View Full Version : Super-busy streets for lazy portraits
Phantomas
11-17-2009, 16:11
For someone slightly held back about upclose street-portrait shooting, like me, maybe a good idea would be to go to a very busy, heavy people traffic area, I mean the type where people will just sweep you away unless you claim your ground, stand in the middle of crowd current and shoot away. The main shopping drag in Amsterdam is a place like that, I don't know why I never tried it, always opting for observing from the side and trying to catch a moment in a stealth mode, but more often than not from too far (or, gulp, from behind)... Maybe just standing in the middle of a flowing crowd and not worrying about the camera because you're pointing at noone and everyone at once could work? Can such attempt have any photographic merit, unless you're Bruce Gilden? Cheap trick? What kind of lens would be good? 50 to long? 35 just right? Even set on hyperfocal and shoot up and down because someone 's face/torso will always be in front of the camera?
Experiences trying similar approach?
I guess I'll just take my camera into a moving crowd next time and find out.
It works for me sometimes but with a 40mm or wider. For me, a 50mm would be too long.
I got these in extremely crowded situations:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/foggie/3655753995/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/foggie/3655753269/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/foggie/3467827148/
28mm preferred on 35 mm film or full size sensor, zone focused at around 1-2-3m; f/11 and GO shoot random pics on Amsterdam streets, some will be nice.
But a Zebra could do this. So where is your human mind's input? Your composition skill, your art impact then?
And is it not a good sign that you realize you are not ready to shoot street, except evasively from the back ... So find the inner strength for it or get off the street.
My 3 cents worth ...
And is it not a good sign that you realize you are not ready to shoot street, except evasively from the back ... So find the inner strength for it or get off the street.
Harsh, but realistic advise! I reccomend anyone who is shy about street photography to try this to break the shyness:
Find a busy street with photographic possibilities; determine the direction in which traffic is flowing; WALK IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION AND SHOOT PICTURES.
chambrenoire
11-18-2009, 10:36
99% of people won't react at all when having their picture taken, so you're pretty "safe" and no need to be shy about it! If they ask you anything or whatever just smile and be on your way. Mustn't be afraid of people.
Phantomas
11-23-2009, 12:10
Thanks people.
foggi - your shots are EXACTLY what I'm talking about. Very nice.
I guess what I mean is (to stress it) really upclose shots of people, camera in their face almost. I do manage to capture general street scenes, but would like to get more of people's faces filling the frame rather than full body/torso shots. That requires more than not being shy. That is almost getting into people's personal space. I doubt that in isolated settings people won't react to that.
Of course the sense of morality will take over and other suggestion will come, to which my answer is yes, I do often make contact with people before making a shot and those usually turn out great, especially when having a background story. I will continue to do this. But such shots require investment - time and conversation with people. Not a huge investment and pleasant even, but I don't always feel like having half an hour conversation for every frame I shoot :o Still, would like to do more random passer-by upclose portraits. For this purpose I still can't find it comfortable to do to walk up to a stranger and point a camera half a meter away from their face. Foggi's photos serve as a perfect illustration to what I mean and the types of photos I'd like to get.
"Walk in the opposite direction and shoot" sound's like a plan I want to work on. I'm not really going to do it completely randomly and blindly, I just need to have faces that close to the lens without being an intruder.
Leigh Youdale
11-23-2009, 12:23
Thanks people.
For this purpose I still can't find it comfortable to do to walk up to a stranger and point a camera half a meter away from their face.
I'm not quite sure why you would want to do this, anyway. What is your purpose and, perhaps more precisely, if photography is a means of communication what is it that you are trying to communicate to the viewer of your images? Random closeup shots of strangers in the street without any other information or background to inform the viewer doesn't seem very purposeful to me.
Phantomas
11-23-2009, 12:33
Random closeup shots of strangers in the street without any other information or background to inform the viewer doesn't seem very purposeful to me.
