Agree to Disagree - Issues in Street Photography
Street photographers are the cowboys of photography. By that I mean sometimes wild, given to acting on impulse, not one to follow the plan that everyone else is working on, and quick to ignore rules. It stands to reason that herding this group into definitional norms is like the proverbial herding of cats. And so, in a manner of speaking, we fight. Here are some of big and little issues where there is disagreement in the street photography community.
Do street photos have to be made on a street?
Street photography started in Paris and became recognized as its own photography genre in the 1930s. Because of its origins, I suspect the real point of contention is not, “Is it shot on a street?,” but rather, “Is it shot in an urban area?” Certainly it is easier to capture those spontaneous moments that are the hallmark of street photography in a denser population set. Perhaps it is unfortunate that the word street was ever used. Had we been more politically correct a century ago, we might have called it life photography.
Do street photos have to be candid?
This is a slightly bigger bone of contention. The most extreme version of this is the “no eye contact rule”. Restated, it is the way of thinking of some purists who maintain that once eye contact has been made, you cannot have a candid photo. The other side can get their little digs in by implying that stealth street photography is essentially a human failure of bravery.
I intended this to be candid.
Does street photography have to be processed in b&w?
This point of disagreement will rage on forever, because it is the quintessential struggle of the traditionalists vs the non-traditionalists. I suspect the tide has begun to turn in favor of color. Paris is no longer the center of street photography. Indeed, the Western world is no longer the center. Our street photographers from the East have a different aesthetic and “fyi” it often includes color.
What ethics should street photographers have?
There is a big ethics continuum. It ranges from “you can take any candid photo you want to,” which is something of an absence of an ethical position, to “you cannot take any candid photo,” which brings into question if you are really a street photographer.
Do street photos have to include people?
Certainly some groups make people in the photo a criteria for posting. I have seen another position that if the environment somehow illuminates the people living there, that is sufficient.
Photo by Ron Giacone. Used with permission. You can see Ron’s Instagram gallery at @nycdigital.
Should street photography photos be posted without captions?
On the one hand, there is the thinking that if the photo needs explaining, it probably isn’t very good. On the other hand there is some evidence that your viewer will look at a picture longer if it has a caption.
Photo by David Wallace. Used with permission. You can see David’s gallery on Instagram at @david_wallace_dw.
This picture appeared in a recent series, The Covid Dairy, on on David’s Instagram gallery. This particular post was captioned, Empty Roads 2 - Having a Ball. Perhaps I am drawn to irony, but the caption made all of the difference in the world in how I saw the post.
What makes a street photograph banal? Here are some opinions that I have come across:
I have seen, and photographed, all of these things identified as banal.
Pictures of people’s backs.
Photo by Antonio Trincone. Used with permission. You can see Antonio’s gallery on Facebook at Antonio Trincone and get more information about him here.
Rotating a reflection so it is upright.
Pictures of street musicians.
Juxtaposition.
Photo by Yer Soliven. Used with permission. You can see Yer’s Facebook gallery at Yer Soliven.
I am trying, for the most part, to not take a position on these issues in this blog. I cannot really pass this one up. No juxtaposition. Really?
Are posed street portraits a type of street photography or a separate genre?
If you are in the camp who believes candid photos are a requirement for street photography, then posed street portraits are definitely not in the street photography genre. They do have some authenticity because models are not used in candid street portraits. Also there is a difference in knowing that a picture is being taken and paying attention to the fact that a picture is being taken. When a subject is not paying attention, the photo can be quite candid.
Photo by Diane Beals. Used with permission.You can view Diane’s galleries on Instagram, @diane_beals2, or on her website at www.diversephotographs.com.
Is geometric street photography really street photography?
This is a new twist for me in the street photography differences of opinion. Simon King writes in the blog for Petapixel, “Is It Wrong To Photograph ‘Light’ in Street Photography?” that geometric street photography is more aptly named “light-architecture”, because what is being photographed is really the light and not a street photography moment. What is interesting to me is that these kinds of images are becoming more prevalent as we move toward anonymity of our subjects.
Photo by Myriam Carrasco. Used with permission. You can see Myriam’s galleries on her Facebook page, Miriam Carrasco, and on her Instagram account at @lanenaesbuena.
I am glad to be a part of a photography genre that is engaging and changing. The only thing that I think we have to remember is that we are each entitled to our particular position on an issue in street photography. We are entitled to speak about that position. What we are not entitled to do is use it marginalize or shame other street photographers who see the issue in a different way.
Exercise
Are there any issues you think about in street photography?