What constitutes a gang? I guess it’s a group of people with a leader and a common purpose. I see them in the streets quite frequently, but it’s not always possible, or wise, to photograph them when they’re heading towards the camera.
Are gangs a good subject for street photography? Absolutely. They’re a great subject if you can solve the problems of taking the shot. Here are the reasons why:
First, as I’ve mentioned, a gang usually has a leader — possibly a charismatic leader whose personality is stronger than anyone else’s within the the group. This means that your picture will have some coherence. It will have a basic structure with the leader being the focal point of the composition.
Second, people in a gang tend to walk closely together, like a platoon of soldiers but not necessarily in step. Gang members keep their individuality even though they surrender their autonomy to the leader.
Third, gangs are purposeful when they’re on the move. When all members are present and they can stop hanging out on the street corner, they start to move with intent. Photography always benefits from “intent,” usually contributed by the photographer. But where gangs are concerned, the photographer can capture a little bit of the subject’s intentionality and transfer it to the image.
The Blue Cone Gang and Others I’ve called the featured image (above) “Blue Cone Gang,” for the entirely gratuitous reason that there’s a blue cone in the picture. The members all look quite serious, don’t they? This is definitely a group of people with a common purpose.
There are all kinds of gangs, ranging from clean-cut, middle-class kids, out for a good time, to criminal gangs such as heavily armed drug dealers hell-bent on trouble. Yet they all have something in common. People club together because they feel stronger and more confident when they’re part of a group.
Women Gang Together, Too When women gang together it’s usually for convenience (such as sharing an apartment) or for mutual support. In both cases, members of the group can engage more readily in adventurous activities, far beyond what they would risk on their own.
This phenomenon hasn’t gone unnoticed by the makers of TV drama serials. For example, “Gossip Girl” and “Pretty Little Liars” were classics of the genre, as was the Korean series “Hello, My Twenties!” I’m still hoping to find others equally as entertaining.
Street photography is more limited in scope than TV drama. Yet although it never answers many of the questions it poses, at least it can invite speculation.
I’ve called the above shot “A Good Day,” after the wording on the leading girl’s black tee-shirt. I wonder where they’re all going and what they’ve got planned for the rest of the day?
Most of us are accustomed to keeping trains at a distance, but in the Far East people have learned to live with them in close proximity. How close? Well, I suppose I’d have to call it “brushing-past close.”
The Mae Klong Train Market in Samut Songkhram Province, Thailand (an hour or two from Bangkok) is one of the best-known examples of intimate trains. It’s become a favourite tourist destination, ever since it appeared on YouTube in some stunning videos.
I’ve visited the market a couple of times and on both occasions have found it incredibly hard to get the perfect street photo. I admit I’m way out of my comfort zone, photographing a moving train from six inches away.
Fortunately, the Mae Klong Train Market also presents opportunities for regular street photos and indeed for other kinds of photography, from still lifes to portraits. While waiting for a train to arrive (there are only four each day) I took shots like the one above. It’s hard to image that a train will run along this track in a few minutes’ time, but that’s what happens.
See What I Mean? The train comes perilously close, but local people have learned to live with it. In fact, it’s been good for business.
Once vendors had figured out how to make full use of the tracks, by means of folding umbrellas and ingenious mechanisms for pulling their wares away from the train at the last moment, they were on to a winner. You could go shopping and be entertained at the same time. That’s a philosophy which has only recently been copied by modern shopping malls (and never by old-fashioned department stores in the UK).
The process of closing the umbrellas has given the Mae Klong Train Market its local name: “Hoop Rom” “umbrella/parasol-closing” Market. Honestly, the procedure is a whole lot more complicated than that, but you get the gist of it. If you want to see it: visit, but take care!
In the meantime, here’s some fish:
If you look closely at the above shot you’ll notice how the bowls of fish are directly on top of the rail. I know, it’s just a nice still life when it’s taken out of context, but the shaft of sunlight shining between the umbrellas takes the place of the almost unseen rail.
Wongwian Yai Station In Bangkok itself, another place where you can find what I’m calling “intimate trains” is Wongwian Yai Station and the little road which runs alongside the track.
This is a favourite haunt of street photographers, not just because of the trains, but also for its buildings which are picturesque or ramshackle, depending on how you choose to see them.
