# taking street photography photos w/ 35mm lens makes subjects mad



## denada

i was reading about street photography this weekend and gave it a try today with my olympus xa. i ask strangers to take their photos often, and it makes me nervous, so i figured this would be a great exercise to make that easier. definitely was. the idea of asking someone for their photo now seems like a relief. it's what i did to rebuild my confidence anytime someone yelled at me. which happened quite a bit. this was downtown cincinnati, where i spend most of my waking life.

walking right up to people and then suddenly taking their photo real close. switched my focus between 2.8 and 4 ft with fll. probably 25 subjects, counting couples and groups as one. half were confused and/or annoyed yet not confrontational. three swore at me and demanded i deleted the photo -- i can't, told them i won't use it and won't -- and one of them swatted at mostly my camera and tried to call the police but his phone ran out of batteries as soon as it connected. i stood my ground when people got confrontational, and i said thanks and kept walking if people just seemed annoyed or confused. the rest of the people, slightly less than half, were genuinely pleasant about it even if a bit confused. sometimes even responding positively to my thanks.

thought i was going to have way better ratio. all the street photographers with blogs say they get the cops called like once a year. i (almost) did on my first day. i'm really good at smiling and being nice. sitting here thinking about it, taking a photo suddenly in someone's face is an attack. that's pretty much why i did it. to get that surprised look. and it worked. even though it was overcast, i bet i got one or two good shots and a few ok. if my first attempt at zone focusing worked, which i did not read about beyond the manual's dof chat. would have been better with a flash. i started with portra 800, and ended with provia 100 and the flash once my confidence was up. only got like six shots with the provia and flash before i was done. one i think is going to be awesome. will share when i get back from the lab.

i don't really mind the confrontation and confusion all that much. it's kinda a rush. it did get exhausting quick. today i included some scary looking people because i was trying to challenge myself, which led to two of the three confrontations. so i can cut those down 66 percent by not poking mean looking dogs. the bigger problem is i want my subjects to be ok with their inclusion. and i want to not be a jerk.

in addition to throwing myself out of my comfort zone, the 35mm lens was to include the subjects in the process. people photography is respecting and connecting with your subjects while exploiting. just the latter feels bad. i smiled, i was confident, i feel i was quick but friendly. people just do not want a camera suddenly in their face. if they see it before you take the shot, the start walking away or smile or make other unwanted movements and faces. i need to figure out my strategy and interpersonal skills or leave this look to other photographers.

so curious about other peoples experiences? any tips?

thanks!


----------



## rexbobcat

I don't do what would be considered "street photography" often. But every time I do I encounter a hostile situation.

I was going somewhere this week and took a quick candid photo of a woman with my phone _from across the street _and almost got assaulted.

Maybe it's different in other countries, but in the U.S. the public has become so skeptical of having their photo taken that I just don't think it's worth it. The photos that I get aren't good enough to deal with people's neuroses.


----------



## jcdeboever

I don't have any issues but I'm a pretty big guy so maybe that has something to do with it. I smile a lot. Wear a black shirt so the camera kinda blends in. I often have the lens set at 8-10 feet. Sometimes I point the camera away from subject, then move it last second. If I do have it pointed at them, sometimes I pause (still looking in viewfinder) after the shot then they don't think I took a pic of them. I had a guy get weird with me once but I was polite and smiled, talked to him with respect, and he could see I was just having fun. Maybe reactions by the photographer escalate things unnecessarily at times. I try to interact with people, blend in, smile, say high a lot, say encouraging things to people.


----------



## Fred von den Berg

When I do street photography, I prefer a certain degree of detachment and in any case that the "subjects" should remain oblivious to the process. Otherwise the whole business becomes strained and unnatural. I also like to use a wide angle lens, so keeping things discreet is the key.


----------



## limr

denada said:


> i don't really mind the confrontation and confusion all that much. it's kinda a rush. it did get exhausting quick. today i included some scary looking people because i was trying to challenge myself, which led to two of the three confrontations. so i can cut those down 66 percent by not poking mean looking dogs. *the bigger problem is i want my subjects to be ok with their inclusion. and i want to not be a jerk.*



Then don't get into their faces without permission. Doing so means they're not okay with the inclusion and yes, you're being a jerk. And the other question you might want to ask yourself is, what kind of street photography do you want to do? The ambush-and-run technique has already been done to death. Aren't you really just copying Garry Winogrand or Bruce Gilden? Other than your personal adrenaline rush, what is the point of the photos? If you're good at smiling and being nice and you want people to feel good about being in the photograph, why not try a completely different approach and interact with the subjects in a less-confrontational way? Then try to get your adrenaline rush without violating people's personal space.



