➡Be sure and get my FREE Photography Guides: "I Bought A Nice Camera, Now What? 10 Things To Do First" and "Photography Basics: 20 Definitions You Should Know" on my website: "boorayperry.com/education/ ➡Use the code RUclips to save 50% on my guide to photographing with natural light and my guide on photographing outdoors with off-camera flash! 9 ➡Guides and other stuff - boorayperry.com/education/ ➡Gear - boorayperry.com/boorays-gear/ ➡Instagram - wwwinstagram.com/boorayperry/ ➡Store - my-store-e02782.creator-spring.com/listing/new-camera-nerd ➡Booray Explains - tinyurl.com/3e7w8zjt
I recently discovered street photography and I love it. You’re right on all 4 points. Everything already exists but it’s interpreted through the eye of another human being. That’s art. When come to be respectful it’s about the ethical values of the photographer . Unfortunately I’ve seen on many FB street photography pages, images of homeless or other demeaning circumstances. They make me cringe. One can argue it’s documentary… It might be but I feel uneasy.
Important discussion. Regarding the first point, good street photography doesn't just document the world, it interprets it. Often it shows us what we DON'T see. But it's good to be forced to reflect on one's artistic practice.
Yep-as if the works of Alex Webb, Saul Leiter, and Harry Gruyaert should simply be tossed off into the trash heap of photography history. Perhaps we should all just simply fall in step with what Tony N. Is putting out there. Oh wait, what work is he putting out there-just YT videos the last time I checked.
Hi Booray, I rewatched your street photography video and I agree with everything you said. I am not by any means a professional street photographer. I do like it. Thanks for putting this out there and great job
Interesting take. What Tony said about not needing to document things anymore like we used to, and because everything has been done before, the same could be said about any photography. You can't find one picture that hasn't been done before but it's all about the way in which it is done now. His photography is amazing but none of it is particularly original. He's not a street photographer per say so really don't know why he's wanting to police a style that he has nothing to do with. Let people practice the art they enjoy. People in larger cities don't seem to be bothered at all by being shot. There is a respectful way to do it anyhow if the subject is the sole subject of the frame. As far as being invasive, nature photographers are about the most invasive you can be. Did the eagle want his picture taken and sold ?
Street photography has a place in my heart. My x100f goes everywhere with me. I enjoy days where I can just walk around in Downtown Sacramento and challenge myself to get a shot. I don’t always get a shot but when I do, it’s so satisfying. Keep up the great content.
I don't think there is any reason why street photography should be creepy, intrusive or rude. When I am trying to make images, I am exactly trying NOT to be intrusive, and when I do engage with people I am friendly. Personally, I am interested in spaces and scenes, and I definitely not stalking any individual AS individual. Also, I would never use / post an image I wouldn't feel happy to show the people who appear in the photograph. I have no desire to make anyone seem ridiculous or undignified. The world is rapidly changing and a lot of classic street photography was done in a handful of western cities. There is definitely still a place for good, artistic, sensitive and perceptive street photography.
I agree with you 100%. Although I’m not a “street photographer”, I often take photos in public places, like parks, historical sights, etc. I do this to document my memories of a special day. The last thing I want is someone else telling me where and when I can take photos in a public space.
I have always resonated with this statement “If you take a picture of a human that does not make him noble, there is no reason to take this picture. That is my way of seeing things.” Sebastiao Salgado One approach to street photography that exemplifies rudeness and exploitation is the type of work done by Bruce Gilden (and emulated by his adherents) - where he jumps in front of people just walking down the street and blasts a flash right in their face - hoping to create a shocked look reaction. Other examples would be those who seek out people in demeaning or embarrassing circumstances to make spectacles of them. I find that sickening.
I agree with all your comments especially what street photography can be at its best. This is not new. Painters and travel writers also describe the world in all its fascinating variety. I think you nailed it when you said being kind to others is key but documenting the world in an interesting way is what humans do
You response to Tony’s 4 points is nearly exactly what went through my mind as you read his list. Tony’s view of photography tends to be more that of a commercial photographer than of an artist.
I simply enjoy it and the mostly great interactions I have with people. Everything mentioned doesn’t matter. if governments can record everything the people do, we should have the same rights in public. Long live street photography!
Why do we need wildlife photographers?! We all know what a bear, a eagle , a moose looks like, it's been documented! I think we can all agree that's a ridiculous statement.
@@BoorayPerry I watchYT videos that last six minutes or more of street photography. I rate them as YES or NO. Sadly, most are rated NO. Sometimes I think, if these are the images that have been selected, what do the images that don’t make the cut look like? On a good day 5% of my images are worth looking at a 2nd time. I have been told a difference between a professional and an amateur is the pro only shares their good images. Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)
Booray first thank you for this. I am a street photographer (these days). I say this because I have jumped from medium to medium for my art pretty much my whole life. My first job was to use photography in large scale b&w for backdrops for NYC stores and store windows. 4 x 8 feet panels - where I would airbrush color and other elements into the prints. 1980s before photoshop. We used to go out and shoot street scenes, for example skateboarders and obscure faces of people in motion. Usually no one cared what we were doing and as a kid I hadn’t a clue if I was infringing or doing something inappropriate. I am not the best photographer. I struggle with the technical aspects but know how important the triangle is. I am an experimenter also. Shooting through glass, using reflections, slowing my shutter to purposefully get blur. I challenge myself each day in NYC to get one good shot. It becomes controversial. Not on the street so much. I do have a tassels here and there and if someone is unhappy with my presence, I show them the shot offer to send it to them or delete it in front of them. That’s a rarity. The usual objection, comes from my audience. Which prompted me to create a separate instagram account for just my street photography. (I_photo_da_street) shameless plug. Lol. It’s there I feel free to share whatever I deem appropriate. I am photographing for my own enjoyment. I am trying to learn and grow as an artist. The point is - the subject while important is not the intention to stalk. You are correct - as an artist I only care about my art. Thanks for this once again. I love all your videos and I am learning with each one of your posts. So much appreciation! Good luck on the house sale! Your friend Andrew.
Thanks for the comment and the kind words. I've been playing around with shooting through glass a little myself. :) I checked out your instagram. Great stuff. Just the sort of stuff I like that gives you a feel for the city. :)
I agree completely. I respect your logical and ethical analysis. Capturing that which is already being captured but with the eye of the artist is the same as the difference between snapshots of the Eiffel Tower and an artistic, deliberate expression of a moment in time evoking an emotional response
Don't want to be negative about the other guy, but he's a grifter. I doubt he even does street photog. so his opinion is of little merit imo. Notice how he hedges every position so he can always backpedal with the opposite position if necessary. You handled this very well, with sincerity! I'm of the school you have to take some risks to get the best work! I feel whatever the other person is feeling-- except times 10. If I were to make someone uncomfortable, I pay for it dearly. I chicken out on a lot of shots I feel in my gut I should have taken. As far as the ethics of street, my guiding code is, "do what you will- but be prepared to accept the consequences". I think that's fair.