Personally, I love this area. The people are friendly and are clearly happy to be living in such an unusual neighbourhood: one that combines commerce with a certain amount of wilderness. Some of the ramshackle buildings even echo the design of a typical railway station:
People walk across the track, ride across it on motor scooters (below); and children sometimes play on it, despite being warned of the danger. Fortunately, the station is not far away, so trains are going quite slowly in the mile or two leading up to it.
Note: If you plan a visit, you can go to Wongwian Yai Skytrain Station, but that’s not it! You’ll need to walk several hundred yards to the old railway station on Somdet Phra Chao Taksin Road.
I’ll be making another trip to Wongwian Yai, determined to get more shots before the developers move in. I like it just the way it is.
In this second part of “Shooting from the hip” I’m going to attempt to give some tips and guidance, having covered the arguments for and against this practice in Part I.
Dozens of articles on the Internet explain how to shoot from the hip and most are reasonably accurate. Alas, many are illustrated with examples where the technique wasn’t really necessary.
Here are some of the tips I use myself:
1. Shoot from the hip on sunny days, not dull days — and don’t attempt it at night.
There’s good reason for this advice because you need both a fast shutter speed and a small aperture, a combination that’s going to work only in bright conditions.
2. Use a wide angle lens: at least 40mm (a “wide standard”) but preferably 28mm or 24mm. Wide angle lenses deliver greater depth of field, bringing more of your subject into focus.
3. Use at least 1/250th second, preferably 1/500th or even 1/1000th second or faster to minimise the effect of any camera movement.
When you’re shooting from the hip you’re likely to be walking. Try to pause for a moment to eliminate the effect!
For the shot below I wasn’t able to pause mid-step, but the fast shutter speed (1/2000th second) froze the movement reasonably well.
4. Stop down at least to f/8, possibly going to f/11-f/16 if you’re looking for better overall sharpness.
Depending on the circumstances, this is not always possible — and you may sometimes get a superior picture with a wider aperture.
5. Make the ISO higher than you would normally use in order to compensate for the fast shutter/small aperture.
Some camera sensors are more prone to noise than others. Don’t go beyond the point where noise becomes a disturbing element.
6. Use a focus technique that gives you the best result. Options are: manual/zone focus; or fully auto. I tend to use my normal Aperture Priority mode with a centre focus point and then try to aim straight!
Alternatively, pick up focus from an object that’s, say, four feet away from you and use it for your next shot. I find this is often more convenient than zone focusing which gives you a fixed distance until you change it manually.
I picked up a four-foot focus for the shot below. It’s still not “tack sharp,” but acceptable at, say, 8 x 10 inches.
Getting It Straight I’ve noticed that some photographers recommend holding the camera by its lens in order to shoot straighter from the hip. I don’t think that’s a good idea. Did Billy the Kid hold his gun by the barrel? Of course not!
Modern cameras offer technological help by providing swivel screens that allow you to compose the image while holding the camera at waist level. On a bright day, it can be hard to see the image on the screen, but it’s certainly better than nothing. Using a Rolleiflex, Vivian Maier was obliged to shoot from below eye-level but her shaded viewfinder with its upside-down image was helpful in a similar, imperfect way.
The Wider Issues There are people who say “Anything goes, do whatever it takes to get a great shot,” and those who keep reminding us to observe this or that rule of ethics, behaviour, or aesthetic.
To the latter we could reply: “If it feels right, do it; if you and your subjects are not discomforted by it, do it; if it looks right, do it.”
Your ethical code, your mode of behaviour, and your artistic judgement are all influenced by your native culture and can vary widely from one part of the world to another.
Getting Philosophical Added to the issues I’ve already mentioned (above, and in Part I) is one more: the philosophical issue of “What is street photography?” The question arises because of the hit-and-miss nature of shooting from the hip. If you get a lucky hit, is that really a good street photograph, or is it an accidental snap?
I am reminded of the old story of the chimpanzee, typing for eternity and eventually writing the entire works of William Shakespeare. Is that not essentially the same process, taken to extremes?
If you want a closer metaphor turn to Google Street View. You wouldn’t call it “street photography,” yet in photographing millions of city streets the Google cameras have captured dramatic scenes, spotted pretty women walking past interesting backgrounds, and captured no end of people arranged by chance into pleasing groups.
I should note that the late Michael Wolf (1954–2019) was given an honourable mention in the 2011 World Press Photo contest for images he culled from Google Street View. “I’m appropriating Google,” he said at the time.
