DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Street Photography tips?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 71, (reverse)
AuthorThread
03/13/2008 04:22:07 PM · #1
I spent the day in downtown San Jose yesterday trying to take photos of people on the street. I took a few candid shots but my goal was to ask permission and interact with the strangers on the street. I would approach the person, make some comment about what they were doing, or a compliment about their clothing or hat, etc. Then explain what I was doing and ask if they would mind if I took a photo of them. I asked 12 people and only had 3 who said yes. I expected much more than that.

So any tips for getting people to pose for you on the street?

03/13/2008 04:24:59 PM · #2
If youre doing street photography, use a zoom lense and capture them in their natural state. Candids to me are way better than asking. The moment they ask, they get all stiff and pose. Just shoot. I'ts not illegal to photograph people in public.

You might get a few nasty stares, but thats about it. I just do. Most dont even realize I capture them.
03/13/2008 04:57:49 PM · #3
Originally posted by Moose408:

I spent the day in downtown San Jose yesterday trying to take photos of people on the street. I took a few candid shots but my goal was to ask permission and interact with the strangers on the street. I would approach the person, make some comment about what they were doing, or a compliment about their clothing or hat, etc. Then explain what I was doing and ask if they would mind if I took a photo of them. I asked 12 people and only had 3 who said yes. I expected much more than that.

So any tips for getting people to pose for you on the street?


I would say...don't ask, just shoot. I would loosely define what you're attempting to do as Street Portraiture. That can be done well or come off very stiff. That's how I would define it for myself but I believe you will get more interesting images and genuine reactions if you stayed stealthy. Street Portraiture is tough and agreesive and happens on the street but I wouldn't necessarily call it Street Photography but you can define this stuff for yourself just don't expect everyone to understand or agree on the terminology.

Many of the great Street Photographers hid their cameras. I think Henri-Cartier Bresson hid his within a handkerchief, for example. Someone (Gordon) correct me if I'm wrong, please. A common lens they used was a 50mm ...which is approx. a 35mm on a 1.5x crop (give or take).

One question: What is it that you are "doing" that you explained to the people you approached?

Message edited by author 2008-03-14 22:12:36.
03/13/2008 04:58:46 PM · #4
Here's an interesting link:

Street Photography for the Purist
("download" link on the left to get the .pdf)

It's a 170 page document that essentially tells you that you CAN NOT capture "good" street photography with an SLR, digital or not. I own a D-SLR so I obviously disagree with that point. However, I feel that this document has taught me A LOT about photography in general and it was a fascinating read.

See if you can read it without getting caught up in the heated debate on gear, but see the points on photography in general.

Oh, and the sample B&W images that are scattered throughout the document - MAGNIFICENT (not the type that will win you ribbons here though). I would recommend the download if only just for them.

Message edited by author 2008-03-13 16:59:56.
03/13/2008 05:07:36 PM · #5
Originally posted by JaimeVinas:

I'ts not illegal to photograph people in public.


I would be careful when saying that. Here in Quebec, it is not illegal to take the photograph, however you do need the subjects written permission to be able to display it publically. The only exception is if the photo depicts a news event. So if I take a shot of someone on the street and post it on this site I am open to a law suit for invasion of privacy or some such thing if I don't have a model release.
03/13/2008 05:10:42 PM · #6
I find candids typically impersonal and voyeuristic. More so when they are taken with a long lens. There's a disconnect from the subject that is pretty apparent in most of that sort of work that doesn't sit well with me, personally. I know a lot of people like that style, but I really enjoy getting up close. The candid images of HCB and others were done with a wide angle lens which gives them their intimacy and connection.

As to approaching someone, the interaction becomes stiff and posed if you make it stiff and posed. Almost all my street shooting is done face to face about 3 feet from the person and I don't think it looks stiff - the subject is aware and engaged, hopefully. Mostly though I'm doing street portraits rather than street photography in the more general sense.

I've tried a variety of different approaches from:

The long elaborate explanation, about some web site I want to put the picture on, who I am and so on. Usually people get shifty and want to move on.

A more simple compliment and request - that's a cool hat, could I take a picture ? Or some other genuine compliment - genuine is the key - be bold and be honest. That usually works well.

I've also spent a day not verbally asking at all, just walking up, gesturing and miming what I want to do. That was the most effective.