Fred von den Berg said:


> When I do street photography, I prefer a certain degree of detachment and in any case that the "subjects" should remain oblivious to the process. Otherwise the whole business becomes strained and unnatural. I also like to use a wide angle lens, so keeping things discreet is the key.



I'm the same way. I do less street photography than I used to, but when I do, my purpose is to observe, not to disturb or interact with a scene. I don't want to influence the image or the story, but just to capture it as it would unfold even if I weren't there.


----------



## waday

rexbobcat said:


> I don't do what would be considered "street photography" often. But every time I do I encounter a hostile situation.
> 
> I was going somewhere this week and took a quick candid photo of a woman with my phone _from across the street _and almost got assaulted.
> 
> Maybe it's different in other countries, but in the U.S. the public has become so skeptical of having their photo taken that I just don't think it's worth it. The photos that I get aren't good enough to deal with people's neuroses.


How are you going about it? I'm in the US and have had minimal problems in several cities..



denada said:


> any tips?


I like street photography a lot. I could be better. But, like limr and Fred, I do it in a way to not disturb or interact with the scene. I don't linger at all with my camera, nor do I interact. If I have my camera out for more than 1 or 2 seconds, I'm doing something wrong. I try to blend in and be a part of the street/scenery so as to not stick out. Settings are made beforehand, so all I need to do is aim and press a button.


----------



## webestang64

All my street photography is like this.....





No need to interact with anybody......LOL


----------



## denada

i appreciate all the replies so far!

some of it must have been my mentality. i was out to prove to myself that i could. this likely made me less sensitive than if i wasn't attempting a just do it attitude. also probably made my movements more calculated and intimidating.

it does seem occasional hostility is part of the game no matter what. people are indeed very wary about having their photo taken.

i am emulating other photographers. my background is too post-modern to feel guilty about that. the point of the photos was to get interesting people in good looking photographs. it was one day of trying out a look i saw and like, not my manifesto.

so the surprise photo is upsetting to many and to be avoided unless i selfishly need that look in the photo. while i've taken photos of people without their knowledge and have no ethical issue with doing so, it's not particularly what i'm after. another only if the situation demands it.

i'm going to experiment with hybrids. asking people to take their photo but trying to find the unstrained moment between poses. or shooting as i ask. or i don't know.

of course interested in hearing more about other's techniques. especially if it involves making the subject aware before or as the photo is taken.


----------



## waday

denada said:


> i'm going to experiment with hybrids. asking people to take their photo but trying to find the unstrained moment between poses. or shooting as i ask. or i don't know.


Two people that come to mind with respect to street and street portraiture are: @The_Traveler and @Philmar 

Both are phenomenal photographers. I've tagged them here, but you may have to reach out to them individually. I'm not sure how much Lew (The_Traveler) frequents the site anymore?


----------



## zombiesniper

I've seen a few Street photographers doing their thing but I can't say I've ever seen one 2.5' away from someone with out asking permission. That's in my WTF are you doing zone. Personally I couldn't care what your doing but if you're going to engage me that close. You should expect a non pleasant reaction. If you approach, ask for and get permission thats different but 2.5' is half an arms length. Not cool in my books.


----------



## rexbobcat

waday said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't do what would be considered "street photography" often. But every time I do I encounter a hostile situation.
> 
> I was going somewhere this week and took a quick candid photo of a woman with my phone _from across the street _and almost got assaulted.
> 
> Maybe it's different in other countries, but in the U.S. the public has become so skeptical of having their photo taken that I just don't think it's worth it. The photos that I get aren't good enough to deal with people's neuroses.
> 
> 
> 
> How are you going about it? I'm in the US and have had minimal problems in several cities..
Click to expand...


I am in a part of San Diego that has a high concentration of homeless and vagabonds. And  the only people who generally walk around are the homeless unless you're downtown (San Diego is a very car-centric city), in which case the density of people on the streets is so low that you still stick out with a camera.

It's hard to put the subject at ease by being friendly when the subject has an inherent distrust of you.

It just not a city that's very conducive to casual street photography. Yes it's possible, but I've had more luck taking photos along the beach than I have in town.