Technological advances also make it possible to photograph, in high resolution, crowds of people from which you can extract cameo scenes that have some of the characteristics of street photography. However, what they lack is the real close-up experience of the street that you get from actually being there, in the thick of it, with your camera.
So we’re back to square one, struggling with the many difficulties of mastering the art of street photography. To cope with these problems I’ve recommended the use of multiple strategies (in “Can You Reduce Street Photography to a Few Rules of Thumb?“) Shooting from the hip is one of them. Let’s all use it occasionally and see what happens.
Is shooting from the hip a good way to take street photos? Such an innocent question! The answer is yes. And no.
In thinking about it very carefully and weighing up the arguments for and against I find myself questioning the very purpose, essence and philosophy of street photography: its ethics, its aesthetics, its whatever.
Let’s look at three arguments in its favour.
1. Shooting from the hip certainly gets you great shots, if only occasionally. 2. It enables you to take shots that would otherwise be impossible. For example, when you know the subject may glance in your direction and ruin the shot if you raise the camera to your eye. 3. It’s often good to get a lower angle of view, looking up at your subject and cutting out extraneous detail from the background.
The featured image (above) shows some of the virtues of shooting from the hip. I like the shot because it identifies a particular moment that cannot be repeated. The light is on outside the Gay Hussar restaurant (which has now closed permanently). Yet the whole scene remains typical of a chilly day in London. I couldn’t have taken the shot in any other way and achieved the same result.
The Easy Option? One argument against shooting from the hip is that it’s too easy: like shooting ducks in a barrel. (Ducks have to be easier than fish). I would counter this by insisting: once you’ve mastered how to get the subject in sharp focus, which isn’t as easy at you might think, the technique does at least allow you to get close without being noticed (image above).
Other Arguments Now let’s look at three, more effective arguments against it.
1. It can be very “hit and miss,” with a depressingly high percentage of failures. 2. It removes your main control over the composition of each photo taken in this way. 3. With loss of control comes loss of intentionality. In other words, you’re inviting Lady Luck to play her part, rather than deliberately taking the shots you want.
Should we imagine a pair of scales and place these two sets of arguments on either side? Which scale would have the weightier argument overall?
Frankly, I can’t offer a definitive answer. You’ll have to decide for yourself, after giving it a try. Personally, I quite enjoy shooting from the hip and I don’t see any harm in it unless it becomes habitual.
Other photographers are not of the same opinion.
The Winogrand View For example, American street photographer Garry Winogrand, as reported by Mason Resnick in the June 1988 issue of Modern Photography, was surprisingly adamant that shooting from the hip was a really bad idea.
Wrote Resnick: “I tried to mimic Winogrand’s shooting technique. I went up to people, took their pictures, smiled, nodded, just like the master. Nobody complained; a few smiled back! I tried shooting without looking through the viewfinder, but when Winogrand saw this, he sternly told me never to shoot without looking. ‘You’ll lose control over your framing,’ he warned.”
On looking at Winogrand’s images one could reasonably reply: “What framing?” — and personally I have other objections to his technique, including all that smiling and nodding which tends to make subjects smile back! Would he not have achieved better results — more authentic results — by shooting from the hip?
I’ll leave that rhetorical question hanging in the air.
Parting Shot Here’s my parting shot: an example of shooting from the hip that was not “hit and miss” and didn’t sacrifice control or composition. In fact, it had been my explicit intention to photograph a tourist couple marching past London’s Coco-de-Mer shop (“Fashionable purveyor of designer sex toys, lingerie and other clothing, erotic books and gifts.”)
I was quickly rewarded with this photo, in which the man succeeds admirably in keeping his eyes in the direction of his companion’s gesture, despite the delights on offer elsewhere.
Neither of them looked in my direction, either. Thank heavens!
My featured image (above) is the kind of photo you can get in Bangkok merely by lingering in the street until late evening, when most people are having dinner. That why I’m going to claim it as a street photo, along with all the others you see here.
In fact, my objective in forgoing dinner was not to watch the Muay Thai (kickboxing) matches themselves, but to get candid shots of the preparations: the boxers, their helpers, and the gathering crowd. But one thing leads to another and I stayed until the end.
Regular Muay Thai events held outside the MBK mall in the centre of Bangkok are popular, not least because they’re free to watch. The boxers get prize money, but many have only just turned professional and for some it’s their first serious fight. As you can imagine, it’s a tense time for all — especially if you have a friend or relative taking part.