A huge, huge part of it is how you approach the person. If you 'stalk' them for more than a few second, they'll have noticed you and find you weird/ want to avoid you etc. Being bold matters. Secondly how you talk - if you sound nervous, speak quickly, etc, they'll mirror that behaviour. If you walk up with the camera at your face that ends up as a real big barrier too. The interaction and approach is a big part of getting a yes or no response.

Also realise that a 'no' often means 'no, not right now, I'm busy' rather than 'no I'm rejecting you personally' though it can be hard to take that to heart (or hard not to take the rejection to heart). These are all people I had just met. Some of them I never even spoke to. Hopefully they don't look too stiff.




If you are interested, I have a dozen or so posts on my blog about my experiences trying to get better at this sort of shooting, unfortunately you have to start at the bottom and read 'up' to get the feel for it though.

03/13/2008 05:14:08 PM · #7
One approach in street candids is when you see something happening like someone coming towards you, aim ahead, get the shot as they walk into the frame and continue to hold that position as they pass. It will look like your point of interest was something on the other side of them. When it's static, move the cam around a bit, with 1 of the stopping point being them of course. It will look very random. This is all if you are uneasy with just aiming and clicking.

If confronted, have a story to go with it, such as you are a photography student and are supposed to be trying to capture people and moments, but it's only for classwork. Sometimes a light-hearted approach saying you aren't really comfortable doing it either, but it's for a grade can ease things a bit.

Candids rock btw!

Message edited by author 2008-03-13 18:28:41.
03/13/2008 05:15:24 PM · #8
Originally posted by pawdrix:

. A common lens they used was a 50mm ...which is approx. a 35mm on a 1.5x crop (give or take).


I think it was often a 50, or wider - 35mm was pretty common too for the 'classic' street photographers. They were in the middle of the events and action, not on the other side of the street with a 200mm. That's why their pictures are so connected. It's tough to do that with an SLR though, to be in the middle, unnoticed, with this huge box. That's what the 'purist' PDf rambles on about a lot from what I remember from reading it. Seemed like a lot of people trying to put arbitrary boundaries around it to say what they do is cool and what ever anyone else does is not. Take it for what it cost you to read.
03/13/2008 05:22:52 PM · #9
I dont think all candids are impersonal.
here are a few Ive taken:

















03/13/2008 05:26:48 PM · #10
Originally posted by JaimeVinas:

I dont think all candids are impersonal.


Those are good examples, but I think most of them display elements of either the disconnection or distrust that I don't particularly like. It's just a personal thing. The ones where you don't feel quite so far away or the subject doesn't look unaware are the ones I enjoy more out of them. (the first and last two for example). I used to take pictures far away of people who were unaware - or occasionally 'caught' me. I don't get the same enjoyment out of the process or results if I'm sneaking shots (or I feel like I'm sneaking shots) of people who are unaware. I dislike shooting from the hip or pretending to shoot something else even more. I shoot 'scenes' with a 50mm or wider when there are people in it, so I'm not saying anything about shooting people in the street - I just don't personally like the long lens or sneaked stuff.

In contrast, I find this a whole lot more interesting, along with the story you are able to relate



Message edited by author 2008-03-13 17:31:16.
03/13/2008 05:30:21 PM · #11
Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by JaimeVinas:

I dont think all candids are impersonal.


Those are good examples, but I think most of them display elements of either the disconnection or distrust that I don't particularly like. It's just a personal thing. The ones where you don't feel quite so far away or the subject doesn't look unaware are the ones I enjoy more out of them. (the first and last two for example). I used to take pictures far away of people who were unaware - or occasionally 'caught' me. I don't get the same enjoyment out of the process or results if I'm sneaking shots (or I feel like I'm sneaking shots) of people who are unaware. I dislike shooting from the hip or pretending to shoot something else even more.


Geez..It had to be a T-sipper to disagree.
I guess everyone who likes bevo has their point of view skewed. :P

Just teasing, I see your point. Its a matter of personal taste. :)

Gig'em Ags!
03/13/2008 05:31:49 PM · #12
Originally posted by JaimeVinas:

Geez..It had to be a T-sipper to disagree.
I guess everyone who likes bevo has their point of view skewed. :P

Just teasing, I see your point. Its a matter of personal taste. :)

Gig'em Ags!


barking up the wrong tree with that ;)
03/13/2008 05:52:40 PM · #13
Originally posted by Gordon:

I find candids typically impersonal and voyeuristic. More so when they are taken with a long lens. There's a disconnect from the subject that is pretty apparent in most of that sort of work that doesn't sit well with me, personally.


