter of choice.
One thing I do know is if attitudes about capturing people in their everyday work or play years ago was like it is now we would not have a pictorial record of the past.
The trouble unlike yesteryears' when there was a handful of people photographers is there is simply to many doing the same under the guis of street photographer and its a a little boring and of no practical interest, at least not now, who knows in years to come, they might be, I doubt it, unless the images tell us something of this time or a story without words.
I would say as Simon does if you are comfortable and enjoy what you do then carry on regardless of other peoples honest opinions and that's all they are.
Regards
Martin
One thing I do know is if attitudes about capturing people in their everyday work or play years ago was like it is now we would not have a pictorial record of the past.
The trouble unlike yesteryears' when there was a handful of people photographers is there is simply to many doing the same under the guis of street photographer and its a a little boring and of no practical interest, at least not now, who knows in years to come, they might be, I doubt it, unless the images tell us something of this time or a story without words.
I would say as Simon does if you are comfortable and enjoy what you do then carry on regardless of other peoples honest opinions and that's all they are.
Regards
Martin
I think it is a rather good capture, obviously taken at a show or country fair of some sort, a very public place, and very much in the spirit of street photography, a genre which has a long and distinguished history.
For what it is worth I actually think that the vast majority of street photography nowadays is awful, a poor excuse for random, ill-considered snapping. Composition doesn't seem to be a factor of any importance whatsoever. Deluges of these dreadful images seem to be posted up on various forums. The complete poverty of interest or artistry is the greater crime for me.
Personally, I don't like posting up pictures that I have taken of individuals without their consent. It does make me uneasy, but I reitereate, that is a very personal feeling. There are some very good street photographers who post in this forum, and I have no problem with their choice. I have been pulled up for posting photos of individual headstones in my Somme project on another forum, again because the respondent had questions over the ethics of doing so. He too acknowledged that it was a personal feeling, and accepted my reasons for doing so.
Keep up the good work Tommy.
For what it is worth I actually think that the vast majority of street photography nowadays is awful, a poor excuse for random, ill-considered snapping. Composition doesn't seem to be a factor of any importance whatsoever. Deluges of these dreadful images seem to be posted up on various forums. The complete poverty of interest or artistry is the greater crime for me.
Personally, I don't like posting up pictures that I have taken of individuals without their consent. It does make me uneasy, but I reitereate, that is a very personal feeling. There are some very good street photographers who post in this forum, and I have no problem with their choice. I have been pulled up for posting photos of individual headstones in my Somme project on another forum, again because the respondent had questions over the ethics of doing so. He too acknowledged that it was a personal feeling, and accepted my reasons for doing so.
Keep up the good work Tommy.
Thanks guys for your replies which have been most interesting and informative. Perhaps, in hindsight, I should have given a little information about how and why I took this photo on the day. I did go to a autumn fair with the intention of getting a few photos and took one camera and one lens, a 90mm. I walked around freely and had really good conversations with a lot of people which luckily I find very easy to do. I did acknowledge quite a number of people that I took their photo off by a little lift of my camera or hand and always with a smile which was always retorted. I never tried to hide but quite the opposite and always took my time when seeing the potential and took every photo with the camera to my eye. Having spent about three hours there and relishing twice in their food tent to the finest "Women's Institute" baking I headed home having enjoyed one of my best days photography in a long time.
Why did I take that particular photo posted. To me it was all about two old guys, about my age, sharing a little knowledge or information with a young lad and obviously being very content in each others company. That immediately struck a chord in me and I immediately wanted to capture that moment, but also making sure that I did not capture the young lads face. As I have said before, I absolutely love taking these type of photos and as Simon quite rightly says it all happens in a split second and you do have to go with your instinct and take it from there. There are good and not so good photos in all genres and "people" images are no different.
This has been interesting to say the least and I totally understand why some forum members may have some issues or likewise with this type of photography. Perhaps the eloquent comments by everyone has helped in some small way, why some of us are fascinated with this type of photography.
Why did I take that particular photo posted. To me it was all about two old guys, about my age, sharing a little knowledge or information with a young lad and obviously being very content in each others company. That immediately struck a chord in me and I immediately wanted to capture that moment, but also making sure that I did not capture the young lads face. As I have said before, I absolutely love taking these type of photos and as Simon quite rightly says it all happens in a split second and you do have to go with your instinct and take it from there. There are good and not so good photos in all genres and "people" images are no different.
This has been interesting to say the least and I totally understand why some forum members may have some issues or likewise with this type of photography. Perhaps the eloquent comments by everyone has helped in some small way, why some of us are fascinated with this type of photography.