urbanphotos

What is Street Photography? Many have tried to answer this, and it seems that everyone has an opinion.
I was surfing the internet one night and came upon a photographer who was sort of posting a "How To"
guide to Street Photography. His work consisted of technically fine color images, which in my view
were fairly bland. The amount of angry responses his lesson and examples provoked, was shocking!
"This is not street photography!" "Street Photography is Cartier-Bresson" or "Street Photography is
Garry Winogrand" "It must be done in only black & white" and on and on the comments came, one after
another. OK, maybe the work wasn't great and maybe some of his advice was questionable under some
circumstances, but at least he was trying to be helpful to some beginners interested in trying this style
of photography. It's called Street Photography because "Where ever you happen to be photography"
sounds silly...there really isn't a better word to describe it, even though a large percent of the work which
a Street Photographer does, isn't on the street. It's in the local diner or supermarket, or in the park or on
the busses and subway. Obviously if there was a better word, some one would have come up with it!
There are too many experts out there who might be right about some things, and are wrong about others.
The one type of "Street Photography" that I don't understand the appeal of, are totally staged photographs,
which have made a few photographers fairly famous. I've always felt that the fact that Street Photography
was depicting things that actually happened, was one of it's main strengths. Many disagree...

Art is subjective and yet it also isn't. NO ONE could say Henri Cartier-Bresson wasn't at least a
very good photographer, unless that person wanted to look silly. Yet when it comes to Garry Winogrand
it gets much more intense. Many swear by him, while others found his work lacking. The same can be
said for Jimi Hendrix...probably the best guitarist ever, yet a lot of people called it noise. A first edition
of Jack Kerouac's On the Road, will set you back at least $2,000 but Truman Capote called him merely a
"TYPIST". So let's get real here, you can't please everyone and therefore it would make sense to try
and take photographs that mean something to you, and only you. The internet has shown me the work of
many photographers, who despite being very talented, will most likely never attain fame & fortune!
That said, I've seen one photographer, whose work I thought was really beat, do very well for himself,
by avoiding the "Decisive moment" and basically shooting street shots from an incredibly long distance!
He ignores Robert Capa's famous quote: "If the photo isn't good enough, you weren't close enough"
He shouldn't stop what he's doing, since he's much more $ucce$$ful shooting at 100 feet, than I am at 8 feet!
There are some very talented street photographers who shoot nothing but color and do great work, so the whole
black & white argument is dead. So many people think you have to shoot like Winogrand with a 28mm
lens, while others go with HCB's 50mm...both work very well in their own way and that too is a dead issue.

Then there are the people who are very concerned about the ethics of Street Photography. I have to admit
that there are times when I have fucked up, and taken shots that I shouldn't have. I've also missed incredible
images because I was worried about offending someone. This is definitely a gray area, with no definite answer.
If photographers swore to a code in which they'd never take a person's picture without their permission,
then photography would be so boring that it would have never made much of an impact. Or you could say
"well only in combat, should suffering be photographed" then Walker Evans' work and the great FSA photos
wouldn't exist. So the fact is, I've been criticized for my shots of homeless people and complimented for the same
images as well! I'm not sure how to defend myself, photography is important to me. I don't want to have
to move to the country and search for spider webs covered in dew drops in order to take my next photograph!
I like the fact that on the streets of New York, the next great shot could happen at any moment, on any corner!

One problem with being a Street Photographer is that it's highly addictive. Do you see everything in black & white?
If you see everything in a 2x3 rectangle, then you might have caught the bug. If the most mundane details excite you
and have you reaching for your camera, then you've been bit. It's like I'm photographing my way through life, and
often I have to put the camera down, so I can live life itself. I know it sounds goofy, but I'm a little different than most
of my friends...they all grew up chasing the next dollar, and all I want is the next image. I'm probably as greedy with
my camera, as they are with the stock market! (which can be equally addictive) One of the few photojournalists
that I know, said "all photographers are psychos" I'm not quite sure about that, but it's food for thought...

One last thought: Street Photography isn't as easy as some would think. I'm very happy with a roll of film that
has ONE or more images on it, worth printing! When everything comes together perfectly in a photograph, it's
very special and unless you're a Cartier-Bresson, it's pretty rare. Usually, no matter how good you are as a street-
shooter, luck will enter and provide you with the photograph that you are most satisfied with. That's why I think
one should consider these special photographs...gifts.

Piczo