Jump to content

Streetphotography (open thread)


Mehrdad

Recommended Posts

"Slender Dreams"

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Out of sync"

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately we don't have a Dislike button. This picture is just disrespectful and serves as a good example of how to discredit streetphotography. Just my 2ct.

 

II wouldn't say that. I'd say the title is very unfortunate, not because I am shocked but because I firmly believe a phtograph's interpretation should be up to the viewer, it's not the role of the photographer to tell people how they should interpret it. Something like Street Name - Year would be much better imo. I don't like titles that are oriented because they seem to imply the viewer is not intelligent enough to make a link on his own about what's happening, so he needs the help of the pohotgrapher to explain him what it's about.

 

Now if one discards the title, he can imagine anything. Would it be called "dreaming about fine lingerie" people would react differently. I know a man from poland who would find this woman a bit underweight. It's all a matter of personal perception and interpretation.

 

I would argue that it's really a shame that some people think one should not photograph fat people because it's disrepectful, or children because it's creepy.

 

If the viewer has issues in his head and thinks immediatly about sex when seing children, or about morbidity when seing overweight people it is entirely HIS problem, not the photographer's and certainly not mine. I don't mind my children being photographed because they are part of an interresting scene or just because they are beautiful.

 

Why could only beautiful slim women, flowers, sunsets and men in suits be photographed? How is that any more sane and democratic than photographing everyone, the homeless included?

 

How is photographing the ass of a beautiful woman next to the rear of a race car and call it "nice bottoms" less exploitative than to photograph a not-so-slim one next to a scrawny mannequin and call it "slender dreams"? It is not. It's all about perception and street photography is often about juxtapositions of things that work in the picture without necessarily having anything to do in real life (here we can't even be sure that the woman is looking at the mannequin due to the angle, that made the picture work in the first place)

 

The title is unfortunate but the picture does not discredit street photography which is exploiting life to make interresting pictures imo. Somehow nobody has risen a concern about the '"out of sync" picture capturing a woman that one could depict as being probably anorexic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you citral. Bilbao, Spain.

Where they built the Guggenheim museum

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

sorry for the OT pic

Link to post
Share on other sites

II wouldn't say that. I'd say the title is very unfortunate, not because I am shocked but because I firmly believe a phtograph's interpretation should be up to the viewer, it's not the role of the photographer to tell people how they should interpret it. Something like Street Name - Year would be much better imo. I don't like titles that are oriented because they seem to imply the viewer is not intelligent enough to make a link on his own about what's happening, so he needs the help of the pohotgrapher to explain him what it's about.

 

Now if one discards the title, he can imagine anything. Would it be called "dreaming about fine lingerie" people would react differently. I know a man from poland who would find this woman a bit underweight. It's all a matter of personal perception and interpretation.

 

I would argue that it's really a shame that some people think one should not photograph fat people because it's disrepectful, or children because it's creepy.

 

If the viewer has issues in his head and thinks immediatly about sex when seing children, or about morbidity when seing overweight people it is entirely HIS problem, not the photographer's and certainly not mine. I don't mind my children being photographed because they are part of an interresting scene or just because they are beautiful.

 

Why could only beautiful slim women, flowers, sunsets and men in suits be photographed? How is that any more sane and democratic than photographing everyone, the homeless included?

 

How is photographing the ass of a beautiful woman next to the rear of a race car and call it "nice bottoms" less exploitative than to photograph a not-so-slim one next to a scrawny mannequin and call it "slender dreams"? It is not. It's all about perception and street photography is often about juxtapositions of things that work in the picture without necessarily having anything to do in real life (here we can't even be sure that the woman is looking at the mannequin due to the angle, that made the picture work in the first place)

 

The title is unfortunate but the picture does not discredit street photography which is exploiting life to make interresting pictures imo. Somehow nobody has risen a concern about the '"out of sync" picture capturing a woman that one could depict as being probably anorexic.

 

I don't know why but people get offended about almost everything nowadays.......perhaps the truth hurts sometimes and yeah, it's always easier to make it someone else's problem rather than our own. IMO, the title and the pic is very powerful. Definitely thought provoking...whether it is acceptable or not depends on who and where you are.

Link to post
Share on other sites

WhatsApp!!!

 

(X-A1,27mm,f/8)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel so strange today.

(X-A1, 27mm, f6.4)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know me better than anyone else

 

(X-E1, Pentax A 70-210)

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

My favorite in the thread so far.  Absolutely stunning.  Framing  is great, processing is awesome.  How did you have time to get low and frame so quickly? What did you shoot with/at?

 :-)  Thanks!

The pic was taken with the XF56 ... actually a bit (too) long for street.

I like the perspective near ground. I've seen the dog arriving 50m before, went down, waiting to take a "head shot" ... but he decided to tag his street ... i felt free to document his action. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately we don't have a Dislike button. This picture is just disrespectful and serves as a good example of how to discredit streetphotography. Just my 2ct.

Thank you for your comments. I fully appreciate your point of view and when you wrote "Dislike" you did press a virtual dislike button. The intention is not be disrespectful. The culture we live in, dreaming to be slender is a very positive thing and even to tell somebody that You will look great if you trim down a bit is considered very normal. So respecting your point of view, I will not change anything , the title or the picture as your norms don't work the same way in every country. Thanks for being honest with your opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amsterdam with Fuji XT1, 10-24mm f/4

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amsterdam, Fuji XT-1, 35mm f/1.4

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Amsterdam, Fuji XT-1, 10-24 f/4

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dam Square, Amsterdam, Fuji XT-1, 10-24 f/4

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vangough museum, Amsterdam, 14mm f/2.8

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vangouh museum, Amsterdam

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Because the sensor assembly is moved electrmagnetically. When there is no power it is essentially free moving.
    • Ahoy ye hearties! Hoist ye yon Jolly Roger and Cascade away. NGC 1502 The Jolly Roger Cluster:

      Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

      Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

      This is the equivalent of 43 minutes, 40 seconds of exposure. NGC 1502 is a neat little cluster located in the Camelopardalis Constellation. This region of space was thought to be fairly empty by early astronomers, but as you can see, there is a lot there. Kemble's Cascade (a.k.a. Kemble 1) is named for Father Lucian Kemble, a Canadian Franciscan friar who wrote about it to Walter Scott Houston, an author for the Sky And Telescope magazine. Houston named the asterism for Fr. Kemble and the name "stuck". NGC 1501 is the Oyster Nebula. A longer focal length telescope is needed to bring this one into good viewing range, but it is well worth the effort. NGC 1502: https://skyandtelescope.org/online-gallery/ngc-1502/ Camelopardalis Constellation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camelopardalis Kemble's Cascade (and NGC 1501: The Oyster Nebula): https://www.constellation-guide.com/kembles-cascade/ Arrrrrr Matey.
    • Looking for input; there are some decent deals and might want to take advantage to expand my lenses for my 100s already own: 110/2 32-64 35-70 100-200 + TC   Shooting mostly family shots, bringing my kit to capture family outings indoors and out. Tracking the 63/43 effective FLs on the two, but has anybody used both? Would the 55 (covered by two zooms right now) be redundant? Would the 80 be too similar in character to my 110 for portraiture?
    • See what I mean? Two instantaneous ads. Worthless.   
×
×
  • Create New...