----------



## denada

i bet most of my shots were about 4 feet from camera to face. still close, no doubt. i started with the camera set at 2.8ft for a few shots but switched to 4ft after checking myself with a parking meter. the first shots set to 2.8 are likely are not in great focus. maybe they were all further out. it was my first attempt at zone focusing.

i leaned in for the shot to get different angles, but all started from me walking down the sidewalk the opposite direction. it's downtown and the personal bubble is not big. no one complained about personal space. 100 percent of the conflict was "did you just take my picture? wtf! i didn't say you could do that!" not that distance and body language doesn't play into it, but i am confident the offense was taking a photo and not invading their personal space. it's downtown where people are wary of getting mugged, so i was definitely not making sudden movements into anyone's bubble.

not defending my strategy, as it is not the photography experience i'm after, but don't want to confuse the issue.

anyway i tried two from the hip shots after work today. with fill flash, which i do not not fully know the functioning off. i used the formula, but if it does not convince the camera to use a quicker shutter speed they're blurred. point of mentioning the flash is they realized they'd been photographed. neither said anything, and both were people i was unsure about. which is a space and body language thing. even though i was about 4 feet from these people, i didn't suddenly stop or point anything at them that they could see. by the time they realized what happened i was far enough away they'd of had to chase (which is one of those lines most recognize as crazy). they know what's happening as it's happening if you stop and frame the shot. experimenting. hip shooting isn't really a viable method for me.


----------



## jcdeboever

denada said:


> i appreciate all the replies so far!
> 
> some of it must have been my mentality. i was out to prove to myself that i could. this likely made me less sensitive than if i wasn't attempting a just do it attitude. also probably made my movements more calculated and intimidating.
> 
> it does seem occasional hostility is part of the game no matter what. people are indeed very wary about having their photo taken.
> 
> i am emulating other photographers. my background is too post-modern to feel guilty about that. the point of the photos was to get interesting people in good looking photographs. it was one day of trying out a look i saw and like, not my manifesto.
> 
> so the surprise photo is upsetting to many and to be avoided unless i selfishly need that look in the photo. while i've taken photos of people without their knowledge and have no ethical issue with doing so, it's not particularly what i'm after. another only if the situation demands it.
> 
> i'm going to experiment with hybrids. asking people to take their photo but trying to find the unstrained moment between poses. or shooting as i ask. or i don't know.
> 
> of course interested in hearing more about other's techniques. especially if it involves making the subject aware before or as the photo is taken.



Just go out and enjoy life. It is a blessing that we can awake each day and partake in an ever changing, by the second, per breath world. Why not go out on a personal assignment and say, I am going to include 3 or 4 elements inside a frame today. Or say,I am.gomg to capture movement across the street with a 200mm. Maybe you snap off 3 frames, maybe 36. Focus on what your environment is providing you, not the people per say. Sometimes I get snap.happy. Don't, make every shot count. Have fun sweetie pie, you deserve it. I have seen some of your images and you have the talent, more so than I. Love is the key to many things, what do you love?. If you could have it, why not enjoy it. A TLR may suit you better for what it is worth.


----------



## Derrel

Oh, wow, 4 feet from the person? OMG, that's the way that Eric Kim operates. At four feet in the USA, you are WELL into the *close personal space* of people in public. That distance, four feet or so, is going to make people feel very offended, very violated by any type of camera. The offense is violating the public "bubble" while taking a photo of the person; it's a sort of compound error. If you would just bump into them, it would be like, "Oh, excuse me," and you'd be good to move on, but also taking a photograph of them from that distance....gosh...very risky behavior.

I feel like many people today have been mislead by this A-hole Eric Kim, and his "street (assault) photography" videos and articles over the last five years or so. Contrast Kim's working methods with those of the old LIFE magazine and Magnum street shooters, people whose idea was avoid confrontation, to keep things quick, and almost invisibly conducted. Walking RIGHT up to a person and shooting a photo on the street from inside of 15 feet is very much a violation of this culture's norms, which is why I label Eric Kim an A-hole. If you want shock and disgust and hostility in the expressions, his method will get them.

You are totally correct--their negative reaction was not about you making sudden movements into their bubble of personal space--it's was what you DID once inside that space-shooting a photo from a very close distance to them. Like I said, physically bumping in to them would be less of a social faux paus.

As far as zone focusing and street shooting goes, I did a LOT of it in my early 20's. Set the lens not at f/2.8, but at f/5.6 or f/6.3 or f/8 and that builds some DOF and makes it easier to get everything into decent focus.

The issue as I see it is one of close personal space versus public space distance norms; you're working like an Eric  Kim...I find his approach extremely damaging and disrespectful to the field of photography. Shooting from a little farther away,and being faster, and learning how to minimize the, "I am taking your picture" aspects of your camera handling and framing up of shots will help minimize conflict with people, to a degree.


----------



## denada

ha, i'm running late but eric kim photos are exactly what prompted this. 2.8 feet focus, shot at fll. be back for a fuller response to you and jcd later!


