Show us your Street Photography.... 4

Welcome to Dyxum Frederick.

You need to read about Posting Images and Links.

Also have a look at what I used for URLs for those two shots (use Post Options/Edit).

Edited by brettania - 12 June 2009 at 15:25

I still think that many of the shots in the threads with this topic are simply shots taken in streets (subjects in environments), or streetscapes, rather than ones which meet the strict definition of "street photography" where there is a greater "focus" on the people in view.

There's some good reading material here.

NOTE: The comment above is not aimed at any specific individual.

Edited by brettania - 12 June 2009 at 15:23

People are missing the point with "Street Photography" in a number of different ways, and I take brettania's comment to be addressed to a number of us who are missing the point for a variety of reasons.

"Street Photography" isn't exactly my strong point, but I'll take a stab at clarifying. My layman's definition of Street Photography is that it tightly focuses on a stranger and tells a story of the interaction between that stranger and the environment they are in.

The first two pictures on this page, by fchesenau, are interesting pictures, but they are not street photography. The first is a picture OF a street, and the second is a picture FROM a street. To be street photography, they would have to include a person in them interacting with the scene.

Your two pictures come closer. In the first one, if you were cropped in closer so that the picture was more tightly focused on the girl on the sidewalk and the "speed dating" graffiti beneath her, it would be a great, funny bit of street photography. But framed way back the way it is now, it's a scene on a street, with some random people doing random things.

In your second one, if again you were much closer and included just the three people and the sailboat they are looking at, you would be have a workable bit of street photography. Framed way back where you are now, there are many focal points, and when there are many there are really none. It's a nice scene, but not street photography. Not tightly focused, telling a story.

That's my take, for what it's worth.

Edited by wross - 12 June 2009 at 16:36

Ach! Ignore MiPr! He's colorblind anyway!

I enjoy doing some sort of a mix between street photography, subjects in environments and environmental portraits, but here are some criteria which I think have to be satisfied in order for a photograph to be called street photograph.

- people are shown in an outdoor scene/situation or city environment

- it should not be a portrait of the human depicted, the person is not meant as a private person but stands as anonymous figure showing and describing live nowadays in the streets. The persons are only protagonists for the everyday human situation.

- in a good street photograph all the elements work together, only the combination of the environment/background, the human and the pose/situation together make the photo.


I agree with everyone who has commented above, except for MiPr
Richard is right in saying that many times photos are pressed into some genres without necessity, because the only thing that counts is that it's an appealing photo. But in an area as the themed views, I think the photos should be posted in categories which should fit the photos, and I agree with Cameron that many I count very few of the photos posted here lately as true street photographs

Bigger

Hi Brettania,

Thank you, I noticed afterwards that I posted wrong but didn't have time to change it yet.

I am posting one more as part of this reply, hope it's ok. I think it's more in keeping with the theme.



Edited by fchesneau - 13 June 2009 at 00:33