I know how they feel. My son is a martial arts enthusiast (karate black belt, Brazilian ju-jitsu, etc.) and did a year’s training in Muay Thai at Master Toddy’s esteemed academy in Bangkok. It’s a tough sport in which there’s said to be an injury every two and a half hours, on average. I’m glad to say my son survived with only minor bruising.
The MBK fights have been on pause recently, the area having been taken over by commerce, but I hope they get reinstored soon. Fortunately, other malls host them, too.
The Photographic Challenge As you can see from my shot of the worried onlooker, light from the setting sun provides intense illumination, but as the evening progresses the light fades and artificial lights take over. That’s fine with me. I get natural light for the preparations and a well-lit ring for the fighting. I never use flash — and even if I did it’s not a great idea to blind one of the fighters temporarily. It could cost him (or her) the match.
Muay Thai has become popular with women, who are now taking up the sport in increasing numbers. I followed the fortunes of one young lady who was taking part (sorry, I don’t know her name, but I’m happy to add it if anyone can tell me). She seemed very relaxed during the preparations, smiling and chatting while her hands were being wrapped with layers of protective tape. I had a feeling she was going to win.
When it came to be her turn, I’d already seen a few of the earlier matches and I’d discovered how difficult it is to photograph Muay Thai unless you have permission to stand on the canvas. From this privileged position, all is possible because you can raise your camera over the ropes and get a clear shot. However, if you’re standing on the floor looking up, the ropes always get in the way.
To solve the problem I scampered upstairs to the mall’s walkway entrance. From there, looking down on the action, I was able to grab a few acceptable shots using the same 85mm lens I’d attached earlier. Sports photographers never have this trouble! But at least I can claim my shots as street photographs, having taken them from the public street.
The view from high above is unusual and dramatic, but I think my best shots came between rounds, when the fighters were receiving attention from their seconds. I like this shot of the fighter breathing deeply, watched anxiously by the little boy at the front of the crowd. Is that her younger brother? As always with my pictures you’ll have to make up your own story to go with them.
I was right about her fighting spirit. She performed brilliantly throughout the match….
…and was the eventual winner against a tough opponent.
It’s Just One Example In most major cities you can find theatrical events performed with varying degrees of formality in the street. You probably won’t find Muay Thai street events outside of Thailand, but there are many other opportunities if you look for them.
For example, there’s “Running the Bulls” in the Spanish city of Pamplona (take care!) or in Japan there’s the “matsuri” when celebrants carry a mikoshi (portable shrine) through the crowd. In London we have the Lord Mayor’s Show and royal events like Trooping the Colour.
If you don’t want conventional travel pictures, look for shots in the crowd. From the Muay Thai event my favourite photo is this one I took before the action began (see below). The young fighter looks serious, but he’s getting support from his younger brother who’s holding the Bout Sheet, sipping a milk shake, and looking equally thoughtful.
What’s running through their minds? We’ll never know for sure.
On the day after Twelfth Night the weather was dull, the light fading, and the Christmas lights had just been switched off. People seemed not to have recovered from their New Year’s hangovers. The chances of getting a good street photo in these circumstances were low, to say the least.
I was quite right. People were scurrying home when I walked into town. The High Street was forlorn without much illumination and getting a shot seemed all but impossible. Then I spotted someone loading a large chair into a vehicle, with two girls sipping drinks nearby, staring wistfully into the distance.
I crossed the road for a better angle, waited for passers-by to catch up — and took the shot you see above. It’s not perfect, but I like it. Somehow it seems to fit the mood and the moment.
Try “No Expectations” So is it better to have low expectations rather than high ambitions when you go out to take some shots on the street?
Never mind “low expectations,” it’s best to have NO expectations in street photography. It’s the only way to avoid disappointment when you return home without the perfect shot.
Frankly, I never have any expectations of getting a decent shot on a quiet day in my home town, but one time I chanced upon five men in motorcycle outfits walking side-by-side. I’ve always valued this shot because I didn’t expect it.
I’m not suggesting street photography is a hit-and-miss activity. It isn’t. With flair, skill and lots of experience you can go out and give a wonderful performance. It’s the rest of the cast — the world at large — who may be having an “off day.”
It’s possible you’ll find yourself asking, somewhat ungrammatically: is it me or is it them? (‘Tis I? Nay, ’tis they!) In other words, have you failed to get the perfect shot because:
1. You didn’t try hard enough. 2. You weren’t looking properly. 3. You missed golden opportunities. 4. You didn’t use the right camera settings.