----------



## Derrel

Just so you know: this type of street photography requires courage, practice, people skills, judgement, fearlessness, thick skin, and so on. There are some ways to minimize the camera and the picture-shooting process, which you can find in some older articles (NOT videos on-line!) written by people who really have honed their craft on the street.

How the camera is carried is a big issue: wrap the strap around your right hand, and carry it as you walk, wrapped tightly so the hand and camera are ONE unit, raise the camera and hand, shoot, and drop the camera and hand, and continue walking. This is very different from "wearing the camera" on a strap, and looking for people to shoot. You're walking along as opposed to out there stand-hunting for people.


----------



## Bebulamar

I won't confront you or upset but just to let you know that I prefer that you don't take my picture.


----------



## limr

Just because they didn't say, "get out of my personal space" doesn't mean they were not bothered by it.


----------



## smoke665

Not knocking street photography but I've lived by this all my life - "Your rights end at the exact point that mine begin" . If any one where to invade my personal space on the street, they're likely to meet with resistance. Given today's climate of terrorism, if that invasion includes pointing something at me, that resistance most likely would become physical. As many states including ours have stand your ground laws, it could also get you shot.


----------



## goooner

Seeing that it is illegal to 'publish' photos here in germany without the persons' consent, I've not been able to take street shots showing peoples faces. I prefer the birds and bees.


----------



## jcdeboever

smoke665 said:


> Not knocking street photography but I've lived by this all my life - "Your rights end at the exact point that mine begin" . If any one where to invade my personal space on the street, they're likely to meet with resistance. Given today's climate of terrorism, if that invasion includes pointing something at me, that resistance most likely would become physical. As many states including ours have stand your ground laws, it could also get you shot.


I agree. It's about respect. If I want to get 4 ft. From someone, I ask them. I have to out of respect. I have been turned down but they always thanked me for asking. I work a  8-10 ft zone currently and trust me, not a lot of opportunity. Street photography is hard work and requires a high level of skill. IMO, it is the hardest type of photography. Look at the masters, and try to present something different, extremely difficult.


----------



## waday

smoke665 said:


> Not knocking street photography but I've lived by this all my life - "Your rights end at the exact point that mine begin" . If any one where to invade my personal space on the street, they're likely to meet with resistance. Given today's climate of terrorism, if that invasion includes pointing something at me, that resistance most likely would become physical. As many states including ours have stand your ground laws, it could also get you shot.


Just because you _believe_ you have the right to not be photographed in public, doesn't make it true.


----------



## denada

completely understand what you're saying about it being the action in that close space, Derrel.

i'm going to continue to consume this genre and tread softer as i figure it out with my own camera. the golden rule often fails me, and i feel a little silly for having let a blog convince me this surprise method was not disrespectful. eric kim does have some great photos. last night i watched a video of him creating them, and he's being lightweight wrong to his fellow human beings in the process.

still strongly believe the primary offense was taking the photo. while further away may reduce conflict, that's utilizing both figurative and literal barriers. and "not interacting" sounds a lot like not getting caught. which i'm not knocking. done it before, will do it again. but i think many or most people do want to be photographed without permission, period. i'll now work to convince myself otherwise.

thanks the the encouragement, jcdeboever.  if you're saying you take no permission photos from 8 - 10 feet away, i'm very interested to hear about your strategy and what reactions you get. and to see the results!


----------



## waday

If I had interacted with this scene, it would have been different. I'm glad I had no interaction with the woman, whatsoever. I like it the way it is*. If I got within 2 feet of the person, the reflection in the window wouldn't be there, she wouldn't be "dancing", and the image wouldn't be the same.




Dancing Reflections by Wade, on Flickr

*I'm still working on how I'd like to process it, and I took it in November, haha.


----------



## denada

waday said:


> If I had interacted with this scene, it would have been different. I'm glad I had no interaction with the woman, whatsoever. I like it the way it is*. If I got within 2 feet of the person, the reflection in the window wouldn't be there, she wouldn't be "dancing", and the image wouldn't be the same.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dancing Reflections by Wade, on Flickr
> 
> *I'm still working on how I'd like to process it, and I took it in November, haha.



that's a great shot and i certainly agree capturing it discreetly was best. while anecdotal if being used to support one style over another, well taken opportunity to share a worthwhile photo.


----------



## waday

denada said:


> while anecdotal if being used to support one style over another, well taken opportunity to share a worthwhile photo.


For my style, yes, I'd rather be a part of the scenery.

If you prefer surprise portraits, then my style is not for you.

Good luck with your adventures.


