Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/05/02

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] WAS: IMG: early April, NOW: Street Photography 'definition'
From: imagist3 at mac.com (Lottermoser George)
Date: Wed May 2 13:59:12 2007
References: <800066.89941.qm@web55901.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <8312802B-50D2-4981-9B7B-979E9D786FAD@mac.com> <B9FB14BA-13F1-429C-A532-41A940F4F036@pandora.be> <003801c78c16$86014db0$2101a8c0@luispersonal> <6E623554-F9B8-4797-819F-7BCB2B0C61CC@pandora.be>

I've been reading the comments to my, "Can one articulate what makes  
a powerful "street photograph?"

On Apr 30, 2007, at 7:03 PM, H. Ball Arche wrote:
> I will say, though, that a large part of what
> motivates me to shoot what I do is the great joy I
> feel to be back home in the South after being away for
> most of the last 25 years. And by South I mean that
> mental condition much more than the simple location. I
> love being surrounded by folks that I 'get', and maybe
> that comes through.

I think that "great joy" comes through in his photographs.

On May 1, 2007, at 6:42 AM, Philippe Orlent wrote:
> Street photography. 4 criteria for me.
> What I consider the perfect street photograph is the following:
> It is a photo made 'out there' (indoors or outdoors), in public  
> places where people that don't necesserally know each other meet,  
> pass, interact or don't interact.

High potential for boring (for me).

> It is a photo where you feel that the photographer was unnoticed.  
> This doesn't mean that you can't have people looking into the lens,  
> but it should be with an 'empty' and non responsive look. Or that  
> pre-recognition look just before people understand that it's them  
> that are being photographed.

Same potential still there (for me).

> It is a photo that captures a moment that the viewer recognizes as  
> being unstaged, pure and genuine. A snap of life. A frozen moment.

Still doesn't, in and of itself, necessarily bring anything  
interesting to the photograph.

> And finally it is a photo that has a perfect composition. As if it  
> was staged to get all the elements in it at the right place at the  
> right time. Like everything suddenly falls into place. Without  
> being staged.

This begins to feel like a valuable criteria.

On May 1, 2007, at 12:31 PM, Luis Ripoll wrote:
> I fully agree your criteria, that's more difficult is communicate  
> to the
> spectator the same sentiment you had when you took the image.

And this, I believe speaks to the heart of it; and to all fine  
photography, or any other art. Probably not the "same sentiment,"  
yet, a sentiment or feeling, as close as possible.

On May 2, 2007, at 1:46 AM, Alastair Firkin wrote:
> I usually think that "interaction" makes the image strong. It can  
> be inter-human interaction, or the effect of the place on the  
> person etc

And this comment also speaks to the "feeling" of the photograph.  
Perhaps also speaks to the "interaction" of the photograph and the  
photographer; as well as the photograph and the viewer.

On May 2, 2007, at 3:31 PM, Philippe Orlent wrote:
>> Philippe,
>>
>> I fully agree your criteria, that's more difficult is communicate  
>> to the
>> spectator the same sentiment you had when you took the image.
>
> I really don't know if that is possible.
> Anybody?

I do think it possible, desirable, difficult and necessary in the  
context of fine, strong powerful photography; whether street or other  
genres. I think it fair to suggest that the best reach for more than  
just a record; and strive to communicate an emotion - at the very  
least a feeling of extraordinary beauty, irony, humor, pathos,  
compassion - something. Whatever the photographer feels then needs   
enhanced and/or amplified by the aesthetic elements composed in the  
frame. I don't think it enough to just document, technically well, a  
beautiful object, place, or event. If the photographer does not have  
strong feelings and/or thoughts about the subject it's unlikely that  
the viewer of the photograph will.

Regards,
George Lottermoser
george@imagist.com





Replies: Reply from luisripoll at telefonica.net (Luis Ripoll) ([Leica] WAS: IMG: early April, NOW: Street Photography 'definition')
Reply from philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent) ([Leica] WAS: IMG: early April, NOW: Street Photography 'definition')
In reply to: Message from h_arche at yahoo.com (H. Ball Arche) ([Leica] IMG: early April)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (Lottermoser George) ([Leica] IMG: early April)
Message from philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent) ([Leica] WAS: IMG: early April, NOW: Street Photography 'definition')
Message from luisripoll at telefonica.net (Luis Ripoll) ([Leica] WAS: IMG: early April, NOW: Street Photography 'definition')
Message from philippe.orlent at pandora.be (Philippe Orlent) ([Leica] WAS: IMG: early April, NOW: Street Photography 'definition')