The question came up:

Do we do street/candid photgraphy "up close and personal" or do we hide behind a bush?

I've seen news journalists use very wide angle lenses only a few inches from their subjects to give "perspective and context." Others (sports, war, etc.) use very long lenses from "safe" distances...easier to run!

Debate: what to use for street and candid photography..."in your face" or long teles?

I tend to be shy and prefer teles...Others enjoy confrontation.

What's your poison?

-- Todd Frederick (fredrick@hotcity.com), February 27, 2002

Answers

in your face or behind a bush

I only have a little experience in this but so far I have found that it rather depends on the subject. I normally preferf the shy option and use a telephoto. This works for me if the subject is just someone going about their daily business as they are often a little surprised to be photographed. However, if the subject is already drawing attention, like a street performer, then they are normally pleased to be photograhed and close up is much better. I guess each situation requires its own judgement

-- andrew catchpole (acatch@molbiol.ox.ac.uk), February 27, 2002.

She's got to be really good looking before I stick my face in her bush.

-- Glenn Travis (leicaddict@hotmail.com), February 27, 2002.

I almost always work close up, even if I am shooting surreptitiously. I find it much easier to get a feel for the subject close up. Also, it removes the obstacles between you and the subject. The photo below was a hip shot from a few feet away. I was surrounded by kids as school had just gotten out and would not have had an unobstructed view from any farther away. More importantly, I wouldn't even have seen the shot from any distance.

The Gaze, Copyright 2000 Jeff Spirer

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), February 27, 2002.

For Jeff: Personally, I'm not an advocate of "shooting from the hip," and I think this photo points it out perfectly. Although technically the shot is ok from the standpoint of being in focus and exposed ok, compositionally, I think its weak. That's why it's cropped. Unfortunately, for me, that only calls attention to its weaknesses. First off, we can tell she's sitting in a doorway, we don't need all that doorway to know that. Secondly, the subject has a pensive look, but much is always conveyed by body language, and here the subject's body is cut off in an unnaturally way. In a way that doesn't add, explain, or enhance our understanding of the subject. I think if you had crouched down and composed a picture, you could have made a really strong photograph instead of (IMUHO) an also ran. If you don't think it's weak, take a print and some tracing paper and draw over it until you get a composition you think is really strong.

-- Glenn Travis (leicaddict@hotmail.com), February 27, 2002.

I think part of my question here contains elements of the "way" in which the photographers uses his/her equipment.

If I were to take the shot Jeff posted, I'd have the kid making faces at the camera. Being really close tends to make people self- conscious or pissed. I don't know how to avoid that.

Some members of the Rollei TLR club suggested doing close people photography with a TLR at waist level in a prefocused mode. I've tried that and it works quite well.

However, eye level "gun" style shooting is very obvious and, for me, tends to distract my subject.

How do you actually use your camera when photographing in close?

I've heared that Bresson would keep his Leica very low behind his long coat, totally concealed with his hands (except for the lens), and then quickly raise it up, barely looking in the viewfinder, take the photo, and then drop it out of sight again, walking on.

If you are photographing people very close, what's your method? This is a very serious question...I'd like to work on this skill.

-- Todd Frederick (fredrick@hotcity.com), February 27, 2002.

That's why it's cropped.

You started with this and it's completely wrong.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), February 27, 2002.

Jeff,

I like your approach to street photography. Would you feel comfortable letting me know a few of the ways you approach and photograph your subjects in close? Todd

-- Todd Frederick (fredrick@hotcity.com), February 27, 2002.

If you are photographing people very close, what's your method?

Usually I just stand around until people don't notice me any more. I think it has far more to do with how you act than whether or not the camera is out.

Bar Love, Copyright 2000 Jeff Spirer

(This one is cropped, in case anyone was wondering, but it's because I print to 8x10 most of the time and 35mm has to be cropped.)

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), February 27, 2002.

To Jeff: I think this is a very strong photograph, that shows and conveys a Love of life. Like that Life photo of the salior and girl in NYC at the end of WWII. This looks composed in the viewfinder, yes?

-- Glenn Travis (leicaddict@hotmail.com), February 27, 2002.

Complete stranger, Broadway, NYC. "Mine if I take your photo?" Pause, "OK." Click, "Thanks." "Sure." I was drawn to his sense, "of self."

-- Glenn Travis (leicaddict@hotmail.com), February 27, 2002.

-- Doug Ford (dford@san.rr.com), February 28, 2002.

"I think it has far more to do with how you act than whether or not the camera is out."

I've said the same thing many times on this topic. Generally, if people are uncomfortable with you taking their photo, a big part of it comes from you being uncomfortable taking their photo. A huge amount of the "information" communicated between people in person comes from non-obvious cues like the tone/volume/inflection of voice, posture, eye contact, facial expression, etc. While you don't actively attend to these things, you do notice them. When you're uncomfortable photographing someone, you're probably telling them that fact (whether you want to or not), and they're reacting to it.

Todd, your intial question ('Debate: what to use for street and candid photography..."in your face" or long teles? I tend to be shy and prefer teles...Others enjoy confrontation.') reveals a bias that makes it difficult for you to take an up-close approach. The terms (even if you're not fully serious) like "in your face" and "confrontation" have aggressive connotations, as though the photographer and subject are in opposition. They usually aren't!

As for my approach to up-close candid photography, I don't really have a specific method. A lot of the time, though, I'm somewhat "anchored" in one place (cafe table, spot at the bar, street corner)--that has certain implications on the psychology of the situation. But I also go roving around, too. I suppose one consistent factor is that I act like I have very right to be doing what I'm doing . . .

It's an interesting topic. I'm going out of town for a few days, but I may come back to it when I return.

-- Mike Dixon (mike@mikedixonphotography.com), February 28, 2002.

The above is one way of dealing with it.

Seriously Todd, from this/other posts I think you're trying to figure out how to get started with street/people photography and you are stalling with some issues - mostly ethical, a few technical. I can offer a beginner's perspective as I started recently with essentially zero experience - you're way ahead of the curve with 30 years. So take this all with a grain of salt - I'm just relating what I've done on my own (which may well be a dumb way to start).

For me it came down to are you going to do it or not. There was nothing left to rationalize. I started about 8 months ago going up to SF in different areas using B&W trying to figure out what to do. Results were not very satisfying - I probably have a couple of pictures I really like from that time.

For the last 3-4 months I've been mostly shooting in just one area in SF (also on Muni and CalTrain). I've really learned the area, people, know what to expect, have a level of comfort/safety, etc. It's very crowded (not necessarily ideal) with many people interacting in different ways. This has helped with the what-if-people-don't-want-their-picture-taken self-doubt issues. I just do it, no one has complained, been ornery, etc. Some are stealth, most are not.

I've seen a big improvement by concentrating in one area. BTW, this wasn't a planned strategy, just the way it turned out - so I'm going to stay there awhile longer while I learn. I have other ideas for later on. Have probably shot around 1300 frames during this period and have printed 100-150 I like. I'm pleased with the way this has worked out. Perhaps a suitable corner/park/cafe in downtown San Jose would work for you?

-- Brad Evans (b-evans@sbcglobal.net), March 02, 2002.