| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/16/2009 11:22:03 AM · #76 |
Century mark!
Votes: 100
Views: 188
Avg Vote: 5.8000
Comments: 3
Favorites: 1 |
|
|
|
07/16/2009 11:24:55 AM · #77 |
Originally posted by Jutilda:
As an observer, not having entered, I'm having a hard time voting higher than a 6. Sorry, but most look like over exposed snapshots, or to me, don't really suit the edgy feel of what I think street photography should be. (sigh) |
Strange but one of the comments I received was similar to that. (Not from you though). I guess, as mentioned previously, the genre can tough to nail down. I think in a lot of cases we can point at a picture and say "that's street photography"....it just seems that we're all pointing at different images. |
|
|
|
07/16/2009 11:59:00 AM · #78 |
Originally posted by Citadel:
Originally posted by Jutilda:
As an observer, not having entered, I'm having a hard time voting higher than a 6. Sorry, but most look like over exposed snapshots, or to me, don't really suit the edgy feel of what I think street photography should be. (sigh) |
Strange but one of the comments I received was similar to that. (Not from you though). I guess, as mentioned previously, the genre can tough to nail down. I think in a lot of cases we can point at a picture and say "that's street photography"....it just seems that we're all pointing at different images. |
It's an incredibly broad topic. When you study the images or photographers, exemplar of the genre, while wide reaching, there are still very rich common threads to their work. It's the complexity of those pictures that seems to elude many viewers. Sometimes very subtle...too subtle and that may be the issue.
Message edited by author 2009-07-16 12:04:04. |
|
|
|
07/16/2009 12:03:34 PM · #79 |
The problem is that edgy photos usually are the rough side of life. If you live in the middle of suburbia, you're not going to get the deep, morose, edgy photos that people like in street photography. All you can hope for is an interesting slice of life.
|
|
|
|
07/16/2009 12:28:35 PM · #80 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
The problem is that edgy photos usually are the rough side of life. If you live in the middle of suburbia, you're not going to get the deep, morose, edgy photos that people like in street photography. All you can hope for is an interesting slice of life. |
The best stuff, the legendary images have little if nothing to do with that (morose, dark etc.) stuff which is a common misconception and perhaps where people go off the rail. Some of my personal favorites involve dogs and they exist everywhere. My guess is since streets tend to be naturally gritty, that single element sadly, has become a focal point or a constant.
Look at Elliott Erwitt, HCB or Winogrand to name a few and you'll see none of that heavy, filthy, homeless stuff but images with a lot of thought, irony, geometry and depth behind them. I think the word edge should be substituted with sensitivity or a personal "edge" that the photographer brings to the table. Bresson and many of the most respected SP's speak to that particular ability.
Check out The Impassioned Eye-HCB, one of many interviews loaded with pearls of wisdom, that get to what I think is the heart of the genre. However much the style has morphed or been watered down he still spoke to the core elements that endure and make it a special form.
A lot of people point the camera and wail away but there's not much to what they are showing, which is common.
eta: An Elliott Erwitt interview... Pretty cool stuff.
Message edited by author 2009-07-16 16:24:01. |
|
|
|
07/16/2009 03:06:44 PM · #81 |
score is a little static at the moment
Votes: 111
Views: 186
Avg Vote: 6.5946
Comments: 4
Message edited by author 2009-07-16 16:23:16. |
|
|
|
07/16/2009 04:26:20 PM · #82 |
| Erwitt's are poignant and have meaning AND they are all in black and white. I think that neutralizes the colors and we can focus more on the subject when other things are going on. I love his work. Thanks for showing. |
|
|
|
07/16/2009 04:39:10 PM · #83 |
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Originally posted by vawendy:
The problem is that edgy photos usually are the rough side of life. If you live in the middle of suburbia, you're not going to get the deep, morose, edgy photos that people like in street photography. All you can hope for is an interesting slice of life. |
The best stuff, the legendary images have little if nothing to do with that (morose, dark etc.) stuff which is a common misconception and perhaps where people go off the rail. Some of my personal favorites involve dogs and they exist everywhere. My guess is since streets tend to be naturally gritty, that single element sadly, has become a focal point or a constant.