----------



## Gary A.

I've been shooting Street since the 1970's.  Street shooting have evolved with the introduction of digital cameras and the proliferation of cameras.  But my Street Shooting technique has stayed the same.

We all see differently and we all shoot differently.  I really don't judge one's technique.  What you do is what you do.  I have developed a sixth sense over the years, of who and what and how and when to capture a Street image. For what it is worth, this is what I do:

1)  I shoot with respect for the Street people.  They are working, playing, shopping, et cetera and I am the intruder into their world.  I respect them and I hope for equal respect in return;

2)  I don't believe in sneaking, hiding a camera, shooting from the hip. Typically, I shoot with two cameras and a camera bag hanging off a shoulder;

3)  I dress and act as if I am working, (as I take my photography seriously, I do feel that I am working).  I wear a sleeved and collared shirt, long pant and closed toe shoes. No T's, no T's with writing or pictures on them, no shorts and no sandals. I used to be a news photog and I act and dress as if on assignment.

4)  I walk and shoot, walk and shoot.  One camera will have a long lens, around 200mm and the other camera a wide lens around 20mm-28mm;

5)  Every shot is situational and every shot is sized up individually and shot individually.  Sometimes I go for eye contact and other times not.  Sometimes I hang back and shoot long and other times I move in tight and shoot wide;

6)  Most importantly, I try to blend into the Street.  I am working, no different than the Street people, we're both working. I try to be no different than a mailbox, or a street light or a doorway. Blending into, becoming a part of the Street is as much mental as it is physical;

7) I rarely speak to anyone and I have never asked permission to photograph anyone. For me, once you speak, typically/often you change the look and feel of what you wanted to capture; and

Some stuff from the 70's:

#1






#2





#3





#4


----------



## smoke665

waday said:


> smoke665 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not knocking street photography but I've lived by this all my life - "Your rights end at the exact point that mine begin" . If any one where to invade my personal space on the street, they're likely to meet with resistance. Given today's climate of terrorism, if that invasion includes pointing something at me, that resistance most likely would become physical. As many states including ours have stand your ground laws, it could also get you shot.
> 
> 
> 
> Just because you _believe_ you have the right to not be photographed in public, doesn't make it true.
Click to expand...


Didn't mention photography. I said if you invade my personal space and point anything at me. I would react defensively, and ask questions later.


----------



## waday

smoke665 said:


> Didn't mention photography. I said if you invade my personal space and point anything at me. I would react defensively, and ask questions later.


I was assuming it was implied considering the context of your response, but ok...

Just because you _believe_ you have the right to _personal space and not having anything pointed at you_ in public, doesn't make it true.


----------



## denada

very much appreciate the rundown of your technique and preview of your style, gary. #1 is a remarkable shot.

edit: "remarkable" feels light. #1 is straight up inspiring and i hope to incorporate elements of the style into my own.


----------



## jcdeboever

denada said:


> completely understand what you're saying about it being the action in that close space, Derrel.
> 
> i'm going to continue to consume this genre and tread softer as i figure it out with my own camera. the golden rule often fails me, and i feel a little silly for having let a blog convince me this surprise method was not disrespectful. eric kim does have some great photos. last night i watched a video of him creating them, and he's being lightweight wrong to his fellow human beings in the process.
> 
> still strongly believe the primary offense was taking the photo. while further away may reduce conflict, that's utilizing both figurative and literal barriers. and "not interacting" sounds a lot like not getting caught. which i'm not knocking. done it before, will do it again. but i think many or most people do want to be photographed without permission, period. i'll now work to convince myself otherwise.
> 
> thanks the the encouragement, jcdeboever.  if you're saying you take no permission photos from 8 - 10 feet away, i'm very interested to hear about your strategy and what reactions you get. and to see the results!



Strategy is simple, any falling into that zone or if I'm entering in it, all I have to do is frame and shoot, assuming metering is correct. 

Results? Not many to share, have to look. I assume most are just not good enough to post in regards to people or I'd direct you with a link. 

However, upon reviewing and studying along the way, many lack 3 elements, so in theory, they're snap shots with little content. Something I am working on. I have 6 rolls to develop, could be some on there that would contain some content. For me it's a learning process. I literally walked around recently and it seems to me that 8-10ft zone is close and safe but still, common sense applies. Sometimes, you see something like a little kid composition developing, not a bad time to interact with the parent  and ask for permission. Doesn't hurt to have examples on you either, say this is what I do and I'm just out walking around, having a great time, enjoying the day. Look in the pixmedic photo contest link for this month. I seen this little girl (with mother) at the botanical garden with a sketch book in her hand. I complimented the mother on a beautiful blouse she was wearing and mentioned what a darling little daughter. I showed her a couple of flower pics and asked her, if the little pumpkin breaks out the sketchbook, could I capture that moment? She said, "that would fine, thank you for asking first."  And don't you know it, that little whipper snapper threw down the sketch book moments later, my camera was set, I crouched down and fired the shutter. I then showed the mother and we laughed, she said that her daughter loved to draw. That was 8 ft. away. That little girl also came up to me and showed me her drawing. Nothing creepy, just having a good time enjoying those precious moment, and earning and showing respect. Everyone loving the day.