In such form that statement could cover the rest of my street photography, or dare I say street photography in general. Do we often have a background story for every street situation or random passer-by we shoot? I don't, I try to capture a moment, sometimes it has a story, sometimes it doesn't, sometimes it's a geometrical composition, sometimes it's a scene, with a story about the situation, but not about characters that participate.
I'm not necessarily taking those to communicate to a "viewer". I'm interested in this for myself, to make a study into people's faces. Random people's faces. I'm sure there will be plenty that will tell a story just like that, without me talking to them.
PS: Familiar with this guy (http://tinyurl.com/yazwr7t)? Not everyone agrees with his work methods or ethics, but he does what he does and I definitely see the appeal in his photos. Do you think he has a background story for each individual in his shots? Yet they do manage to convey certain traits of the subject's character, don't they.
There needs to be a point to street photography,financial,i.e. a professional asssignment or a personal project of importance.Otherwise youre just an idiot getting in everyones way and properly deserve the slap youre going to get,especially if you really chicken out and start shooting from the hip as some now consider valid in which case hope fully therll be a queue to break youre camera over your silly head:D.You take a picture of someone you take something with you from them,there is an inbalance only rectified by your work having some point and beauty .Good luck,try and maybe it will work for you,weve all been there,it still gives me the shivers but its worth it!.:)
that's wonmderful... and surely will become a classic amongst classics of RFF posts !
tbarker13
11-23-2009, 13:15
Maybe just standing in the middle of a flowing crowd and not worrying about the camera because you're pointing at noone and everyone at once could work?
Looking at other comments you've made in subsequent posts, i have to wonder. It seems like it would be very difficult to do this sort of random (pointing at no one, yet everyone) approach while still managing to fill the frame with your subjects - at least with any sort of regularity.
And really, I don't think there is any way to get in people's faces for frame-filling shots without offending at least some of them.
And really, I don't think there is any way to get in people's faces for frame-filling shots without offending at least some of them.
Long focal length lens???
There needs to be a point to street photography,financial,i.e. a professional asssignment or a personal project of importance.Otherwise youre just an idiot getting in everyones way and properly deserve the slap youre going to get,especially if you really chicken out and start shooting from the hip as some now consider valid in which case hope fully therll be a queue to break youre camera over your silly head:D.You take a picture of someone you take something with you from them,there is an inbalance only rectified by your work having some point and beauty .Good luck,try and maybe it will work for you,weve all been there,it still gives me the shivers but its worth it!.:)
I like this opinion, I wish I had said it. Never quite understood the obsession with street shooting, especially hip shots.
tbarker13
11-23-2009, 13:25
Long focal length lens???
Well of course, but I don't think that's the approach our OP had in mind, considering that he asked about 35mm and 50mm FLs.
Of course, it might be interesting to watch someone use hyperfocal strategy with a 135.:)
Phantomas
11-23-2009, 13:27
Valid question tbarker , I guess you're right from technical perspective. Of course the camera pointing will not be completely random, it will just look like that to the crowd :) I do plan to be selective, but will have to see how that would work in practice (a little patience, need daylight and weekend).
My initial post was me thinking aloud. I understand that people would consider such shots absurd, pointless, rude, by the same measure as i consider shots of flowers, babies, fashion or even (a lot of) landscapes uninteresting. To me photography doesn't have to have financial or assigned projects as driving force. Having personal project is of course helpful. This is mine, at least to try, I can come always comeback with poor results and/or broken head, and then I'll change a subject or try a different approach.
There needs to be a point to street photography,financial,i.e. a professional asssignment or a personal project of importance.Otherwise youre just an idiot
Codswallop!
sweathog
11-23-2009, 13:30
When I read the original post my gut reaction was that 50mm would be too wide.
That said, I've never shot exactly in that style, but I think I might give it a try.
Leigh Youdale
11-23-2009, 13:38
I
I'm not necessarily taking those to communicate to a "viewer". I'm interested in this for myself, to make a study into people's faces. Random people's faces.
Fair enough, and I guess most of do things for ourselves, even landscapes, but we probably also expect to engender some response or reaction from the viewer similar to our own when we took the photo.