Sometimes hedging a position isn't so you can back pedal. I have a problem where it's very hard for me to take a hard position on one side of any issue because I can always see the other side. Thanks for watching and thanks for an insightful comment. 😁📷
So as far as you’re concerned, if people are not aware of being photographed, they are just subjects, tools, and paint for your pallet, and have no right to privacy? That’s discomforting. To the 4 points of the post. 1 - No longer needed. For each artist trying to create art, there are hundreds of content providers more interested in going viral. 2 - People should consent. If any part of your rationalization includes any variation of "it's not illegal”, you’re on thin ethical and moral ice. For the record, there are places where it is illegal to take the picture without consent, and lots more places where it’s illegal to post those pictures. As to that guy on the bike that you know nothing about, how do you know that if someone saw that picture it wouldn’t cause him trouble? The internet is littered with lives upset by an innocent post. 3 Street photography is often stalking. And judging from the bulk of the “street photography” channels on RUclips, being brazen, stalking, and being sneaky do seem to be the core skills. 4 Intrusive and rude. As per item one, there is only a small fraction of the “Street Photographers” creating art these days. Most of the great Street Photographers were artists and/or working professionals first. Using the work of the best to justify poor manners is a shabby argument.
@@BoorayPerry Street photography is not journalism. Journalists, at least reputable ones, generally follow some code of ethics and as well as laws that try to find the balance between privacy and the public’s right to know. There's quite a lot of material on the topic.
@@BoorayPerry Are you trying to generate activity on your post? This has nothing to do with the topic of your post or my initial comment, which is Street Photography and the value of it.
@@alanhaenni I mentioned security cameras in the video. I'm trying to understand your point of view. I'm trying to understand exactly who you think should be allowed to photograph in a public space. I get that journalism is fine with you but we haven't yet discussed the governing body that will determine if someone is a journalist or not. Of course someone will have to be in charge of determining if something is "newsworthy" or not as well. Next, security cameras which are everywhere... should they be shut down as well? I'm just trying to understand how you think the whole thing should work for everyone.
Great video Booray, I don't follow Tony other than here in YT but I had no idea he made this statement about street photography. He made some interesting points. I have only practiced street photography like 3 times this year, and every time it feels as a very rewarding experience. You are out in public but as a photographer somehow it feels like the most intimate experience not because you are "stalking" people but because it's literally only you and your camera vs the world around. In my experience street photography simply should not die, because I compare it to wildlife photography in the sense that they both push you to be better, and make you get more familiar with your gear since you have to make adjustments on the fly every now and then. And street photography in particular makes you work on your composing skills more. Here are my takes on each of Tony's points about the matter: 1. About "everything being documented all the time": I remember that Simon d'Entremon (I might have butchered his last name) talks in some of hi videos about a very old and famous tree in Nova Scotia if I recall correctly, that it was a point of attraction for tourists and locals, but it was taken off by a heavy storm or something nature-related. He was able to capture a BEAUTIFUL astro photo featuring that tree before the tree was removed, and that he was glad he did. That is something only photographers can achieve (without taking A.I. into he talk). So as you say, if anything is getting documented all the time, stopping street photography will not make any difference. 2. About people giving consent: well, if someone is getting an issue with being photographed, I would agree that the photographer should delete the pic if confronted. But we should still be able to capture pictures of people in public. I would argue that photographers should oath to always show pics that do not compromise on someone else's image, unless is for strictly documentary purposes. 3. I can see scenarios like this happening, but how "often" is what we should figure out. Creeps will creep no matter what. 4. I agree with you on this one, I have seen some incredibly artistic street photos. That bottom line that Tony is implying is way WAY too low.
Saying that “Street Photography” should die but photojournalism and documentary photography are OK is sort of elitist. First, there’s no good definition of photojournalism or documentary photography that would not include taking pictures of strangers in public places. Making a distinction would have to come down to who’s doing the photography and not the content. I don’t think we want to say that only professionals at work are allowed to record what goes on in our world.
When we look at everything through the lens of technology and instrumentalism and are intimidated or fascinated by tools, it is not so strange that with the advancement of digitalism, we have such a view on different categories, including art and photography... while what a photographer It draws him to the street and makes him interested in recording people's lives, It is not the generality and availability of photography facilities or vice versa, its exclusivity, but this inner desire that gives meaning to his own life. If the argument that taking pictures in the street is intrusive and rude is a correct hypothesis, then Henri Cartier-Bresson; Garry Winogrand; Eugene Atget and Vivian Maier have been one of the biggest intrusive in contemporary history! Because a photograph was definitely something more strange and disturbing on those days!... The tools are supposed to be something to serve our ideas, thoughts and creativity, not something to suppress and remove us from the circle of life! I think that what is dead is not street photography, but a human being who has lost himself under the control of tools and commodity fetishism... Apologies for the grammatical mistakes. With respect and love from Iran
Hey Booray, it's great to watch another one of your videos you are the real deal. I do Street photography just for myself i'm not on Instagram so i don't post any of my photos. The one subject that i wouldn't photograph is a homeless person. You have a great philosophy Booray follow your heart and do what you enjoy, and that's what i do. I enjoy Street Art, shooting Birds, Planes, diecast cars and Street photography. Great shot you took of the Panning of the Bicycle. This was a great topic, thank you. 😊📸
You are SO right about staging your home to sell. I'd love it if things were like that all the time. I did purge SO much when we moved to our current home in 2017.
Interesting topic. I believe photography is art and if someone happens to enter the picture while I am shooting a building, well, I could remove them. I tend to shoot cityscape, more than street photography, mainly because I love historical buildings, inside and outside. In America, there are camera's everywhere in the city, predominately at stop lights, financial institutions, etc. for security reasons, so, really there is no privacy in this country or the expectation of that right. I see where Tony is coming from, especially if he is living in Europe, because they have much stricter laws concerning this. If I am out shooting and I see that someone appears to be uncomfortable I will look around for something else to photograph, out of respect, but, that is how I was raised.
First off I don't give one iota to what that pair think, As you said we are all being photographed hundreds of times a day, CCTV on the street, in the shops, dash cams, doorbell cameras etc etc. I will take shots that are humorous, but that are not making people look foolish. People are great subjects, so many expressions all add to the rich tapestry of life, street photography is fun. If they think street photography is creepy I think they need to look at themselves, it could be them that has the problem.
Thank you Booray. I would hate for us to give up another freedom. This country was founded on freedom. The freedoms we enjoy in America are so important to us as individuals. The government continually chips away at our freedoms and ‘freedom of speech or expression’ is fundamental to all of us. There is more of a chance that someone with a phone will record embarrassing videos or photos and post them than would a serious street photographer. I vote for not giving up our freedom to practice street photography.