----------



## DarkShadow

I don't really do street shooting but I think you have to keep a safer distance and blend it to the crowds use a smaller camera if you can with other then a DSLR and when you see something of interest that maybe worth lifting the camera, take the shot then keep moving the chances of someone chasing you half way way down the block is slim. You may also want to practice shooting from the hip when you can as one of our members the Traveler does, its a skill like any other photography,You just have to be confident and practice with that style of shooting. Good luck and be sure to wear a helmet and mouth guard.


I did do one street shooting up close and had no conflicts at all on this one but at the time I think he was really depressed from the infraction he received of driving  with out a seat belt. LOL


----------



## Gary A.

About a year ago, I challenged myself to shoot Street with a 50-200 @ 200mm (300mm on FF) on one camera and a 8mm fisheye on the other:

#1





#2





#3





#4


----------



## Braineack

Weird I don't have any problems with my street photography...




DSC03314 by The Braineack, on Flickr



> so curious about other peoples experiences? any tips?



do you want photography tips, or advice on how not to be a horrible human being?


----------



## DarkShadow

I give you guys lot of credit doing this style of photography,people can be really strange and unpredictable especially if they suffer from mental illness, no fault of there own. I still feel safer around wildlife especially birds, though I have been dive bombed once by a 3 inch Black-Capped Chickadee.


----------



## smoke665

waday said:


> Just because you _believe_ you have the right to _personal space and not having anything pointed at you_ in public, doesn't make it true.



Actually it does in my state and 32 others in this country that have some form of "Stand Your Ground Laws". While they may differ on the use of deadly force they pretty much all recognize an individual right to use force without retreating, in order to protect and defend themselves or others against threats or "perceived threats".  The Stand Your Ground Laws as apposed to the Castle Doctrine, extend the right of an individual  to expect absolute safety in a place they have a legal right to be. IE public place, street, etc.  I noticed a PA location on your tag, which also has Stand Your Ground Laws which state "a person in any lawful place outside his home “has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his ground and use force, including deadly force if . . . (he) believes it is immediately necessary to do so to protect himself against death, serious bodily injury, kidnapping, or sexual intercourse by force or threat.” (18 PA consolidated statutes 505(b)(2.3))". So yeah my right to believe I can limit your intrusion into my personal space (or any space) is not only true, but backed by law. A stranger coming up on someone on the street and sticking an unknown object in their face from 3' feet away (as the OP described), without warning, would be construed as  a "Perceived Threat" by most rational people and stands a good chance of eating the camera if lucky and possibly dead if not depending on the state and the other circumstances. Someone standing across the street pointing a camera in my direction, would likely be viewed as a situation where you could easily retreat from and not be considered an immediate threat, warranting the use of force.


----------



## waday

@smoke665, I disagree with your assessment, but that's ok! 

If you're that jumpy around other people, please let me know when you're around. I'd prefer not to be in your vicinity for fear of getting shot or otherwise physically assaulted by accidentally tripping near you. Or whipping out my phone. Or reaching for my wallet.


----------



## pjaye

waday said:


> @smoke665, I disagree with your assessment, but that's ok!
> 
> If you're that jumpy around other people, please let me know when you're around. I'd prefer not to be in your vicinity for fear of getting shot or otherwise physically assaulted by accidentally tripping near you. Or whipping out my phone. Or reaching for my wallet.



I'm sorry, but as someone who was at a location the day before a terrorist attack (Ottawa - war memorial), if you point something black at me and I catch it out of the corner of my eye, I AM going to react badly. There is a BIG difference of seeing something pointed at you or someone tripping. In this climate, yes, I will react badly if a stranger points something at me. I WILL assist a stranger who trips near me. Big difference between "reaching for a wallet or phone" and pointing something.