Or did you fail because:
1. The weather was too gloomy. 2. There were too few people around. 3. Those who were around were too gloomy. 4. No opportunity presented itself.
These two sets of possible reasons tend to play off each other. You start mixing them together. For example, you may think that no opportunity presented itself because you weren’t in the right place (very likely!) and therefore you weren’t trying hard enough.
However, you’d be wrong to beat yourself up. You were trying hard to be in the right place, but it didn’t work out. At that exact time, somewhere else in the world, another photographer was getting (and perhaps fluffing) a better opportunity. You just didn’t know where to go.
Empty Hand Syndrome I’ve spoken with other street photographers about the “empty hand” syndrome — of returning home with nothing worth sharing — and I think it may affect the experienced photographer more than the beginner. It happens when nothing you see fits perfectly with your style. Beginners have not yet developed a style, so they can feel reasonably satisfied when returning with just a few visually interesting shots.
When you develop a style — when you start to notice certain configurations of people in the street and photograph them in your own particular way — you begin to have expectations which are not fulfilled every time. That’s why you should be prepared to have a post mortem analysis when you return home.
Was it I? Or was it the world? Just possibly it could have been both.
If you’ve fallen in love with street photography you may have a nagging feeling that you need to buy a new camera to help you get better shots. What happens next?
The next step is to start gathering information. My favourite strategy is to spend a lot of time examining and comparing sample photos from all the cameras on my short-list. This is therefore No.2 on my list of strategies, after first creating the short-list!
1. Create a Short-List I’m assuming you know roughly what kind of camera you want in terms of image quality, portability, and price. It’s good to keep an open mind on these issues, because, as you gather more information, you may need to change your mind. You can add to the short-list as you read reviews and news announcements, but don’t let it get too long. Make a Top Ten list, for example. Ten is a good, round number.
Here’s an idea! Read my latest article on PhotoStartSheet.com, called “The Best Camera for Street Photography 2019.” In this article I’ve drawn attention to all the outstanding features and possible drawbacks of using twelve of the best cameras for street photography. You may be able to omit three or four cameras from the list because of price, weight, etc., so maybe add one or two of your own choice, and you’ll have a short-list of 10.
2. Compare Sample Photos It’s much easier to compare sample shots a few months after a camera’s launch when there are plenty of photos to see. At launch date you have only the manufacturer’s sample shots, then a week or two later come the hastily taken shots on major review sites. These images are often highly unsatisfactory and give only a vague idea of each camera’s capability. So, this leads me to the next point, which is “Wait a While.”
3. Wait a While Unless you’re buying a camera that’s been on the market for at least a few months, I think it’s best to wait until at least a few hundred people have used the product in real-world situations (not just in typical outdoor or studio tests). Once you seen what a skilled photographer can achieve with a camera on your short-list, you’ll have much more confidence in the product. However, you must still read all about it to see if it’s likely to meet your needs.
4. Read the Reviews In fact, it takes a while for in-depth and carefully considered reviews of the latest cameras to appear online. Of course, there’s always a rush to be first, but I never trust those early evaluations. They’re often written before users find the bugs!
Yes, new cameras often have bugs which don’t get picked up during testing. We’ve had light leaks through the viewfinder, banding in low light, unwanted artefacts caused by the on-board processor: all kinds of faults which get ironed out eventually.
The latest bug: a wobbly control dial on the Ricoh GRIII (below, surely one of the most desirable of recently announced cameras for street photography). “We’ll fix it free of charge,” says Ricoh, in an April announcement.
5. Try Before You Buy Nothing beats actually having the camera in your hand, plus the opportunity to take a few shots in the style you intend to use. The best solution is to invest in a day’s hire of the camera, but I appreciate that this can add several percentage points to your total expenditure. At the very least you should take your own SD card to the camera store and persuade the salesperson to let you take a few shots outside.
So there’s my 5-step process. If you’ve paid for rentals, feel free to shop around for the best price when you come to purchase. Otherwise, support your local camera store if they’ve been especially helpful in letting you try the product. My local branch of the London Camera Exchange has been brilliant in this respect.
There’s a school of thought which says the best compositions are the tried and tested ones, but another which insists on the need to be creative and avoid the obvious. Who’s right? And why?
No art form can advance if all the people who practice it merely adhere to a set of rules, however sensible these rules may appear to be. After all, fashion changes. Nature evolves. Dinosaurs become “so last year.”