I think it's a question of ethics vs law. I do worry a bit that some street photographers looking to push the boundaries to "go viral" (maybe they're new to street, or maybe frustrated that they're not getting attention). If we lose sight of ethics then I think lawmakers might feel compelled to step in. For example in Germany it isn't currently legal to publish a photo on social media (or anywhere) who is recognizable without their consent (with a few exceptions - eg a public figure). I think Germany's laws are problematic. Some of the event photography that I'm booked for would be illegal there (eg isolating people in a crowd and making them the subject at an outdoor event. At public gatherings (including protests) you can only publish wider group shots. You can't isolate interesting moments in the scene. The same restrictions apply to photographing police in Germany. On the claim that street photography is often used as a pretext for being creepy. I'm not seeing that. At times though I have stopped and thought "will people think I'm creepy" before posting, when in reality there's nothing of concern in the scene. In a way female street photographers have some advantages in authentic scenes they can capture and publish. I'm not mad about that, it's just reality. Some female street photographers acknowledge that capturing and publishing some authentic street scenes (including kids and women) is easier for them.
I completely agree with your arguments. Like you, I worry that, with powerful and easy to use digital cameras being so accessible, street photography CAN easily go into creepy territory. I also think that there's nothing inevitable about this. I think it is key for individual street photographers is to approach the trade (or the hobby) with integrity, empathy, and GOOD INTENTIONS toward their subjects. If we inadvertently take a photo that we think might be perceived as creepy, then it probably IS creepy and should not be posted or shared unless an strong artistic argument for it can be found. The photographic community should not be shy to call out photographers who transgress this "golden rule".
I’m a month late to the conversation myself. Booray’s rebuttal is right on. The only thing I’d add is an objection to the idea that a legitimate practice should be “forbidden” because it _can_ be a pretense for something else. In the case Tony makes, the problem is stalking, a crime we already recognize as such, not photography. I recognize that we need to “do better” for the victims of stalking, but banning photos, or AirTags isn’t the answer. Of course Booray is a photographer with a RUclips channel. In contrast the Northrups are RUclipsrs who happen to comment on photography. I don’t want that comment to be interpreted as “gatekeeping”. As me saying that T & C _can’t_ be photographers too. However, I often suspect that Tony will contrive an argument solely for the views. He definitely put thought into this - but that thought was about generating a reaction, not expressing a genuine viewpoint. C.L.I.C.K.B.A.I.T Thanks for weighing in here Booray. Good luck with the move. I miss the pod. I don’t FB, but I might have to activate Threads so that I can keep up with “the conversation.”
You're 100% accurate with your thoughts. I stopped following Tony's channel a long time ago for various reasons. I had no idea he posted this. I realize everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but some options are worth more. Great video!
A person may not have a legal right to privacy in a US public place therefore you are not prohibited by law from photographing them. But if you photograph them in a way that would embarrass them or compromise their safety for your gain, then that is still unkind /unethical. So then the question becomes do you want to be a jerk for profit. Plenty go right ahead and eagerly use "documenting for posterity" / "everything should be documented" as an excuse to be intrusive, some even belligerently so. It would be a shame if respectful / professional photographers got caught up in a backlash against the increasing number of intrusive street photographers.
-Street Photography and Fine Art are all that's left. Everything else is so contrived and repeated, and there is so little conceptualization, just repetition. (My work included). Street photography is about Finding, and Observing, and Interpreting random moments. A ring camera is documenting history, but under very limited circumstances (One angle, one lens) It's advantage is only consistency. -As far as the stalking arguement, Baseball bats can be used to hit people over the head, we don't eliminate Little League. With Freedom comes risk.
I think Tony forgot to mention that he's not opposing street photography, he's opposing bad street photography, y'know, the people who don't ask for conscent when taking a photo with a flash into someone's face, taking the same boring photos that had already been taken over and over, creep and stalk people on the street, etc. Basically, yeah... I'm opposing that as well. But it's quite a generalization (and an offensive one at it) to assume all street photography is like that!
Everything is documented is creepy in itself but the street photographer isn’t trying to do that as much as capturing a moment in his or her time…a still…a frozen part in time while everything stops except for what the photographer ‘sees’ and captures. There are a few street photographers that create art beyond the street….like a painting .
IMO. There’s very much a need for artistic street photography more than ever in this day and age when everyone’s a photographer and we’re filmed all the time + for all the other reasons you outlined. Having said that I do prefer the photography that celebrates the dignity of the subject like HCB did rather than say Martin Parr who ridicules and strips the dignity away from his subjects/victims
I'm not a fan of Tony & Chelsea Northrup. That said I have watched some or their vids on occasion and no doubt will continue to do so. Their knowledge of photography is huge and they're a great resource to learn from. I do cringe though more often than not when I watch them. As far as Tony's tweet is concerned regarding street photography, he lost the argument for me with his very first point. 1. We no longer need street photographers to capture candid life for historical purposes. Everything is documented. Um, by that same logic we no longer need landscape photographers. We no longer need architectural photographers of old buildings or castles. We no longer need nature photographers.... and so on, and so forth. Everything has been documented has it not? Based on what I have seen of both Tony and Chelsea I'm of the opinion that they do this on purpose purely to elicit reaction and clicks. An example of that is that every so often they will put out a poll for their viewers, a simple "Yes" or "No" type poll. What goes unnoticed is that for months and months prior to their poll they've already actively been priming their regular audience to their own point of view. When they post their poll, a huge majority of their audience, having already been primed, will vote in a way that enforces Tony and Chelsea's opinions. So although I have watched some of their vids, their opinions are always viewed by me with a large pinch of salt.
@@Dustyphoto915 What? There is absolutely nothing wrong with sharing great works. Unless they are boring, I may add. The energy of the street and the beauty of all the people, need not be kept in the shadows.
@@lorenschwiderski Great works. Exactly. Instagram is not full of great works. Great works are awash in a mass of mediocre images for the sake of content.
At first, when I saw the title of the video, I thought “Yes! It’s all a bit voyeuristic, a bit creepy”. However, I think you have changed my mind. By the way I love that photo of the guy at the pipe organ.
