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

    • Thank you. I will research it.
    • Ahh, the infamous brick wall photos… 😀 According to internet lore, if the dng converter does not properly apply the corrections, you can have it apply custom profiles that should work for you. How to do that is waaaaaay outside of this comment’s scope, but there are plenty of sites listed in the search engines that step you through the processes. Best wishes.
    • Jerry Thank you very much. That is extremely helpful. It seems that the camera and the lens have the latest firmware update, so it appears that the corrections should be applied automatically. The lens arrived this afternoon and I took some quick test shots, in which the correct lens information appeared in the EXIF files, so that sounds good. I used Adobe DNG converter to convert the Raw (RAF) files, and then opened the DNG files and saved them in PSD format. However, with a beautiful, clear, cloudless blue sky, there were no lines near the edges to check if distortion had been corrected. Another day I plan to photograph a brick wall. Thank you for your help.
    • Typically you need to make sure the lens is compatible with the camera, i.e. check the lens compatibility charts for your camera, then make sure the respective firmwares are updated so older issues are resolved. After that, each lens has a manufacturer’s profile which will be embedded into the raw file meta data for the images captured using that lens. From there, it is up to the raw conversion software to apply the lens correction to the image. Different converters do that differently, some automatically, some only if a setting is turned on. For in-camera jpegs, the on-board converter does the corrections automatically, assuming the camera recognizes the lens, it applies a generic profile otherwise. I do not know if that can be turned off or not.
    • How does one make sure that Fuji's image correction is turned on to correct barrel and pin-cushion distortion on a GFX 100 or GFX100S when using the GF20-35? Is it only applied to the jpegs and not to the raw files? (I was surprised to discover the barrel distortion on the GF 35-70mm lens.) I normally shoot in raw with jpeg back-up and use the raw files, which I convert either in Affinity Photo 2 when editing with that program or in Raw File Converter Ex 3.0 by Silkypix if I wish to process the image in Photoshop CS6. (Adobe DNG is also a possibility.) Thank you for the help. Trevor
×
×
  • Create New...