I’m conservative by nature and I strongly disapprove when someone builds an ugly extension to a house I once occupied, or when the government imposes new regulations affecting tax or business. But in matters of art I assume the role of agitator, provocateur, and would-be revolutionary.
Invention v. Tradition Art requires both stability and instability: the steady hand of tradition and the killer instinct of revolution. Most artists combine characteristics from both categories. Their creative talents compel them to be inventive, but taste, tradition, and a desire to communicate in a language people understand — all act as restraints, keeping them firmly grounded.
I’m guessing that many street photographers find themselves caught in this dilemma when they have to make basic decisions about where and when to point the camera, how to frame the composition, and what camera settings to use.
When you’re faced with thousands of different options you need to have an overriding purpose to govern your actions. Honing this purpose (yes, you can hone a purpose!) consists of balancing the stable and unstable elements in your work. You need to cling to certain things — such as your guiding moral sense, or a desire to represent objects faithfully, or even something simple like retaining at least one true vertical in the image — while still leaving room to experiment and play.
Composition, For Example I think this process can best be demonstrated in composition, which is clearly one of the most fundamental aspects of street photography.
Being guided by easy rules of thumb like the “rule of thirds” is not sufficient in matters of composition. You need a much larger repertoire of compositions that you know will work. For me, composition is a key element in my photography, so if I had only one overriding option — such as compose in thirds — I’d soon get very bored with the results.
Here are a few options among the dozens you can use. You can divide the image into two halves, separated by a natural dividing line, providing there is a vital relationship between each side of the image. Alternatively, you can base the composition on a pyramid shape, anchored by deep shade at the bottom and tapering to a point higher up the frame. Or you can make one object the central focus of the image, with all the other figures and objects seeming to dance around it.
I chose the last of these three options when I took the featured image (above). My overriding purpose (honed beforehand) was to keep the composition stable while moving in close to achieve some kind of intimacy with the subject. In other words, I was reasonably certain about the effect of the stable composition, less so regarding the “dance” of the others elements around it.
In the Centre The central object is the voluminous bra and panty set hanging from a plastic chain on the stall. The bra says “I love you, I love you” over and over again, while the other item says “Shine like a star, shine like a star.”
The young women take no interest in the large brassiere, being more concerned with feeling the quality of various inserts that will make breasts look big enough to fill it. It’s as though the large bra has been deliberately displayed as the standard size, to which all women must adjust themselves artificially — regardless of their enviable figures.
By moving in close I was able to capture several elements that express the feeling and message of the content. One woman scratches the back of her head in a gesture of indecision, the other two feel the sponginess of the inserts. Are they serious? Or is this the female equivalent of “kicking the tyres,” as when men prowl around the forecourt of a car dealership?
Frankly, I have no idea — and I didn’t really like to ask. In fact, I don’t think they were aware that I was taking pictures. I would have told them they could save their money by not believing the message on the box: “Become attractive lady with perfect breast.” To my mind, any lady with “perfect leg” is, by definition, attractive.
Avoiding the Obvious Here’s another, perhaps less exciting subject, to which I’ve applied the same principle. I’ve placed the purple backpack in the centre of the frame, partly because it’s such a striking colour but also because it’s being gripped firmly by a young man’s hand. Behind him are a stack of posters: Chairman Mao posters on the left, and kung fu movie posters on the right.
Because it’s a stall selling antiques and memorabilia, everything on it is old, or, being in Hong Kong, old-ish. Only the man’s hand is young and alive. Even his bag has seen better days!
My method, as before, was first to find the content for a photograph, then to chose a composition, and finally to figure out the best way — and the best moment — to get the shot. As always in street photography, timing was crucial. It was important to get a clear image of Chairman Mao on one side and Bruce Lee in “The Way of the Dragon” on the other. The impression I wanted to give was of a young man holding on to the present in the midst of the past, brought to a standstill by the undesirability of all the objects offered for sale.
In neither of the examples I’ve given were the compositions obvious on first looking at the scene in front of me. When faced with a market stall a photographer naturally sees the stallholder as a potential target, perhaps in conversation with a customer. You have to look more closely to see what’s less obvious, to find the details that allow you to tell a different story.
By moving in close, by shifting your attention up, down or to the side, and by ignoring the siren call of the obvious — you can uncover stories where you least expect them. That’s the joy of street photography. When it works.
A while back I went to London with the intention of taking some street shots, but rather than go to my usual haunts I decided to travel a little further on the Tube.