I disagree with Tony. Street photography is about documenting life at the moment it occurs. Interesting behavior. Interesting ways people dress. Juxtaposition nobody sees but me. Capturing interesting light. There is so much to capture when I am on the street. I do not take images that will show my subject in a bad light. This is especially true of homeless or people with behavioral dyscontrol. Your privacy IS being invaded when I photograph you on the street. As you point out we are being recorded on CCTV all the time. Forget the legality. If you want to protect your privacy while on the street you need to wear a mask. I do not take pictures that aren’t intrusive. I make the image and move on. Nobody knows I’ve taken the picture when done right. Most of my images are done right. I try to be like Henri Cartier-Brisson and be invisible . When I am caught I raise my camera to let the subject know I’ve taken their image. This week I was caught taking a picture of three people. One woman didn’t like the image I made when I showed it to her. She said she could do better than that. She broke into a bright smile and looked towards the sky. A much better image than the original. When the subject asks that the image to be deleted I delete the image. I also offer to shoot the image to them after I’ve shared it with them. Most people refuse this offer. My favorite place to do street photography is NYC. There are many people on the street. They seem focused on other things and don’t notice what I’m doing. If I’m caught they continue going where they are going. I’ve never had a New Yorker ask me to delete an image. I live in Seattle and things are different here. I’ve been caught and had the request to have the image deleted. I had a woman try and steal my camera when she caught me. A couple called the police and tried to have me arrested. They never asked that their image be deleted. When the officer told them what I was doing was legal they almost attacked him. Since I started taking street images I’ve learned to see that there are potential subjects all around me. The street is full of entertainment if you are made aware of the show. Sometimes I walk the street for exercise without a camera. I create images in my mind and smile. I’m still entertained. I would be very sad if street photography was made illegal. Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)
Item #3 stalking/creepy. I did not link that to street photography but more towards the paparazzi howdying celebs for profit and definitely invading their privacy in some instances. I agree that good street photography has value in that it tells a story and invokes emotion.
Don’t forget paparazzi are not street photographers. Paparazzi are trying to capture images of famous people to sell. Street photographers capture moments on the street others don’t see. Very few of us sell these images. My images never leave my computer’s hard drive. Many of the images never leave the memory card and are erased to make room for new images. Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)
I do not agree that everything is documented. I realize people are taking billions of pictures per day, but the vast majority of these pictures are snapshots of limited interest that will decay into digital dust. Surveillance video is recorded over quickly unless it captures a crime. Street photographers are doing something different that can offer artistic and historical value that is like rare gems in the digital dust storm.
After Tony and Chelsea's unfounded assault on Steve McCurry a couple years ago I've never watched any of their content since. Nothing wrong with street photography, not my cup of tea but then again I don't have any interesting "streets" near me. If there was I'd sure like to try it.
First, 99% of photos taken on the street are by people using their cellphones. Plenty of company for those of use with our Fuji 100 cameras. Second, when taking an photo of a person who will notice me doing it, I always ask permission, telling them why I want their image. I rarely get turned down.
I tell them the reason that I want to take the picture. "That is a great outfit. I'd love to take a picture of it. May I? You look adorable with that child! I'd love to have a picture of it. May I." other words, I compliment them first and then they like it. People who dress nice like to be seen and admired and people with kids who are cute like to be told it and be in a photo.
@@PhilZwick You are taking street portraits. A perfectly fine thing to do. In my mind, street photography is partially about creating images that are candid. Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)
A good street photographer is courteous and knows how to build up their subjects. The subject walks away from the encounter feeling good about themselves. They've got a positive story to tell. But SOME street photographers ARE jerks. The guys who troll a crowded street and jump into the subject's face with a flash within 2 feet of the subject's face SURPRISE!!! . . . there's nothing artistic about frightening strangers. THOSE guys should be banned. They are punks. Only a very passive (New York) culture tolerates them. If they tried such a thing in a more independent-minded city, they might come to physical harm. And no jury in such a city would have much sympathy for them.
Very much agree with you. If street photography will die it's probably because of the uniformity of it now. So many people are staring numbly into their mobiles, most are dressed the same, their hair is uniform, their attitudes are uniform and their environment mostly uniform. The days of Cartier Bresson are sadly gone and the grittiness of street photography has largely disappeared.
I have no idea what planet you're living on but that it has to be farthest from the truth. Speaking as a street photographer, who's been shooting the streets for many years. You can find normality or grittiness just depends on where you want to look. 🤔😁📸
There is a difference between a 'Bruce Gilden' and a 'Suzanne Stein'. Gilden got away with his particular brand of being a jerk in NYC...in Oklahoma he would have been punched out in a minute (and I suspect changed his whole approach to street photography!). In fact I heard him say one time..."see this...this is MY street!". Earning fame and fortune at someone else's expense is a lousy way of doing business. It says more about the photographer than the photo says about the street. There is nothing wrong with street photography...just the jerks who think it's all about them and their career. You know the ones...the ones who like to cram a camera in someone's face to get a reaction. I saw another 'Gilden' on some 'walkie-talkie' channel about street photography. His comments were a clear indication of his attitude about 'getting a picture no matter what'. He talked big....until a guy threatened to feed him his camera...and suddenly his 'method' wasn't so valuable any more. He whimpered away like a kicked puppy. People like that have no individual ideas or impetus...they just copy someone like Gilden, and usually do so poorly. I predict street photography will be around forever. The photographers who miss the whole purpose and value of doing street photography with compassion and awareness of those around them will not. By the way...I don't watch Tony Northrup....has he ever really been a street photographer??
Culturally it's very different in Australian....people crave privacy here ..even legallyits different here....we can take the photo but you can't post it hmmmm ...if I do street photo's I'll always seek.permission of people..I.imagine America and Europe is different 😮. Is it stalking ....Tony Tony if you were stalking someone you wouldn't even.own a camera ..I've worked with violent crazy people and they aren't standing on the street with an x100v
You sound overmodulated. But anyway. You follow Tony Northrup? 😅😅 Jesus Christ. It depends what he means by street photography. I don’t think anyone really knows other than pictures you take outside. Tony has a video from 3 years ago. It’s called “should we ban street photography”. He’ll say anything for clicks.
Yeah, just seeing this and will just say, if this guy truly believe what’s he’s saying and it not just click bait to stir engagement, then he’s ignorant of the distinction or an elitist a$$hole who thinks his way of seeing the world and making art is better than everyone else.
![Lethal Company Music Video 🎵 "Follow The Orders" [VERSION A]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QeooZB4Z7RA/mqdefault.jpg)
➡Be sure and get my FREE Photography Guides: "I Bought A Nice Camera, Now What? 10 Things To Do First"
and
"Photography Basics: 20 Definitions You Should Know"
on my website: "boorayperry.com/education/
➡Use the code RUclips to save 50% on my guide to photographing with natural light and my guide on photographing outdoors with off-camera flash!
9
➡Guides and other stuff - boorayperry.com/education/
➡Gear - boorayperry.com/boorays-gear/
➡Instagram - wwwinstagram.com/boorayperry/
➡Store - my-store-e02782.creator-spring.com/listing/new-camera-nerd
➡Booray Explains - tinyurl.com/3e7w8zjt
I recently discovered street photography and I love it. You’re right on all 4 points. Everything already exists but it’s interpreted through the eye of another human being. That’s art. When come to be respectful it’s about the ethical values of the photographer . Unfortunately I’ve seen on many FB street photography pages, images of homeless or other demeaning circumstances. They make me cringe. One can argue it’s documentary… It might be but I feel uneasy.
Street photography absolutely should NOT "die." What an absurd question.
Important discussion. Regarding the first point, good street photography doesn't just document the world, it interprets it. Often it shows us what we DON'T see. But it's good to be forced to reflect on one's artistic practice.