----------



## smoke665

@waday I'm not the least bit jumpy, but I am very alert of my surroundings while on the street, considering some of the locations I have to be in occasionally, and the nature of people today. You seem to be reaching to make the specifics of the OP different then they were stated. She didn't say she was reaching into her bag, she didn't say she was tripping, she said "walking right up to people and then suddenly taking their photo real close" - 2.8' to be exact. Reacting to this type of scenario, where you don't have time to know if it's a camera or weapon, I'll choose safety for myself and my family. If that doesn't fit your idea, then yup, might want to give me some leeway.


----------



## waday

No worries, mod squad, I'm leaving this alone before this goes further downhill.


----------



## vintagesnaps

I worked in the city so I'm not surprised people might be apprehensive. You're a stranger and they don't know why you're taking pictures or where they'll end up.

I think it's a self protective response. I notice street photography seems to be done in cities, in lower income areas, not in the suburbs or more affluent neighborhoods. I think living in neighborhoods where there's drug activity and violence, most people there are perfectly nice and law abiding and take care of each other and probably have developed a certain wariness and awareness of strangers. And really, why should they have to endure people with cameras being in their face because of where they live or their life circumstances? It's a matter of being respectful.

Probably you'd need to spend time people watching and interacting and letting them get used to you and learning how to be less intrusive. 4 feet sounds way too close and yeah, take a look at the work of some Magnum photographers. I've done events and it takes learning the timing, how to be unobtrusive yet respectful.


----------



## Gary A.

8)  I don't shoot the homeless, unless something odd is happening, (in which case I am shooting the odd thing that is happening, not the homeless per se).

I figured out, all by myself, that I was just shooting one side of the homeless, the I live in the suburbs and I drive into the big city/people zoo to look at the unfortunate - side.  I shot the homeless on my time and on my terms.  I decided that if I didn't take the time and effort to shoot the homeless from their side ... then I shouldn't shoot them at all.  So I removed any homeless I had on my site and haven't shot them since.


----------



## smoke665

vintagesnaps said:


> And really, why should they have to endure people with cameras being in their face because of where they live or their life circumstances? It's a matter of being respectful.



Couldn't agree more, why should anyone, anywhere have to put up with the intrusion. Respect of others goes a long way in this world, and as you said - spending time with people, observing them, working to be less intrusive makes a lot more sense then intentionally being a jerk about it.

@Gary A. big difference in the experience of the street if there's no going home to the suburbs. Be they homeless, be they low income, middle income or whatever, people deserve to be treated with respect. As Vintagesnaps pointed out, financial status doesn't determine if a person has a good heart or not. Sad thing is there are a large number of Vets out there on the streets now, and the number is growing.


----------



## Gary A.

@ smoke665- The #1 rule in my code is respect. I don't get your point.  Yes, it is sad that there are many homeless vets ... but I don't see what that has to do with my Street shooting?  I am now working with local government to create shelters for homeless Vets ... but that also has nothing to do with my Street shooting.

I don't jump in people's faces, I don't hide, I don't sneek ... I shoot in plain sight with two cameras and a shoulder bag.  When I shoot I don't think whether my subject has a good heart or not ... nor do I use a monetary/financial measure to determine if they are worthy to be captured by my camera.  I have lived in big cities, I fully realize the difference between low income housing in an inner city and living in a suburb ... which was why I brought up that point. BTW- I have also lived in trenches with our armed forces, fighting the mud, inspects and surviving on C-Rats.  What's your point?


----------



## smoke665

Gary A. said:


> I don't get your poin



No disrespect or disagreement intended, Gary. I was actually agreeing with your comments. Probably should have included more of your quote. My bad on that.


----------



## Gary A.

Maybe I just overreacted ... often the internet sucks.  Sorry for overreacting.


----------



## jcdeboever

I really like street shooting. I have such a desire for breathing when I think about it. I love life so much I could cry. Thinking always, about the men that have given their lives for my freedom. What a blessing it is to get up in the morning... kiss your wife, squeeze her bottom, tell her you love her, laugh when the dog lays on her head. Then, she makes me an egg with a slice of toast, pinches my ass, tells me she loves me and to hurry home for some of this (pointing). Now if I am not prepared to enjoy walking around looking for an opportunity to execute an assignment or to fulfill a Hedgecoe project, well I'm just plain ignorant to the wonders of what is presented to me on a daily basis. I can only be polite, nice, and respectful.


----------



## denada

we can all be in agreement about shooting the homeless and others in situations of despondence. i live in cincinnati. within city limits. though not downtown, because that's stupid expensive. i cannot, nor can 90-something percent of america, afford to live in the part of the city where i was taking photographs.


----------



## OGsPhotography

Interesting stuff. Cant wait to see what develops.

About the whole personal space controversy, I'll just point out the " fake snowman" scare gag...