It is what it is. I think that's the beauty of it. Documenting life as it actually happened. No poses....just reality...the moment. I can't see what needs to sit well.

Taking candid shots on the street is different from what you do. They aren't supposed to accomplish the the same thing. Two different animals, they can't be compared.

The connection is the choice of what you photograph and when to press the shutter. I'm trying to show you the world through my eyes. I'm pointing at what I think is interesting and I hoping you the viewer find it interesting, as well. The point as I try to define this for myself is NOT to connect directly with my subject.

Message edited by author 2008-03-13 17:53:49.
03/13/2008 06:13:46 PM · #14
I saw a girl in town the other day, she was standing next to a busker, obviously her friend. But she had this great hat on, and looked like she couldn't really give a shit, pretty bored.

The look on her face and her body language would have made an amazing shot, I didn't have my camera on me, and don't know if I would have anyway... but I'm sure if anyone had asked first then she couldn't have repeated the pose even if she had wanted to.
03/13/2008 06:15:52 PM · #15
Originally posted by pawdrix:

Originally posted by Gordon:

I find candids typically impersonal and voyeuristic. More so when they are taken with a long lens. There's a disconnect from the subject that is pretty apparent in most of that sort of work that doesn't sit well with me, personally.


It is what it is. I think that's the beauty of it. Documenting life as it actually happened. No poses....just reality...the moment. I can't see what needs to sit well.



I sprinkled 'personally' through my comments quote deliberately. I'm expressing my blanket prejudices. I personally don't like long lens, candid street photography. To me it seems like the cowards way out and I don't like it and try not to do it. Not to say you shouldn't do it, shouldn't enjoy it or that it is a terrible thing to do - just that I don't like it.

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Taking candid shots on the street is different from what you do. They aren't supposed to accomplish the the same thing. Two different animals, they can't be compared.


Yup, I agree completely. I'm not comparing them. I'm saying I don't like one of them. Just like I don't much like wedding photography. Both leave me cold. This isn't an opinion that just popped into my head - I've looked at a lot of these sort of images and they just don't work for me, for the reasons I've mentioned. It's just one person's opinion though :)

03/13/2008 07:23:34 PM · #16
I got me this fake Homeland Security badge online. I flash it at folks on the street and tell them I found their behavior (or hat, shirt, etc) suspicious and I am required to photograph it for our records. If they do not comply, I offer up the taser alternative.
[joke joke joke!]

Originally posted by Gordon:

I personally don't like long lens, candid street photography. To me it seems like the cowards way out and I don't like it and try not to do it. Not to say you shouldn't do it...

You sure have a tactful way of insulting people there, Gordon.
03/13/2008 07:29:37 PM · #17
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

I got me this fake Homeland Security badge online. I flash it at folks on the street and tell them I found their behavior (or hat, shirt, etc) suspicious and I am required to photograph it for our records. If they do not comply, I offer up the taser alternative.
[joke joke joke!]

Originally posted by Gordon:

I personally don't like long lens, candid street photography. To me it seems like the cowards way out and I don't like it and try not to do it. Not to say you shouldn't do it...


You sure have a tactful way of insulting people there, Gordon.


I'm not trying to insult anyone. I'm just saying it isn't for me. Is that such a bad thing ? Read the article I linked to - it may well explain my position in a better fashion. I just don't like those sorts of images, for all the reasons I stated. But I don't like baby pictures like Anne Geddes does, either. Or a whole load of other styles of photography that people enjoy. Good for them, it just doesn't work for me.

I didn't even say anyone was a coward for doing it [which is what I assume you were thinking]- I said it feels that way to me. I feel like I'm sneaking around. I feel like I'm doing it because I'm too afraid to approach someone (because, when I was doing it that way, I was too afraid). That's why it doesn't work for me, any more. It is a particularly personal opinion.

Message edited by author 2008-03-13 19:34:07.
03/13/2008 07:41:44 PM · #18
Originally posted by Gordon:

I didn't even say anyone was a coward for doing it [which is what I assume you were thinking]- I said it feels that way to me.