The rush hour had just finished and the subway carriage was empty when I got in it. I studied my reflection in the window opposite: clean shirt, safari jacket, cowboy hat for sun protection, camera stowed in a canvas bag.
A couple got on at the first station and sat opposite. I’m not sure what the woman said to her partner after glancing at me, but in response he took out his mobile phone and snapped a shot of an empty seat a little way off to my right.
How curious! I did a rough calculation of the angle. He was holding the phone horizontally and although he didn’t even glance at me I’m absolutely sure that I was the subject. I felt like taking out my own camera to snap him in return — or possibly his partner, who was better looking. But really, I didn’t mind. I’ve taken thousands of candid pictures of other people, so I can’t complain, can I?
The Complainers Alas, in the UK — and in the USA and elsewhere — we’ve evolved a culture of complaining, even when it’s outrageously inappropriate.
For example, there was an incident in which a hotel saved the life of a guest during a party, but this didn’t stop another guest from complaining online about the waitress’s overly strong perfume.
Needless to say, people are always complaining when someone takes their photo without asking. When I arrived at my destination I took several shots, then ran into a problem when one man objected strongly. I explained that my shots have to be candid — and that I couldn’t ask, otherwise it would spoil the shot. However, he was adamant and insisted I should ask. I finally agreed with him and beat a hasty retreat.
The Full Huffington I think I got off lightly. Not so lucky was the man described by a female journalist in an article in the Huffington Post. The man took a picture of her with his phone “in a crowded bar,” and, basically, she went ballistic.
Well, that’s not quite correct…she went nuclear.
She told the bartender, who alerted the bouncer, who removed the man, who resisted. The bouncers called the police, who arrived at the same time as the man’s wife, who looked at the journalist, who averted her gaze.
I fully take the point that the man in question may have been taking sneaky pictures — and he was certainly not a bona fide street photographer. Yet I can’t help thinking that the lady complains too much. I think her “predator” was just idly playing with the camera on his phone, with no intent to harm or harass anyone. Maybe he thought her attractive, in which case the act of photography could be interpreted as a compliment.
In a way, the mobile snap of a pretty woman is a bit like a silent wolf whistle — and we all know how well a loud wolf whistle goes down these days! Women confront building workers and try to “bust their balls” (sorry, I’ve been watching “The Sopranos” again). Men now try to be more discreet, but their discretion is not accepted. Snaps are out! Soon it will be unacceptable even to look and there’ll be police outside every bar.
What’s the Difference? After all, what’s the difference between snapping a photo and just looking? Personally, I don’t think there’s as much difference as people commonly suppose. I’m fortunate to have a good visual memory and can recall what someone looks like if I’ve seen them in reality.
Certain people (not me) have an “eidetic memory” which enables them to recall every detail of a person or scene in their “mind’s eye,” after a brief viewing. An “afterimage” on the retina seems to linger in the mind for a short while, before it fades away.
Most of us have the ability to recognise the faces of people we’ve met. General Eisenhower was said to have been able to put a name to the faces of hundreds of people under his command. You don’t need a camera or a photograph to store a person’s image in your mind.
There are all kinds of issues surrounding the incident with the journalist I’ve mentioned, not least of which is her complaint that he also photographed her friend’s (fully clothed) bottom.
Ah, well, it’s not a hanging offence, is it? I feel a measure of sympathy with the man in question because of the furore which followed his misdemeanor. Please note: “misdemeanor: a nonindictable offence, regarded in the US (and formerly in the UK) as less serious than a felony.”
The Forum Speaks Forum members on DPReview made some excellent comments — and some ludicrous ones — while debating the Huffington article. For some, the journalist’s draconian response was outrageous, for others it was fully justified.
What I found most depressing was the comment by an anonymous poster who said: “One of the reasons I don’t do street photography is that I would feel too weird just taking pictures of people I don’t know.”
“Marie” wrote: “I can’t even imagine taking someone’s picture without asking, unless it’s a celebrity or something.”
Another poster self-righteously noted: “I never take photos of a single person without asking permission first.” Then added: “Does not apply to groups of people, couples, etc.”
The idea that photographers should take pictures only of people they know is so absurd as to be not worth rebuffing. Without candid street photography we’d never have an accurate record of our way of life.
I agree that certain places are “off limits” — and bars are probably among them. In those places we should be able to drink and relax, and carry on our nefarious activities without having them recorded for possible public distribution. But the street, the park, the museum, and even the mall should be places where photography is accepted and where everyone is “fair game.”