Yep-as if the works of Alex Webb, Saul Leiter, and Harry Gruyaert should simply be tossed off into the trash heap of photography history. Perhaps we should all just simply fall in step with what Tony N. Is putting out there. Oh wait, what work is he putting out there-just YT videos the last time I checked.
Hi Booray, I rewatched your street photography video and I agree with everything you said. I am not by any means a professional street photographer. I do like it. Thanks for putting this out there and great job
Thanks for commenting!
Interesting take. What Tony said about not needing to document things anymore like we used to, and because everything has been done before, the same could be said about any photography. You can't find one picture that hasn't been done before but it's all about the way in which it is done now. His photography is amazing but none of it is particularly original. He's not a street photographer per say so really don't know why he's wanting to police a style that he has nothing to do with. Let people practice the art they enjoy. People in larger cities don't seem to be bothered at all by being shot. There is a respectful way to do it anyhow if the subject is the sole subject of the frame. As far as being invasive, nature photographers are about the most invasive you can be. Did the eagle want his picture taken and sold ?
You are right about the contradiction between points 1 and 2; and also that one can do candid photography AND respect their dignity.
Street photography has a place in my heart. My x100f goes everywhere with me. I enjoy days where I can just walk around in Downtown Sacramento and challenge myself to get a shot. I don’t always get a shot but when I do, it’s so satisfying. Keep up the great content.
I'm the same way 😀📷
I don't think there is any reason why street photography should be creepy, intrusive or rude. When I am trying to make images, I am exactly trying NOT to be intrusive, and when I do engage with people I am friendly. Personally, I am interested in spaces and scenes, and I definitely not stalking any individual AS individual. Also, I would never use / post an image I wouldn't feel happy to show the people who appear in the photograph. I have no desire to make anyone seem ridiculous or undignified. The world is rapidly changing and a lot of classic street photography was done in a handful of western cities. There is definitely still a place for good, artistic, sensitive and perceptive street photography.
I agree with you 100%. Although I’m not a “street photographer”, I often take photos in public places, like parks, historical sights, etc. I do this to document my memories of a special day. The last thing I want is someone else telling me where and when I can take photos in a public space.
I have always resonated with this statement
“If you take a picture of a human that does not make him noble, there is no reason to take this picture. That is my way of seeing things.”
Sebastiao Salgado
One approach to street photography that exemplifies rudeness and exploitation is the type of work done by Bruce Gilden (and emulated by his adherents) - where he jumps in front of people just walking down the street and blasts a flash right in their face - hoping to create a shocked look reaction. Other examples would be those who seek out people in demeaning or embarrassing circumstances to make spectacles of them. I find that sickening.
I agree with all your comments especially what street photography can be at its best. This is not new. Painters and travel writers also describe the world in all its fascinating variety. I think you nailed it when you said being kind to others is key but documenting the world in an interesting way is what humans do
I really miss your podcast but am glad you are still active here on RUclips. Happy Holidays!
Hey thanks! Happy holidays!
You response to Tony’s 4 points is nearly exactly what went through my mind as you read his list. Tony’s view of photography tends to be more that of a commercial photographer than of an artist.
I simply enjoy it and the mostly great interactions I have with people. Everything mentioned doesn’t matter. if governments can record everything the people do, we should have the same rights in public. Long live street photography!
Why do we need wildlife photographers?! We all know what a bear, a eagle , a moose looks like, it's been documented! I think we can all agree that's a ridiculous statement.
Street photography is fine. Oversharing is the problem. We see too many pointless images because of social media.
Another way to look at it is that we get to curate what we see ourselves.
@@BoorayPerry I watchYT videos that last six minutes or more of street photography. I rate them as YES or NO. Sadly, most are rated NO. Sometimes I think, if these are the images that have been selected, what do the images that don’t make the cut look like? On a good day 5% of my images are worth looking at a 2nd time.
I have been told a difference between a professional and an amateur is the pro only shares their good images.
Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)
@@martingreenberg870 that's not a bad definition 😁
I can really appreciate the conversation, but Tony Northrup is all about attention himself.
Booray first thank you for this. I am a street photographer (these days). I say this because I have jumped from medium to medium for my art pretty much my whole life. My first job was to use photography in large scale b&w for backdrops for NYC stores and store windows. 4 x 8 feet panels - where I would airbrush color and other elements into the prints. 1980s before photoshop. We used to go out and shoot street scenes, for example skateboarders and obscure faces of people in motion. Usually no one cared what we were doing and as a kid I hadn’t a clue if I was infringing or doing something inappropriate.
I am not the best photographer. I struggle with the technical aspects but know how important the triangle is. I am an experimenter also. Shooting through glass, using reflections, slowing my shutter to purposefully get blur. I challenge myself each day in NYC to get one good shot.
It becomes controversial. Not on the street so much. I do have a tassels here and there and if someone is unhappy with my presence, I show them the shot offer to send it to them or delete it in front of them. That’s a rarity. The usual objection, comes from my audience. Which prompted me to create a separate instagram account for just my street photography. (I_photo_da_street) shameless plug. Lol.
It’s there I feel free to share whatever I deem appropriate. I am photographing for my own enjoyment. I am trying to learn and grow as an artist. The point is - the subject while important is not the intention to stalk. You are correct - as an artist I only care about my art. Thanks for this once again. I love all your videos and I am learning with each one of your posts. So much appreciation! Good luck on the house sale! Your friend Andrew.
Thanks for the comment and the kind words. I've been playing around with shooting through glass a little myself. :)
I checked out your instagram. Great stuff. Just the sort of stuff I like that gives you a feel for the city. :)
I agree completely. I respect your logical and ethical analysis. Capturing that which is already being captured but with the eye of the artist is the same as the difference between snapshots of the Eiffel Tower and an artistic, deliberate expression of a moment in time evoking an emotional response
Logical and ethical on my middle names. 🤣
Don't want to be negative about the other guy, but he's a grifter. I doubt he even does street photog. so his opinion is of little merit imo. Notice how he hedges every position so he can always backpedal with the opposite position if necessary.
You handled this very well, with sincerity!
I'm of the school you have to take some risks to get the best work! I feel whatever the other person is feeling-- except times 10. If I were to make someone uncomfortable, I pay for it dearly. I chicken out on a lot of shots I feel in my gut I should have taken.
As far as the ethics of street, my guiding code is, "do what you will- but be prepared to accept the consequences". I think that's fair.
Sometimes hedging a position isn't so you can back pedal. I have a problem where it's very hard for me to take a hard position on one side of any issue because I can always see the other side.
Thanks for watching and thanks for an insightful comment. 😁📷
So as far as you’re concerned, if people are not aware of being photographed, they are just subjects, tools, and paint for your pallet, and have no right to privacy? That’s discomforting.
To the 4 points of the post.
1 - No longer needed.
For each artist trying to create art, there are hundreds of content providers more interested in going viral.
2 - People should consent.