Which is why I said you have a tactful way of insulting people.

Originally posted by Gordon:

But I don't like baby pictures like Anne Geddes does, either.

But you didn't say it felt like "Child abuse to me" - see the difference?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though - I see how you meant it, but I can't see it as being interpreted as anything but saying you think it is cowardly. In any case, I'll concede that you have more relevant input in this thread than I do, so I'll stfu now.
03/13/2008 07:53:02 PM · #19
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

so I'll stfu now.


You meant 'for now' right?
03/13/2008 07:57:27 PM · #20
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by Gordon:

I didn't even say anyone was a coward for doing it [which is what I assume you were thinking]- I said it feels that way to me.

Which is why I said you have a tactful way of insulting people.

Originally posted by Gordon:

But I don't like baby pictures like Anne Geddes does, either.

But you didn't say it felt like "Child abuse to me" - see the difference?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt though - I see how you meant it, but I can't see it as being interpreted as anything but saying you think it is cowardly. In any case, I'll concede that you have more relevant input in this thread than I do, so I'll stfu now.


No, you are really misunderstanding what I'm trying to say. I've spent about a year and half working through that fear (my blog rambles on at length for 20+ posts on just that one subject (wish I could sort it backwards over time - start at the bottom I'm afraid[sic]) Fear is a big part of it, or was, for a long time. Still is. Too afraid to use a shorter lens. Too afraid to approach people. I've been working on that for a while now. So stepping back to using a long lens, to me, feels like the cowardly approach. For me, I feel like I'm taking the easy way out. I can see that in the pictures taken with that style, too, so again, for me, I see that and project it on those sorts of images.

There's a blog link earlier in this thread, you can read about me walking around for hours on end not asking people, if you want to. For a lot of other people I've talked to, fear is the big barrier they have against doing up close and connected street portraiture or street photography too. It gets couched in a lot of different terms, but for a lot of photographers, it's what makes them use long lenses or shoot when people aren't looking.

I can well accept there's another group of fully realised, happy and comfortable photographers who totally reject the up close and personal style of shooting, wanting to use long lenses, happy to step back and watch the world unfold, recording it without the participants knowing. I'm certain there are plenty of people who love that style of long lens, unaware imagery and can totally revel in producing it. It just doesn't work for me. Never has, but I had to find another approach before I could mostly stop doing it and feel better about the street photography that I do.

I'm still mostly waiting for rejection inside, but I just get on with it regardless now.

Message edited by author 2008-03-13 20:02:05.
03/13/2008 08:25:30 PM · #21
Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Originally posted by Gordon:

I find candids typically impersonal and voyeuristic. More so when they are taken with a long lens. There's a disconnect from the subject that is pretty apparent in most of that sort of work that doesn't sit well with me, personally.


It is what it is. I think that's the beauty of it. Documenting life as it actually happened. No poses....just reality...the moment. I can't see what needs to sit well.



I sprinkled 'personally' through my comments quote deliberately. I'm expressing my blanket prejudices. I personally don't like long lens, candid street photography. To me it seems like the cowards way out and I don't like it and try not to do it. Not to say you shouldn't do it, shouldn't enjoy it or that it is a terrible thing to do - just that I don't like it.

Originally posted by pawdrix:

Taking candid shots on the street is different from what you do. They aren't supposed to accomplish the the same thing. Two different animals, they can't be compared.


Yup, I agree completely. I'm not comparing them. I'm saying I don't like one of them. Just like I don't much like wedding photography. Both leave me cold. This isn't an opinion that just popped into my head - I've looked at a lot of these sort of images and they just don't work for me, for the reasons I've mentioned. It's just one person's opinion though :)


Gordon,
I have to disagree with the coward remarks.
I use long lenses because I like to grab people in action without having to get in the way.
I dont have an issue approaching people and asking them.
I use the long lenses becuase it gives me the ability to take several pictures and not have to spend time on people.