Look at Elliott Erwitt, HCB or Winogrand to name a few and you'll see none of that heavy, filthy, homeless stuff but images with a lot of thought, irony, geometry and depth behind them. I think the word edge should be substituted with sensitivity or a personal "edge" that the photographer brings to the table. Bresson and many of the most respected SP's speak to that particular ability.
Check out The Impassioned Eye-HCB, one of many interviews loaded with pearls of wisdom, that get to what I think is the heart of the genre. However much the style has morphed or been watered down he still spoke to the core elements that endure and make it a special form.
A lot of people point the camera and wail away but there's not much to what they are showing, which is common.
eta: An Elliott Erwitt interview... Pretty cool stuff. |
That's why I'm seeing significantly different pictures in the challenge. The definition that I was looking at was saying that street photography was capturing a moment in the life--either poignant, tender, happy. That street photography was more about the people. Erwitt's stuff was incredible, but completely different from the definition I was going by (the dog photo, especially). It also make sense why people are thinking that many of the photos in the challenge are snapshots. When you are going for the shot of people interacting, there's not much you can do about background, clutter, etc. You're very limited because you're catching a moment. I like the combination of definitions, though I have a feeling that people are voting on one vs the other. It's been a strange combination of votes--a number of 10s and many 4s.
Thanks for the links, though. I'm going to go back and look at them more closely. There's some spectacular images and spectacular ideas there. |
|
|
|
07/17/2009 12:35:13 AM · #84 |
Originally posted by vawendy:
It also make sense why people are thinking that many of the photos in the challenge are snapshots. When you are going for the shot of people interacting, there's not much you can do about background, clutter, etc. You're very limited because you're catching a moment. |
That's what makes good street photography SO good, because the photographer has managed to catch a combination of these things all in a single frame, it's also what makes it so hard and why I imagine a large number of the photos in the challenge appear like snapshots. |
|
|
|
07/17/2009 01:33:49 AM · #85 |
IMO the background can often be quite interesting,
here for example in this image.
but if you really don't want it there as you feel it could be a distraction then a shallow DOF will usually deal with it
such as here
Oh yeah my score...
well i seem to have suffered a barage of low scores over night in both this and the flower entry, has anyone else seen that trend?
Votes: 127
Views: 209
Avg Vote: 6.4646
Comments: 4
Message edited by author 2009-07-17 01:36:29. |
|
|
|
07/17/2009 07:38:34 AM · #86 |
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
but if you really don't want it there as you feel it could be a distraction then a shallow DOF will usually deal with it
such as here
|
Now, you see if I were judging, I wouldn't call that a street shot but a portrait (a candid portrait (?) which I have many of in my folder) because the street is irrelevant to the shot. I see no connection with the energy, geometry, soul etc. for me to qualify it. The other shot, while scant, does have a small drop of that energy but not much.
There's no dof rules, of course but you could say as you employ shallower depths of field you are both literally and figuratively removing/blurring the street from the image. So in essence, taking it away. No a rule there, again but interesting to think about. I don't want to be misinterpreted by people thinking I'm saying "you need to see the street" but the essence needs to show, in some way as I see it.
Message edited by author 2009-07-17 08:10:44. |
|
|
|
07/17/2009 09:51:37 AM · #87 |
I posted these shots in response to  vawendy raising the point about background and not as a definition of street photography.
However we must be very careful about being too definitive as it starts to become restrictive.
The beauty of this site is that we get to interpret the challenge as we see fit, and the voters get to agree or disagree as they see fit.
|
|
|
|
07/17/2009 10:34:04 AM · #88 |
Originally posted by Lutchenko:
However we must be very careful about being too definitive as it starts to become restrictive.
The beauty of this site is that we get to interpret the challenge as we see fit, and the voters get to agree or disagree as they see fit. |
I go a little crazy when people say I'm being restrictive. Cubism is Cubism and there are elements that make it so. Again, SP is about so many things...moments, alignments, geometry, numbers, interaction, energy, movement, humor, the human condition, light and shadow play and much more BUT critically important is how they intertwine... or to the point, often it's what is critically missing.
