- This topic is empty.
Q: What does the term "Street Photography" mean?
-
What does the term “Street Photography” mean to you?
Do you have to take the photograph on a street?
Does it have to have a street in the photograph?
Does it have to have people in it?I’m curious.
Apologies if this has been asked before. I did a quick search but got thousands of hits (probably for the word photography).
I don’t know anything about street photography but my vision of it would be the capture of daily life.
Don’ know if thats a hindrance or a help.Stephen.
I can’t remember where I read it (it was online somewhere), but I like the definition that SP is photographing people in their environment so that would be similar to your “capture of daily life” Big Fella.
For me people should be in the shot but it’s not always necessary*.
Also, I don’t believe it has to be taken on a street. It could be taken in a shop, a cafe or a train station for example.
Other than that anything goes.
I should say that I am new to “Street Photography” so my definition may change over time as I evolve as a photographer.
*I do like people in the photo but one of my favorite photographs is by Magnum photographer Richard Kalvar and is of a dog sitting on the street (“Tired Dog”) .
http://www.in-public.com/RichardKalvar/image/2190
I think for me the SP arguement is simple. I would say SP is shooting in a public area and the shot is candid.
Now before someone jumps in say something silly like “what about a football match, that’s public”, of course the shot should
be in an urban street enviornment.To be honest though i really think the candid nature and non-staged enviornment is key to successful photography.
GrahamB wrote:
[…] of course the shot should be in an urban street enviornment.
So, does that rule out any candid shots taken in a rural environment, i.e in the countryside? (I’m not trying to be smart here.)
Street photography is a type of documentary photography that features subjects in candid situations within public places such as streets, parks, beaches, and other settings..
I think Dave, it’s one of those questions that there is no concise answer to. The term “street photography” is really just a label, like any other label and can be made to suit lots of very different photography. A lot of photography that is classed as “street” could just as easily be called documentary or candid or even architectural sometimes. Also what about the many shots of graffiti..right Graham…:wink:…that you see online …not a person in sight..but a lot of people still class it as “street”.
Give it any label ya like in the end…a good shot is a good shot :D
My brief thoughts:
1) It must contain a person or persons (in shops, cafes, the street per Dave’s thoughts) and not just a picture of a street. I think that we have photos in this section of just streets :)
2) Documentary – I agree with RGH.
3) Should be candid and not stagedJust my initial thoughts on it :)
I’d say its photojournalism or documentary photography featuring subjects shot in public places and mostly candidly.
Should be candid and not staged
I dunno, if you ask someone if it’s okay to photograph them then the results tend to be more portraity than candid.
I’ve seen some great street portraits of individuals that I’d class as street photography but could just as easily sit within the category of portraiture.Definitely think it has to be in an urban environment, it’s a photo taken documenting street life (this would include ‘permissioned’ portraits of everyday people out and about on the streets, as well as random people shots and shots documenting the look of a street – with or without people).
does that rule out any candid shots taken in a rural environment
Depends what you mean by a rural environment. Rural to me is farmlands; farmers, farms and backroads. I wouldn’t class a candid shot of Jimbob Doohickey walking down a country lane watching cows pretending not to read the sunday sports supplement as street photography. Once you get into towns and villages, micro urban environments, the rules would apply.Mick451 wrote:
Should be candid and not staged
I dunno, if you ask someone if it’s okay to photograph them then the results tend to be more portraity than candid.
I’ve seen some great street portraits of individuals that I’d class as street photography but could just as easily sit within the category of portraiture.I would agree with it being okay to ask someone if it’s okay to photography them. I was at a talk by Les McLean, who has some really nice SP work, and he said that part of SP for him is talking to people. I’m doing a workshop with him in Dublin in March and looking forward to seeing how he tackles approaching people and also the candid side of things.
I saw a post on another forum, where somebody in the UK was giving up trying to take candids for his personal safety since he had been abused by some people who noticed him doing candid work. He said that he now finds it much simpler to ask the subject for permission to photograph as it saves grief but does miss the candid side of things.
David
Street Photography is like Documentary Photography but instead of a series of images covering an event or telling a story, a single image tells the story and is often surreal, abstract, ironic, open to interpretation, kind of like a painting or a poem.
Of course Street Photography means different things to different people and is just a label at the end of the day but that’s what I see when I look at the masters… Winogrand, Meyerowitz, HCB etc.
It doesn’t need to be restricted to the street either. Beaches, parks, supetmarkets… it’s more about the style and content than the location.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