That way, people would have to dress with greater care. Society would benefit greatly if everyone was “camera ready” all of the time. I’m all for it.
If you were to ask me about the most significant development in street photography in the last thirty years, my reply would not be about digital cameras or photo editing software. It would be about what people are actually doing in the street.
These days, everyone is on the phone. Thirty years ago no one was on the phone. That’s the difference.
If Henri Cartier-Bresson were alive today and able to photograph a man leaping a puddle behind the Gare St Lazare, the man would definitely be chatting on a mobile phone.
I returned from a day’s shooting in London recently to discover that nearly every photo showed someone — either the main subject or a person in the background — using (what we used to call) a “mobile”. I wondered, will it be like this for the next hundred years, or will a new technology come along to displace the ubiquitous smartphone?
What’s Good About It? Given that the main subject of street photography has become “people on the phone,” is it possible to find anything good about it? After all, if we can’t find a way of making it appealing, we must either take laborious steps to avoid it — or turn it to our advantage.
One good thing about the mobile phone is its tendency to absorb the user, so enabling the street photographer to take a picture without being noticed. That’s really helpful. It allows us to get closer and take a more detailed but less cluttered photo.
Unfortunately, there’s one big snag: when they’re standing still, people either close their eyes, or, when they have a live video link, look directly at the phone.
My featured image (above) shows the effect of closed eyes and phone absorption — and also makes a comment on it by including part of a poster featuring a woman with eyes wide open.
Relying on Context Again, I start with the premise that “everyone’s on the phone,” and this time I’m suggesting an approach which prioritises context above the subject. Here’s an example (below).
If there were no mobile phones, the subject of this image would have no reason to be lingering in the temporary doorway of the restaurant construction. But is he really the subject? The context — the colourful hoarding — is so noticeable as to dwarf the individual worker, however nicely lit he may have been in the sun of the late afternoon.
I’m a little bit worried that I may have been “played” by the company in question. It would be a good PR ploy — wouldn’t it? — to dress up the building site with huge, eye-catching graphics, then to make sure there was a photogenic builder on hand to pose outside whenever a street photographer walks past.
I understand that P.F. Chang’s is the “largest full service, casual dining Chinese restaurant chain in the United States,” so I wouldn’t be surprised if they didn’t pull out all stops for the London launch.
Incidentally, the name doesn’t refer to the sexy lady on the hoarding. She’s not the proprietress, unfortunately! P.F. Chang is Paul Fleming (hence P.F.) and Philip Chiang (now with simplified spelling). Well, it’s better than P.C. Fleming, especially in London.
Listening, Talking, Browsing, Snapping One reason why the phone has become so ubiquitous is because of its multi-purpose functionality. I recall the launch of the iPhone in 2007 (only twelve years ago!) by Steve Jobs: the first time the world heard about it.
Jobs pretended to be launching “three revolutionary products” – “a widescreen iPod,” “a revolutionary mobile phone,” and thirdly, “a breakthrough Internet communicator.” They were, of course, one and the same device, as he went on to demonstrate.
To say the iPhone became “transformative” is really an understatement. Arguably it’s transformed nearly everything, from popular photography to street navigation. The cellphone is an interactive diary, a notepad, a combined radio, record player, TV and cinema, a restaurant and entertainment guide, even a wallet from which we can spend money. We’re moving towards a cashless society, courtesy of the iPhone (and its imitators). We can run our entire lives from this one, handheld device.
The trouble is: our entire lives tend to consist of what we do with the mobile phone — all that listening, talking, browsing, snapping and spending. Although it connects us to each other, the phone has also become an intermediary standing between us and the real world.
Does anyone really look at Michelangelo’s David? No, they take a photo with a mobile phone in order to establish an entirely illusory connection, rather like sending a tape recorder to an orchestral concert instead of attending in person.
I’m not sure whether the man in my photo (above) is browsing, chatting or snapping. If he’s taking a photograph he’ll be disappointed. The baby seems have disappeared, leaving behind her “thick down warm rompers pink hooded ski suit” (or whatever its called).
In the same way we could be using the mobile phone to help us lead our lives, only to find that life has vanished, leaving the empty husk of virtual reality in its place.
It’s all very confusing. I’m still not sure whether the “smart phone” is the friend or the enemy of the street photographer. Just thinking about it is enough to make me want to take up smoking again.