In what way could all those things, all those options, at our disposal be in any way, restrictive? Even as I see it, it's still wide, wide open. If I see no interaction or some depth on any level...well, ya know. Sometimes a portrait's just a portrait, no matter where it was taken. I take my fair share of portraits out in the street but I call them portraits or Street Portraits but it's still a different animal (not as a rule, there are always exceptions).
Minus the text I'd call that a portrait but it straddles a bit into the SP realm because you can feel some Streets energy in the image. The subject also embodies some of that energy but as an SP shot, it's weak. IMO, it's stronger or more firmly set as a portrait.
I look for relationships born out of the Street (as a shooter and a viewer). They are everywhere and as Erwitt says in the video I posted, all you have to do is "look".
As for clutter...I love it. If it's there, it belongs there and if it catches the eye so be it.
OK...back to the scores. Hope I didn't take up too much space.
Message edited by author 2009-07-18 13:30:32. |
|
|
|
07/17/2009 11:09:16 AM · #89 |
| It's really funny but the typical b/w street photography is turning into the dpc waterdrop shot for me. No matter how amazing it is everything is starting to look the same. I'm glad we did the colour challenge.. brings a bit of diversity. |
|
|
|
07/17/2009 11:20:42 AM · #90 |
Hey Steve I never said you were being restrictive I just said that being too definitive is restrictive
Votes: 133
Views: 225
Avg Vote: 6.4361
Comments: 4
Message edited by author 2009-07-17 11:21:14. |
|
|
|
07/17/2009 05:03:35 PM · #91 |
it's very quiet on here chaps
Votes: 141
Views: 235
Avg Vote: 6.4823
Comments: 4 |
|
|
|
07/17/2009 06:24:00 PM · #92 |
Six very positive comments, one tepid score.
Votes: 148
Views: 283
Avg Vote: 5.0338
Comments: 6
Favorites: 0
|
|
|
|
07/17/2009 08:41:03 PM · #93 |
i agree with pawdrix 100%
there are definitions for street photograhy
without demeaning anyone..there are photos where someone sit and sets up the sceen and theres are photos where one IS at the scene and decides when to take tha shot
Message edited by author 2009-07-17 20:43:20. |
|
|
|
07/18/2009 02:17:58 AM · #94 |
Getting towards the home straight now
Votes: 194
Views: 321
Avg Vote: 6.4897
Comments: 6
Favorites:
Message edited by author 2009-07-20 13:12:01. |
|
|
|
07/20/2009 03:24:09 PM · #95 |
I voted based on what I feel street photography to be: non-posed, photojournalistic style/candid images of people.
That being said, my average vote apparently was like 2.85.
Trends for this challenge:
Stalking photos...stuff taken with long lenses of people far away, with their backs turned.
Out of focus/soft focused (a lot im sure due to using long, slow lenses and suffering from camera shake.
Pictures of city blocks.
Definitely found a few gems on there, that were really beautifully done. |
|
|
|
07/20/2009 04:13:01 PM · #96 |
200 vote check-in.
Votes: 200
Views: 343
Avg Vote: 5.4550
|
|
|
|
07/20/2009 04:40:48 PM · #97 |
Votes: 200
Views: 483
Avg Vote: 5.8800
Comments: 4 |
|
|
|
07/20/2009 06:19:36 PM · #98 |
Well many thanks to the idiot who just dished out the 1s
Votes: 199
Views: 328
Avg Vote: 6.4171
Comments: 6
Favorites: 1 |
|
|
|
07/20/2009 08:08:10 PM · #99 |
Nine positive comments -- and I might break a 5.1!
Votes: 201
Views: 392
Avg Vote: 5.0945
Comments: 9
Favorites: 0
|
|
|
|
07/21/2009 02:58:21 AM · #100 |
200 vote check-in (don't get many of those)
Votes: 200
Views: 314
Avg Vote: 5.7700
Comments: 4 |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/12/2025 09:04:49 AM EDT.
