Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Link to post
Share on other sites

My comments in the controversial street photography about humour, is shown by the same image of the nun and priest. To one, it is controversial and to another, it's humorous or just simply a gesture of welcome and friendship.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This one always makes me laugh - just picturing the frustration and desperation of trying to dispose of this chair to leave it like this.

 

"Soho Trash"

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

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
It seems to me that Street Photography is moving slowly but surely towards being a collection of joke shots. Lucky captures of peculiar happenings seem to win the awards. But street photography in it's true pure form came about as a way to document everyday life on the street. As Bruce Gilden puts it, it's a street photograph if you can 'smell the street'. With a lot of the photos I'm seeing, labelled as street photography, this is clearly not the case. They are good pictures of odd happenings, but I'm concerned that this style of photography is heading towards and being rewarded for producing gimmicks.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Sophie :)

 

This is just one forum of many, covering just one, tiny aspect of the truly vast subject of street photography.

 

Have you looked at the other forums here, such as architecture, people at windows, kids & teenagers, street markets, loneliness / solitude, and shop windows?

 

Even with those other categories you are seeing just a tiny selection of street photography. 

 

Forums, by their nature, tend to "categorise" different subjects, and it's very easy to judge an overall subject by seeing just one, tiny part of it.

 

The "gimmicks" you refer to are real occurrences, they were not posed.

 

If you look at any of the books of photographs by Robert Doisneau, Elliott Erwitt, Gianni Berengo-Gardin, and many, many others, you will see that they were photographing those "gimmicks" 50 or 60 years ago, and those gentlemen were the pioneers of street photography.  Doisneau and Erwitt, in particular, show amazing senses of humour and irony in the work they produced from the 1950s onwards.

 

Street photography is not "heading" anywhere... it's still doing exactly what it did since Henri Cartier-Bresson started back in the 1930s, almost one hundred years ago, as you will easily see if you visit any exhibition of street photographs taken in any of the last 8 decades :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It seems to me that Street Photography is moving slowly but surely towards being a collection of joke shots. Lucky captures of peculiar happenings seem to win the awards. But street photography in it's true pure form came about as a way to document everyday life on the street. As Bruce Gilden puts it, it's a street photograph if you can 'smell the street'. With a lot of the photos I'm seeing, labelled as street photography, this is clearly not the case. They are good pictures of odd happenings, but I'm concerned that this style of photography is heading towards and being rewarded for producing gimmicks.

 

I think you should lighten up a bit.  Loosen the camera strap from around your neck and breath.  I actually enjoyed these humorous images though I DESPISE street photography and the entire gender it encompasses.  Even a jerk like me can like something.   :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Headless Wave in Istanbul

<a data-flickr-embed="true"  href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/fdwalker/21146165573/in/dateposted/" title="Headless Hand | Istanbul, Turkey"><img src="https://farm1.staticflickr.com/625/21146165573_a692826dc0_b.jpg" width="1024" height="681" alt="Headless Hand | Istanbul, Turkey"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

A little sea breeze on the ferry in Istanbul

<a data-flickr-embed="true"  href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/fdwalker/23887355706/in/photostream/" title="Istanbul, Turkey 2015"><img src="https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5668/23887355706_b4b54f6d2b_b.jpg" width="1024" height="678" alt="Istanbul, Turkey 2015"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

Sun tanning in Cinarcik, Turkey

<a data-flickr-embed="true"  href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/fdwalker/23736758770/in/dateposted/" title="Cinarcik, Turkey 2015"><img src="https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5718/23736758770_5a721396cb_b.jpg" width="1024" height="678" alt="Cinarcik, Turkey 2015"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

Follow it all at ShooterFiles.com !

http://shooterfiles.com/

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • I'm not exaggerating when I say that I have searched with great vigor (and at great expense) for a way to capture IR images with a Fujifilm camera for which I didn't have to use major amounts of sharpening to bring out the best. Zooms, primes, Fuji, Tamron, Viltrox, Sigma, Zeiss ... probably 20 lenses all told. Plus multiple IR converted Fuji cameras, X-T1, X-T3, X-T5. I even tried different ways of filtering IR, such as using the Kolari clip-ins and lens-mounted front filters. I was ready to give up until I almost accidentally tried one of the cheapest lenses out there -- the little TTArtisan 27mm F2.8. No hotspots that I could see, and best of all ABSOLUTELY SUPERB SHARPNESS across the entire frame. It's this attribute that I search for, and until now, never achieved. In my prior attempts, I listened to the advice from the "pundits", picking up a copy of the venerable Fuji 14mm F2.8, the Zeiss Touitt 12mm F2.8, Fuji 23 and 35mm F2.0, even the very similar 7Artisans 27mm F2.8, and none of them come even close to the TTArtisan for edge sharpness in infrared. Incidentally, I'm using a Kolari 720nm clip-in filter. Sure the TT has its issues -- vignetting at 2.8, tendency to flare with sunlight nearby, but all in all, this lens is glued to my X-T5 for now. This image was taken hand-held with this lens -- completely unedited!
    • Hy there When Im using the fan001 on the XH2s and I flip the LCD Screen vertically by 180 degrees then the image flips vertically, what is good but it also flips horizontally. The clean feed on HDMI is not flipping horizontally but its also flipping if the HDMI output info display is on. When I unmount the fan then the image flips only vertically. My firmware is updated to the latest version. Any ideas if there is a fix for that?
    • In reply to the original question, it all depends on what you mean by infrared.  If you mean "see thermal information", then I agree with the comments here.  However, if you mean near-infrared, the X-T4, or basically any digital camera can be modified to "see" it.  Check out Lifepixel.com and Kolarivision.com for more info. As regards lenses, I'm not exaggerating when I say that I have searched with great vigor (and at great expense) for a way to capture IR images with a Fujifilm camera for which I didn't have to use major amounts of sharpening to bring out the best. Zooms, primes, Fuji, Tamron, Viltrox, Sigma, Zeiss ... probably 20 lenses all told. Plus multiple IR converted Fuji cameras, X-T1, X-T3, X-T5. I even tried different ways of filtering IR, such as using the Kolari clip-ins and lens-mounted front filters. I was ready to give up until I almost accidentally tried one of the cheapest lenses out there -- the little TTArtisan 27mm F2.8. No hotspots that I could see, and best of all ABSOLUTELY SUPERB SHARPNESS across the entire frame. It's this attribute that I search for, and until now, never achieved. In my prior attempts, I listened to the advice from the "pundits", picking up a copy of the venerable Fuji 14mm F2.8, the Zeiss Touitt 12mm F2.8, Fuji 23 and 35mm F2.0, even the very similar 7Artisans 27mm F2.8, and none of them come even close to the TTArtisan for edge sharpness in infrared. Incidentally, I'm using a Kolari 720nm clip-in filter. Sure the TT has its issues -- vignetting at 2.8, tendency to flare with sunlight nearby, but all in all, this lens is glued to my X-T5 for now. This image was taken hand-held with this lens -- completely unedited!
    • No - I don’t think so - it means you can take pictures if you remove the lens completely - but I’m not sure that is a problem
    • I bought a manual lens over xmas and it took me a while to find the "shutter w/o lens" function in the menu settings.  So far I haven't found a way to either put that on the Q menu or marry that setting to one of the 4 custom modes.   Am I missing something? Is there a problem if I just leave that setting enabled even when the OEM auto lens is in place? tia
×
×
  • Create New...