PS: Familiar with this guy (http://tinyurl.com/yazwr7t)? Not everyone agrees with his work methods or ethics, but he does what he does and I definitely see the appeal in his photos. Do you think he has a background story for each individual in his shots? Yet they do manage to convey certain traits of the subject's character, don't they.
Yes, I've seen his work and also video of him actually working the street. It is very random and "in your face" but given enough shots and enough people I guess you're going to end up with a proportion that hold some interest - maybe ones that even tell some sort of story. Each to his own I guess. I certainly could never work that way - the fact he's "famous" (or notorious) for it means that very few would.
To get back to your original questions, there might be cultural differences between New York and Amsterdam, or Istanbul or Kabul that would influence the manner in which you engage in street photography. I recently took quite a number of street photos in Paris at reasonably close quarters using a 25mm lens but none were really "face" shots and I wouldn't be comfortable trying that. I think you probably need to work up to it by maybe concentrating on subjects at 2-4 metres away and when results and confidence are at the right level try going in closer. Good Luck!
tbarker13
11-23-2009, 13:46
I understand that people would consider such shots absurd, pointless, rude, by the same measure as i consider shots of flowers, babies, fashion or even (a lot of) landscapes uninteresting. To me photography doesn't have to have financial or assigned projects as driving force. Having personal project is of course helpful.
I'n not a big fan of street photography. But I do agree 100 percent with what you say here. You should explore photography in whatever way you like.
Maybe you'll end up with a black eye. Maybe you'll end up with some amazing images. There is, of course, only one way to find out.
I do wish you luck.
When I read the original post my gut reaction was that 50mm would be too wide.
That said, I've never shot exactly in that style, but I think I might give it a try.
I'd try a 90.
Phantomas
11-23-2009, 13:56
I'll bring a 35 a 50 and a 90 (which came with a Hexar set and is otherwise unused).
I will stand facing the crowd and gaze meaningfully into horizon ogling a beautiful Amsterdam landmark that "I'm about to shoot". Of course in the meantime my vision will be surveying the crowd moving towards me, selecting interesting characters. I will raise the camera to my eye, focus, compose and shoot. Then look dissatisfied that someone got in between the camera and that beautiful landmark :) Sounds like a plan.
And yes, if I find it interesting I will shoot from the hip, and not to hide the fact but to get a different angle. I don't care what people say about off-the-hip. I shot the whole Red Light District like that and that's the only way it can be shot.
I'll bring a 35 a 50 and a 90 (which came with a Hexar set and is otherwise unused).
I will stand facing the crowd and gaze meaningfully into horizon ogling a beautiful Amsterdam landmark that "I'm about to shoot". Of course in the meantime my vision will be surveying the crowd moving towards me, selecting interesting characters. I will raise the camera to my eye, focus, compose and shoot. Then look dissatisfied that someone got in between the camera and that beautiful landmark :) Sounds like a plan.
And yes, if I find it interesting I will shoot from the hip, and not to hide the fact but to get a different angle. I don't care what people say about off-the-hip. I shot the whole Red Light District like that and that's the only way it can be shot.
Just as long as you realise that your hip deserves all the credit,not your not your eye,unless you have your brains in your ass like gm13 :)
Phantomas
11-23-2009, 14:15
Of course, my hip deserves credit where due, as does my brain for letting me use the highly accredited hip when necessary.
newspaperguy
11-23-2009, 14:17
Might I suggest you start in crowded public event... a fair or a festival, where there will be a profusion of cameras. You will feel less stand-outish (Is that a word? It is now.)
And if it's really crowded, I'd opt for the 35mm lens.
Austerby
11-23-2009, 14:19
It's certainly a technique that will provide photographs but to me the essence of a street shot is not the random photos of strangers - it's those which tell me something more about an event, an occurrence, the photographer etc. so the people become ciphers or bit-part players. I like to see humour, wit and intelligence which the best street photos have. I see people walking down the street every day and it doesn't interest me a great deal - there has to be that special extra something, which is what makes it hard work.