If any part of your rationalization includes any variation of "it's not illegal”, you’re on thin ethical and moral ice.
For the record, there are places where it is illegal to take the picture without consent, and lots more places where it’s illegal to post those pictures.
As to that guy on the bike that you know nothing about, how do you know that if someone saw that picture it wouldn’t cause him trouble?
The internet is littered with lives upset by an innocent post.
3 Street photography is often stalking.
And judging from the bulk of the “street photography” channels on RUclips, being brazen, stalking, and being sneaky do seem to be the core skills.
4 Intrusive and rude.
As per item one, there is only a small fraction of the “Street Photographers” creating art these days.
Most of the great Street Photographers were artists and/or working professionals first. Using the work of the best to justify poor manners is a shabby argument.
If your solution is that permission should be required then how do you feel about journalism?
@@BoorayPerry
Street photography is not journalism.
Journalists, at least reputable ones, generally follow some code of ethics and as well as laws that try to find the balance between privacy and the public’s right to know. There's quite a lot of material on the topic.
@@alanhaenni And security cameras? How do you feel about them?
@@BoorayPerry Are you trying to generate activity on your post?
This has nothing to do with the topic of your post or my initial comment, which is Street Photography and the value of it.
@@alanhaenni I mentioned security cameras in the video. I'm trying to understand your point of view.
I'm trying to understand exactly who you think should be allowed to photograph in a public space. I get that journalism is fine with you but we haven't yet discussed the governing body that will determine if someone is a journalist or not. Of course someone will have to be in charge of determining if something is "newsworthy" or not as well.
Next, security cameras which are everywhere... should they be shut down as well?
I'm just trying to understand how you think the whole thing should work for everyone.
Great video Booray, I don't follow Tony other than here in YT but I had no idea he made this statement about street photography. He made some interesting points.
I have only practiced street photography like 3 times this year, and every time it feels as a very rewarding experience. You are out in public but as a photographer somehow it feels like the most intimate experience not because you are "stalking" people but because it's literally only you and your camera vs the world around.
In my experience street photography simply should not die, because I compare it to wildlife photography in the sense that they both push you to be better, and make you get more familiar with your gear since you have to make adjustments on the fly every now and then. And street photography in particular makes you work on your composing skills more.
Here are my takes on each of Tony's points about the matter:
1. About "everything being documented all the time": I remember that Simon d'Entremon (I might have butchered his last name) talks in some of hi videos about a very old and famous tree in Nova Scotia if I recall correctly, that it was a point of attraction for tourists and locals, but it was taken off by a heavy storm or something nature-related.
He was able to capture a BEAUTIFUL astro photo featuring that tree before the tree was removed, and that he was glad he did. That is something only photographers can achieve (without taking A.I. into he talk). So as you say, if anything is getting documented all the time, stopping street photography will not make any difference.
2. About people giving consent: well, if someone is getting an issue with being photographed, I would agree that the photographer should delete the pic if confronted. But we should still be able to capture pictures of people in public. I would argue that photographers should oath to always show pics that do not compromise on someone else's image, unless is for strictly documentary purposes.
3. I can see scenarios like this happening, but how "often" is what we should figure out. Creeps will creep no matter what.
4. I agree with you on this one, I have seen some incredibly artistic street photos. That bottom line that Tony is implying is way WAY too low.
Good luck with the move.
Saying that “Street Photography” should die but photojournalism and documentary photography are OK is sort of elitist. First, there’s no good definition of photojournalism or documentary photography that would not include taking pictures of strangers in public places. Making a distinction would have to come down to who’s doing the photography and not the content. I don’t think we want to say that only professionals at work are allowed to record what goes on in our world.
Booray I agree with you 100%. Real Street photography is art not an opportunity to be creepy.
When we look at everything through the lens of technology and instrumentalism and are intimidated or fascinated by tools, it is not so strange that with the advancement of digitalism, we have such a view on different categories, including art and photography... while what a photographer It draws him to the street and makes him interested in recording people's lives, It is not the generality and availability of photography facilities or vice versa, its exclusivity, but this inner desire that gives meaning to his own life. If the argument that taking pictures in the street is intrusive and rude is a correct hypothesis, then Henri Cartier-Bresson; Garry Winogrand; Eugene Atget and Vivian Maier have been one of the biggest intrusive in contemporary history! Because a photograph was definitely something more strange and disturbing on those days!... The tools are supposed to be something to serve our ideas, thoughts and creativity, not something to suppress and remove us from the circle of life! I think that what is dead is not street photography, but a human being who has lost himself under the control of tools and commodity fetishism... Apologies for the grammatical mistakes. With respect and love from Iran
Thanks so much for commenting!
:)
Hey Booray, it's great to watch another one of your videos you are the real deal. I do Street photography just for myself i'm not on Instagram so i don't post any of my photos. The one subject that i wouldn't photograph is a homeless person. You have a great philosophy Booray follow your heart and do what you enjoy, and that's what i do. I enjoy Street Art, shooting Birds, Planes, diecast cars and Street photography. Great shot you took of the Panning of the Bicycle. This was a great topic, thank you. 😊📸
Thanks buddy. It's sort of become a rule in the last decade or so that street photographers should not photograph homeless people.
@@BoorayPerry Your welcome my friend. It was a great topic as always Booray. 😊📸
Street Photography should never end... 😀
You are SO right about staging your home to sell. I'd love it if things were like that all the time.
I did purge SO much when we moved to our current home in 2017.
I'm a purger by nature but not the family. :)
@@BoorayPerryyeah. The same 🙃
Interesting topic. I believe photography is art and if someone happens to enter the picture while I am shooting a building, well, I could remove them. I tend to shoot cityscape, more than street photography, mainly because I love historical buildings, inside and outside. In America, there are camera's everywhere in the city, predominately at stop lights, financial institutions, etc. for security reasons, so, really there is no privacy in this country or the expectation of that right. I see where Tony is coming from, especially if he is living in Europe, because they have much stricter laws concerning this. If I am out shooting and I see that someone appears to be uncomfortable I will look around for something else to photograph, out of respect, but, that is how I was raised.
In street photography …It's not the photo that counts, but the picture. And the picture is unique.
First off I don't give one iota to what that pair think, As you said we are all being photographed hundreds of times a day, CCTV on the street, in the shops, dash cams, doorbell cameras etc etc. I will take shots that are humorous, but that are not making people look foolish. People are great subjects, so many expressions all add to the rich tapestry of life, street photography is fun. If they think street photography is creepy I think they need to look at themselves, it could be them that has the problem.
All very well said, great video!
Thanks!
Thank you Booray. I would hate for us to give up another freedom. This country was founded on freedom. The freedoms we enjoy in America are so important to us as individuals. The government continually chips away at our freedoms and ‘freedom of speech or expression’ is fundamental to all of us. There is more of a chance that someone with a phone will record embarrassing videos or photos and post them than would a serious street photographer. I vote for not giving up our freedom to practice street photography.
