Streetphotography (open thread)

[sadaqat 96]

"Slender Dreams"

[Advertisement]

Hi,

This might be interesting too: Fuji X Cameras

[sadaqat 96]

"Out of sync"

[Harlem 317]

"Slender Dreams"

 

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.

[citral 188]

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.

[bigbadwolf 155]

[Mehrdad 266]

[citral 188]

It is quite well framed and the colours and muted tones are pleasing to my eyes, where is that? I'd say europe but not sure where.

[Mehrdad 266]

Thank you citral. Bilbao, Spain.

Where they built the Guggenheim museum

 

 

sorry for the OT pic

[CRAusmus 194]

.

 

 

 

d-marker by Christoph, auf Flickr

 

 

 

:.

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?

[citral 188]

x-tc on rampage by Christophe Branchereau, on Flickr

[DIS Ottawa 34]

A coffee shop, just off the street.

[andrewlee 67]

Chosen by Andrew Lee, on Flickr

[Aswald 217]

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.

[ewm19 109]

X100T, edit with LR

 

Mechanical Work by ewm19, on Flickr

[Conflan 29]

WhatsApp!!!

 

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

[Conflan 29]

I feel so strange today.

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

[Conflan 29]

You know me better than anyone else

 

(X-E1, Pentax A 70-210)

[Watcher24 493]

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. 

[sadaqat 96]

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.

[sadaqat 96]

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

[sadaqat 96]

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

[sadaqat 96]

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

[sadaqat 96]

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

[sadaqat 96]

Vangough museum, Amsterdam, 14mm f/2.8

[sadaqat 96]

Vangouh museum, Amsterdam