Same principle applies to a lot of photographic subjects, not just street.
Of course, my hip deserves credit where due, as does my brain for letting me use the highly accredited hip when necessary.
A hip hip,.........nice
andredossantos
11-23-2009, 14:42
On a busy street, I find an interesting place/light and use a camera with a wlf. I frame the photo then wait until people fill the frame in an interesting way. You have to be quick an it helps to prefous then change on the fly. Large depth of fiel helps too. You can get very close without being noticed. Also, people just aren't as threatened by cameras with wlf's. I've been meaning to get a wlf for my canon f1 and seeing if people react diffrerently.
Here are a few, though w/ little merit. (all taken w/ a 35) What I think the 1st and last of them illustrates is a slight invasion of personal space. Those two taken in a small "village" of 2000 where the personal boundary is greater. The other NYC. Yes it does take a bit of nerve, a smile goes a long way and rarely isn't returned. Point being I think heading to a very busy center where the personal boundary is decreased is an excellent idea.
I thoroughly enjoy the challenge of TRYING to compose something from the street with a touch of elegance in it's structure. Perhaps if I succeeded once in a while it would cease to be so appealing. Maybe I'll find out someday. As it stands, w/o practice no one would pay me for the crap I typically turn out.
Just as long as you realise that your hip deserves all the credit,not your not your eye,unless you have your brains in your ass like gm13 :)Nice brother, real nice.
Phantomas
11-23-2009, 14:42
It's certainly a technique that will provide photographs but to me the essence of a street shot is not the random photos of strangers - it's those which tell me something more about an event, an occurrence, the photographer etc. so the people become ciphers or bit-part players. I like to see humour, wit and intelligence which the best street photos have. I see people walking down the street every day and it doesn't interest me a great deal - there has to be that special extra something, which is what makes it hard work.
Same principle applies to a lot of photographic subjects, not just street.
Very good point and certainly something I've been putting under a question mark with my idea of trying an afternoon, even just a roll of film, of such photography. This made me question the essence of street portrait photography. Of course it is commonly believed that engagement with your subject and personal involvement with them will provide much better photos. Not arguing with that. But isn't it also about successfully capturing a random scene that doesn't hide its randomness and that's the whole appeal? Hard work pays off, but does one always have to work for their shots? Yes, I see crowds every day, yes mostly grey masses, but sometimes I can look and focus with my eyes and i wish I was snapping away with them. No, I don't know those people, I will see them for maybe 10 seconds in my life, but their expression speaks and I'm certain it would speak on a photograph. Unfortunately those 10 secs are not enough, nor even necessary, to take such photo in an involved and personally engaged manner.
I'm under no illusion that I will have a great success and will build comprehensive study of deep characters, but there's a chance to get something and at least to give a try to the photographic subject that I personally find interesting. I'm not even a good photographer, hell, I'm a noob and will stay so for at least next 10 years. But I don't think this a ridiculous idea or concept. At least it's not my idea to shoot careless pointless photos of a crowd, hopefully I can manage to take out what I'm visualizing out of the crowd with the camera. That's the hardest part.
Bobfrance
11-23-2009, 14:52
I agree largely with Austerby.
Images simply of people's framed expressions don't do much for me. I think you need interaction, context and composition to really have a street shot that is engaging.
It is often very hard to get all of these (or even some!) in a single shot, but trying for that is favourable to taking 1000's of random shots and hoping one will work out right.
My favorite focal length for street shooting is 28mm or 24/25mm. Sometimes I go as wide as 15mm. I love deep shadows and getting close, as if you're standing in the midst of your subject. I find successful street photography is where the onlooker is engaged with his/her subject, bringing the "outside" in.
90mms are too "telephoto" for me.
Phantomas
11-23-2009, 15:58
Thanks. gm, kbg32 - another illustration of what I'm trying to achieve. Nice shots!