Places change. I wish I had photos of the street I grew up on before an Easter Sunday fire that leveled 5 houses next to ours.
I think it's a question of ethics vs law. I do worry a bit that some street photographers looking to push the boundaries to "go viral" (maybe they're new to street, or maybe frustrated that they're not getting attention). If we lose sight of ethics then I think lawmakers might feel compelled to step in. For example in Germany it isn't currently legal to publish a photo on social media (or anywhere) who is recognizable without their consent (with a few exceptions - eg a public figure). I think Germany's laws are problematic. Some of the event photography that I'm booked for would be illegal there (eg isolating people in a crowd and making them the subject at an outdoor event. At public gatherings (including protests) you can only publish wider group shots. You can't isolate interesting moments in the scene. The same restrictions apply to photographing police in Germany.
On the claim that street photography is often used as a pretext for being creepy. I'm not seeing that. At times though I have stopped and thought "will people think I'm creepy" before posting, when in reality there's nothing of concern in the scene.
In a way female street photographers have some advantages in authentic scenes they can capture and publish. I'm not mad about that, it's just reality. Some female street photographers acknowledge that capturing and publishing some authentic street scenes (including kids and women) is easier for them.
I completely agree with your arguments. Like you, I worry that, with powerful and easy to use digital cameras being so accessible, street photography CAN easily go into creepy territory. I also think that there's nothing inevitable about this. I think it is key for individual street photographers is to approach the trade (or the hobby) with integrity, empathy, and GOOD INTENTIONS toward their subjects. If we inadvertently take a photo that we think might be perceived as creepy, then it probably IS creepy and should not be posted or shared unless an strong artistic argument for it can be found. The photographic community should not be shy to call out photographers who transgress this "golden rule".
That's a good plan 🙂📷
I’m a month late to the conversation myself. Booray’s rebuttal is right on. The only thing I’d add is an objection to the idea that a legitimate practice should be “forbidden” because it _can_ be a pretense for something else. In the case Tony makes, the problem is stalking, a crime we already recognize as such, not photography. I recognize that we need to “do better” for the victims of stalking, but banning photos, or AirTags isn’t the answer.
Of course Booray is a photographer with a RUclips channel. In contrast the Northrups are RUclipsrs who happen to comment on photography. I don’t want that comment to be interpreted as “gatekeeping”. As me saying that T & C _can’t_ be photographers too. However, I often suspect that Tony will contrive an argument solely for the views. He definitely put thought into this - but that thought was about generating a reaction, not expressing a genuine viewpoint. C.L.I.C.K.B.A.I.T
Thanks for weighing in here Booray. Good luck with the move. I miss the pod. I don’t FB, but I might have to activate Threads so that I can keep up with “the conversation.”
You're 100% accurate with your thoughts. I stopped following Tony's channel a long time ago for various reasons. I had no idea he posted this. I realize everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but some options are worth more. Great video!
Tony’s post seems like click bate.
Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)
Starting thinking about a parody skit where a creepy stalker is concerned with contrast dynamics and composition.
A person may not have a legal right to privacy in a US public place therefore you are not prohibited by law from photographing them. But if you photograph them in a way that would embarrass them or compromise their safety for your gain, then that is still unkind /unethical. So then the question becomes do you want to be a jerk for profit. Plenty go right ahead and eagerly use "documenting for posterity" / "everything should be documented" as an excuse to be intrusive, some even belligerently so. It would be a shame if respectful / professional photographers got caught up in a backlash against the increasing number of intrusive street photographers.
I see where Tony is coming from but I think Booray has a more well thought out point of view.
-Street Photography and Fine Art are all that's left. Everything else is so contrived and repeated, and there is so little conceptualization, just repetition. (My work included). Street photography is about Finding, and Observing, and Interpreting random moments. A ring camera is documenting history, but under very limited circumstances (One angle, one lens) It's advantage is only consistency.
-As far as the stalking arguement, Baseball bats can be used to hit people over the head, we don't eliminate Little League. With Freedom comes risk.
I think Tony forgot to mention that he's not opposing street photography, he's opposing bad street photography, y'know, the people who don't ask for conscent when taking a photo with a flash into someone's face, taking the same boring photos that had already been taken over and over, creep and stalk people on the street, etc. Basically, yeah... I'm opposing that as well. But it's quite a generalization (and an offensive one at it) to assume all street photography is like that!
Everything is documented is creepy in itself but the street photographer isn’t trying to do that as much as capturing a moment in his or her time…a still…a frozen part in time while everything stops except for what the photographer ‘sees’ and captures. There are a few street photographers that create art beyond the street….like a painting .
IMO. There’s very much a need for artistic street photography more than ever in this day and age when everyone’s a photographer and we’re filmed all the time + for all the other reasons you outlined. Having said that I do prefer the photography that celebrates the dignity of the subject like HCB did rather than say Martin Parr who ridicules and strips the dignity away from his subjects/victims
I'm not a fan of Tony & Chelsea Northrup. That said I have watched some or their vids on occasion and no doubt will continue to do so. Their knowledge of photography is huge and they're a great resource to learn from. I do cringe though more often than not when I watch them. As far as Tony's tweet is concerned regarding street photography, he lost the argument for me with his very first point.
1. We no longer need street photographers to capture candid life for historical purposes. Everything is documented.
Um, by that same logic we no longer need landscape photographers. We no longer need architectural photographers of old buildings or castles. We no longer need nature photographers.... and so on, and so forth. Everything has been documented has it not?
Based on what I have seen of both Tony and Chelsea I'm of the opinion that they do this on purpose purely to elicit reaction and clicks. An example of that is that every so often they will put out a poll for their viewers, a simple "Yes" or "No" type poll. What goes unnoticed is that for months and months prior to their poll they've already actively been priming their regular audience to their own point of view. When they post their poll, a huge majority of their audience, having already been primed, will vote in a way that enforces Tony and Chelsea's opinions.
So although I have watched some of their vids, their opinions are always viewed by me with a large pinch of salt.
I do street photography for myself! Not to share with anyone else.
Exactly. The problem isn’t the street photography it’s the over sharing.
@@Dustyphoto915 What? There is absolutely nothing wrong with sharing great works. Unless they are boring, I may add. The energy of the street and the beauty of all the people, need not be kept in the shadows.
@@lorenschwiderski Great works. Exactly. Instagram is not full of great works. Great works are awash in a mass of mediocre images for the sake of content.
At first, when I saw the title of the video, I thought “Yes! It’s all a bit voyeuristic, a bit creepy”. However, I think you have changed my mind. By the way I love that photo of the guy at the pipe organ.
Thanks Bill 😁
I disagree with Tony.
Street photography is about documenting life at the moment it occurs. Interesting behavior. Interesting ways people dress. Juxtaposition nobody sees but me. Capturing interesting light. There is so much to capture when I am on the street.