Like the others said, its just another style. I've done both and depending on what I am trying to do, I favor one over the other
however in my opinion, candid photography in the streets defines street photography
And the other style is more of a portraiture type of photography
03/13/2008 08:27:23 PM · #22
Originally posted by Gordon:

I personally don't like long lens, candid street photography. To me it seems like the cowards way out and I don't like it and try not to do it. This isn't an opinion that just popped into my head - I've looked at a lot of these sort of images and they just don't work for me, for the reasons I've mentioned. It's just one person's opinion though :)


Albiet not a very good one, I consider myself a "Street Photographer". On the contrary I think it takes a great amount of courage to take this style of photo. I get alot of motorcycle club's candids and while they would've never allowed it at first, I get good responses when I show them what I've taken and then they pretty much let me shoot at their events. Alot of my prints are up in clubhouses throughout the Northeast. The Local Hell's Angels have asked me to photograph for a magazine they want to start and I'm allowed to take portraits of many of the patch wearers. While I respect your opinion and I'm a great fan of your work, I would never consider this "coward's work"..... And Pawdrix is one of the best I've met at this type. (NYC is almost an unfair advantage of this.)


03/13/2008 09:07:15 PM · #23
Originally posted by pawdrix:

One question: What is it that you are "doing" that you explained to the people you approached?


I told them I was taking a photography class and needed to take photos of people on the street.

03/13/2008 09:50:10 PM · #24
Originally posted by Gordon:

To me it seems like the cowards way out and I don't like it and try not to do it. Not to say you shouldn't do it, shouldn't enjoy it or that it is a terrible thing to do - just that I don't like it.


The only thing here I'd take issue with is that I see NO difference between hiding your camera behind a bag, a handkerchief or any method the old school guys used and using a long lens. Stealth is the goal and if they had the same selection zooms back whenever they'd use them.

Keep in mind, if you ask anybody who's seen me shoot...posthumous, skewsme, melethia, jpr, LevT, doctornick, roby21112 etc. they'll tell you I have no problem getting up in peoples space or asking strangers to take a shot. So I take a slight issue with the word "coward" but whatever. I know what I need to do to achieve my goals and courage or balls doesn't play a single role in the process. I'm not trying to prove anything, I just want the shot.



My only goal is to get a picture where people are acting totally natural....completely at ease and if they see me with a camera it all disappears. The whole moment is blown. That's not what I want. The shot is not about me, it's about them. Trust me, I'm no lurker and I've almost gotten my ass kicked a few times with a long lens and a short one...not that I mind. Every now and then I could use a good ass kicking...lol.

One look at my portfolio and you'd know that I have no problem asking complete strangers to pose...dangerous strangers, sometimes.



In short if you want candids, you're better off not being seen and that's that. I don't feel the need to jeopardize a shot because it takes rocks to do it up close...if I can do it that way, believe me I'll do it but I don't think it's necessary or that it proves anything.

Message edited by author 2008-03-13 22:08:40.
03/13/2008 09:56:39 PM · #25
Originally posted by pawdrix:


The only thing here I'd take issue with is that I see NO difference between hiding your camera behind a bag, a handkerchief or any method the old school guys used and using a long lens. Stealth is the goal and if they had the same selection zooms back whenever they'd use them.


I'll say for the third or fourth time in this thread, I, me, feel like I am a coward when I shoot that way. I was expressing my own personal opinion of how long lens, candid shooting makes me feel. If you still don't understand that I mean it about me, read the 20+ blog posts I linked above where I say the same thing, over and over, in tedious detail. I, me, myself, don't like that style of street photography. So I, personally, me, don't do it any more. Because when I do it, I'm being afraid and avoiding what I really want to do. Which makes me a coward for doing it. So I see that style of photography as cowardly.

If you like it, go for it. I'm explaining why I don't like it. Not why you shouldn't do it.

Originally posted by pawdrix:

So I take a slight issue with the word "coward" but whatever.


If you could stop taking issue long enough to go back and read the several posts I've made, you'll realise you are totally missing the point of what I said. Sorry. I can't state it any more clearly than that. It isn't about proving a point. It isn't saying anything at all about how you choose to shoot. Way off the mark. It also is in line with what the original poster is asking about - not how to shoot candids from a bag or with a long lens. How to approach people. How to deal with those fears. It's great for you that you don't have any of that. I suspect you are in a very small minority of photographers (who will all no doubt pipe in in a few minutes about how they resent me calling them a coward too and then they too will have missed the point)

Message edited by author 2008-03-13 22:05:43.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 04:26:34 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 03/28/2024 04:26:34 PM EDT.