JohnBeeching
01-19-2010, 03:51
Here are some I took in Amsterdam, possible in teh very street you are talking about. All, except the last one, with a 28mm.
http://staff.bath.ac.uk/bssjrb/Photographic/dutch/dutch.htm
John
Extremely crowded doesnt really exist in my city. There are two busy intersections. That is it.
Results might not be too good. If you are going to shoot in a crowd like that, you'll need at most s 28mm. I've done this but the results seem to be "passer-by" type shots. And they don't really say anything I'm interested in. People on their phones, not really doing anything out of the ordinary. When the crowd thins out is when you get people doing interesting stuff.
Try it for yourself. You might like it!
Results might not be too good. If you are going to shoot in a crowd like that, you'll need at most s 28mm. I've done this but the results seem to be "passer-by" type shots. And they don't really say anything I'm interested in. People on their phones, not really doing anything out of the ordinary. When the crowd thins out is when you get people doing interesting stuff.
Try it for yourself. You might like it!
Here's an example of one that I like.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gumanow/2273989046/in/set-72157622077600802/
Lilserenity
01-29-2010, 11:10
I can't profess to have the answers; but a few things I do is familiarise myself with the location, spot things that may work in the wider context.
Then I'll stick around a bit, if it's in a communal place (e.g. park, market etc.) people will get used to you milling around. Interact, I sometimes natter to people or maybe grab a drink from a market stall holder and sit down.
Then I'll wander and shoot, sometimes I'll hang about and wait. The biggest mistake I made when starting to street shoot (and sometimes still make) is to keep moving, sometimes stop and then wait, watch. If you just pull the trigger on anything to keep moving in an attempt to 'evade' being caught as such, you'll tend to get garbage.
This combined with the observation period is this advice: See something that works as a scene but needs life, stop and wait. Have in mind what you want. E.g. I was using my Autocord this Tuesday in Midsummer Place, Milton Keynes -- it's a shopping centre. There's this huge atrium which is open at both ends by glass which allows incredible light. There was a stall holder with balloons and flowers, colour, this alone through the lens worked. But I thought, what if a child comes along and starts playing with the balloons with mother in tow -- that would work. It would symbolise something, not sure exactly what, some kind of childhood hope perhaps. So I waited, and waited. Eventually it happened, and I took the picture and moved on. Be prepared to linger, and if necessary come back again and again until it works.
Of course this doesn't cover the spontaneous things that happen so be ready, and make life easier by concentrating on a couple of locations to start with and wait for the unusual to occur, if nothing happens, move on.
My final advice apart from what others has said is this: If you feel shy about this, or feel like you're trying to evade people's attention due to being shy -- don't start thinking a new camera or a new lens will sort this. E.g. it'll be easier with a wide angle, easier with a rangefinder, easier with a telephoto etc. -- invariably it won't be because the real problem is in yourself and not being assertive enough; address this and you'll likely make it work with any camera.
I find anywhere between 28mm and 50mm works, 50mm (or MF equivalent) works for me just fine.
Oh and of course:
Get close. Then get even closer still.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3647/3510507883_3d46048cce.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/lilserenity/3510507883/sizes/o/)
Mind you, I'm not exactly a crack pro at this stuff, just keep trying to do better next time and learn.
Vicky
infosecgeek
02-26-2010, 11:14
28mm preferred on 35 mm film or full size sensor, zone focused at around 1-2-3m; f/11 and GO shoot random pics on Amsterdam streets, some will be nice.
But a Zebra could do this. So where is your human mind's input? Your composition skill, your art impact then?
And is it not a good sign that you realize you are not ready to shoot street, except evasively from the back ... So find the inner strength for it or get off the street.
My 3 cents worth ...
He is right... I was always shy about doing street, so strayed away from it until I bought the E-P2.. I'm still uneasy about throwing a big slr in someones face, but with the m4/3 it is awesome.. I walk around see someone I want to shoot compose, take the shot.. If I "Get Caught" I smile, but don't try to pretend I'm not shooting them... 35 to 50mm on a FF is perfect.. Actually just ordered a R3M, my first rangefinder... Can't wait to get started..
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.