I do not take images that will show my subject in a bad light. This is especially true of homeless or people with behavioral dyscontrol. Your privacy IS being invaded when I photograph you on the street. As you point out we are being recorded on CCTV all the time. Forget the legality. If you want to protect your privacy while on the street you need to wear a mask.
I do not take pictures that aren’t intrusive. I make the image and move on. Nobody knows I’ve taken the picture when done right. Most of my images are done right. I try to be like Henri Cartier-Brisson and be invisible . When I am caught I raise my camera to let the subject know I’ve taken their image. This week I was caught taking a picture of three people. One woman didn’t like the image I made when I showed it to her. She said she could do better than that. She broke into a bright smile and looked towards the sky. A much better image than the original. When the subject asks that the image to be deleted I delete the image. I also offer to shoot the image to them after I’ve shared it with them. Most people refuse this offer.
My favorite place to do street photography is NYC. There are many people on the street. They seem focused on other things and don’t notice what I’m doing. If I’m caught they continue going where they are going. I’ve never had a New Yorker ask me to delete an image. I live in Seattle and things are different here. I’ve been caught and had the request to have the image deleted. I had a woman try and steal my camera when she caught me. A couple called the police and tried to have me arrested. They never asked that their image be deleted. When the officer told them what I was doing was legal they almost attacked him.
Since I started taking street images I’ve learned to see that there are potential subjects all around me. The street is full of entertainment if you are made aware of the show. Sometimes I walk the street for exercise without a camera. I create images in my mind and smile. I’m still entertained.
I would be very sad if street photography was made illegal.
Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)
Item #3 stalking/creepy. I did not link that to street photography but more towards the paparazzi howdying celebs for profit and definitely invading their privacy in some instances. I agree that good street photography has value in that it tells a story and invokes emotion.
Don’t forget paparazzi are not street photographers. Paparazzi are trying to capture images of famous people to sell. Street photographers capture moments on the street others don’t see. Very few of us sell these images. My images never leave my computer’s hard drive. Many of the images never leave the memory card and are erased to make room for new images.
Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)
I do not agree that everything is documented. I realize people are taking billions of pictures per day, but the vast majority of these pictures are snapshots of limited interest that will decay into digital dust. Surveillance video is recorded over quickly unless it captures a crime. Street photographers are doing something different that can offer artistic and historical value that is like rare gems in the digital dust storm.
After Tony and Chelsea's unfounded assault on Steve McCurry a couple years ago I've never watched any of their content since. Nothing wrong with street photography, not my cup of tea but then again I don't have any interesting "streets" near me. If there was I'd sure like to try it.
I have the same problem. I like sweet photography but it's not very convenient for me to do it. 😀📷
First, 99% of photos taken on the street are by people using their cellphones. Plenty of company for those of use with our Fuji 100 cameras.
Second, when taking an photo of a person who will notice me doing it, I always ask permission, telling them why I want their image. I rarely get turned down.
What do you tell them is the reason for taking the picture?
I tell them the reason that I want to take the picture. "That is a great outfit. I'd love to take a picture of it. May I? You look adorable with that child! I'd love to have a picture of it. May I." other words, I compliment them first and then they like it. People who dress nice like to be seen and admired and people with kids who are cute like to be told it and be in a photo.
@@PhilZwick You are taking street portraits. A perfectly fine thing to do. In my mind, street photography is partially about creating images that are candid.
Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)
A good street photographer is courteous and knows how to build up their subjects. The subject walks away from the encounter feeling good about themselves. They've got a positive story to tell. But SOME street photographers ARE jerks. The guys who troll a crowded street and jump into the subject's face with a flash within 2 feet of the subject's face SURPRISE!!! . . . there's nothing artistic about frightening strangers. THOSE guys should be banned. They are punks. Only a very passive (New York) culture tolerates them. If they tried such a thing in a more independent-minded city, they might come to physical harm. And no jury in such a city would have much sympathy for them.
By the way I love your channel
Thanks!
Very much agree with you. If street photography will die it's probably because of the uniformity of it now. So many people are staring numbly into their mobiles, most are dressed the same, their hair is uniform, their attitudes are uniform and their environment mostly uniform. The days of Cartier Bresson are sadly gone and the grittiness of street photography has largely disappeared.
That's a great point
I have no idea what planet you're living on but that it has to be farthest from the truth. Speaking as a street photographer, who's been shooting the streets for many years. You can find normality or grittiness just depends on where you want to look. 🤔😁📸
@@alexcasaresOracleAZ planet earth. 😂😂
@@martin701
Must not be the same earth I'm living on or you just don't know how to see beyond the mundane 🤔😜
There is a difference between a 'Bruce Gilden' and a 'Suzanne Stein'. Gilden got away with his particular brand of being a jerk in NYC...in Oklahoma he would have been punched out in a minute (and I suspect changed his whole approach to street photography!). In fact I heard him say one time..."see this...this is MY street!". Earning fame and fortune at someone else's expense is a lousy way of doing business. It says more about the photographer than the photo says about the street.
There is nothing wrong with street photography...just the jerks who think it's all about them and their career. You know the ones...the ones who like to cram a camera in someone's face to get a reaction. I saw another 'Gilden' on some 'walkie-talkie' channel about street photography. His comments were a clear indication of his attitude about 'getting a picture no matter what'. He talked big....until a guy threatened to feed him his camera...and suddenly his 'method' wasn't so valuable any more. He whimpered away like a kicked puppy. People like that have no individual ideas or impetus...they just copy someone like Gilden, and usually do so poorly. I predict street photography will be around forever. The photographers who miss the whole purpose and value of doing street photography with compassion and awareness of those around them will not. By the way...I don't watch Tony Northrup....has he ever really been a street photographer??
Everything documented once and for all? Of course not. Life is dynamic. Streets today, streets 2010 or 1910……..ist all different.
Tony you can’t document the future. Tony aren’t you promoting censorship? Okay, Tony describe how you would “police” this censorship.
Culturally it's very different in Australian....people crave privacy here ..even legallyits different here....we can take the photo but you can't post it hmmmm ...if I do street photo's I'll always seek.permission of people..I.imagine America and Europe is different 😮. Is it stalking ....Tony Tony if you were stalking someone you wouldn't even.own a camera ..I've worked with violent crazy people and they aren't standing on the street with an x100v
This issue will get worse with Artificial Intelligence curating everything, everywhere and you can be charged with something that is not real.
I disagree with Tony. I believe that he trying to be provocative to get views.
should you? yes
You sound overmodulated. But anyway. You follow Tony Northrup? 😅😅 Jesus Christ. It depends what he means by street photography. I don’t think anyone really knows other than pictures you take outside. Tony has a video from 3 years ago. It’s called “should we ban street photography”. He’ll say anything for clicks.
Yeah, just seeing this and will just say, if this guy truly believe what’s he’s saying and it not just click bait to stir engagement, then he’s ignorant of the distinction or an elitist a$$hole who thinks his way of seeing the world and making art is better than everyone else.