I really hope no one gets hurt and I think the risk is possibly worth it, something different. 

Some people are just going to react to their space being invaded and being startled.
Some thing like this could happen;





I did a bit of street startle photography this week at Disney, I photographed the photog right when they were ready to shoot photopass shots. I cant wait to see some of their expressions. Personally I could care less to have photos of complete strangers, just not my thing.


----------



## denada

those videos are fake to rake in ppv earnings (that little girl should get a cut). don't let them affect your perception of people.

looking forward to seeing your disney photo if you decide to share.


----------



## ZombiesniperJr

OGsPhotography said:


> Interesting stuff. Cant wait to see what develops.
> 
> About the whole personal space controversy, I'll just point out the " fake snowman" scare gag...
> 
> I really hope no one gets hurt and I think the risk is possibly worth it, something different.
> 
> Some people are just going to react to their space being invaded and being startled.
> Some thing like this could happen;
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did a bit of street startle photography this week at Disney, I photographed the photog right when they were ready to shoot photopass shots. I cant wait to see some of their expressions. Personally I could care less to have photos of complete strangers, just not my thing.


Yep the video you showed shows the dangers of getting in people's personal space and scaring them at the same time



denada said:


> those videos are fake to rake in ppv earnings. don't let them affect your perception of people.
> 
> looking forward to seeing your disney photo if you decide to share.


Even if those ones are fake this does happen quite often with people


----------



## rexbobcat

denada said:


> those videos are fake to rake in ppv earnings (that little girl should get a cut). don't let them affect your perception of people.



I mean, that doesn't make his point invalid.


----------



## OGsPhotography




----------



## denada

ha, thanks for sharing. looks like he and everyone is having a good time. that little girl's outfit is doll.


----------



## bhop

I used to shoot more street stuff, but got tired of people being confrontational. People's paranoia about photography or "what you're going to do with my photo?" etc..  is just getting worse. These days I do more of a "streetscape" style of photos I guess..if i'm out in the streets.


----------



## nerwin

I think a big key thing for street photography is acting like you are taking pictures of something behind them. I did a little bit when I was Boston and I was surprised that a few people, complete strangers, posed when I was taking a picture of them haha. So maybe it really depends on the location, time of the day and your presence?

Another cool idea would be to have a portable photo book with your best street shots and show them what you do with their picture.

I really don't understand, a lot of people have issues with street photographers with endless amounts of confrontations and others with none. There's gotta be a reason why that is.

People really are paranoid when it comes to photography but they don't think about how many security cameras are recording them everyday.

I'm just going to take pictures of cats, they don't care (most of the time).


----------



## thereyougo!

I think part of the problem is that people have been whipped into mass hysteria by the media.  Trump complained that there isn't enough in European media about terrorist attacks - that they are underreported.  I can tell you that they aren't.  Blanket coverage of the incident in London two days ago, yet on the same day many more children were killed by an erroneous air strike and it isn't reported at all.  

Mass hysteria by the media (and in the US a head of state that prioritises media fed information over briefings) means that many people view the world with more and more paranoia - it's like the world has taken part in a mass consumption of cannabis (paranoia being a major side effect of cannabis use).  This feeding on fear doesn't just make us more jumpy, it makes us more pliable.

So as far as street photography is concerned, expect it to get worse before it gets better.


----------



## Gary A.

thereyougo! said:


> I think part of the problem is that people have been whipped into mass hysteria by the media.  Trump complained that there isn't enough in European media about terrorist attacks - that they are underreported.  I can tell you that they aren't.  Blanket coverage of the incident in London two days ago, yet on the same day many more children were killed by an erroneous air strike and it isn't reported at all.
> 
> Mass hysteria by the media (and in the US a head of state that prioritises media fed information over briefings) means that many people view the world with more and more paranoia - it's like the world has taken part in a mass consumption of cannabis (paranoia being a major side effect of cannabis use).  This feeding on fear doesn't just make us more jumpy, it makes us more pliable.
> 
> So as far as street photography is concerned, expect it to get worse before it gets better.


... and a craving for snack food.


----------



## smoke665

thereyougo! said:


> I think part of the problem is that people have been whipped into mass hysteria by the media.



38 years ago, I made my first trip to NYC. As a country boy accustomed to meeting people on the street, smiling, speaking, and exchanging greetings, I was somewhat taken back by the what I encountered on the street there. Not only would people not speak, smile or greet one another, they would go out of their way to avoid eye contact of any kind. However, in a restaurant, or lobby, or other inside locations, I didn't notice any of  that. I suspect that people feel more vulnerability on the street than elsewhere. The recent terror attacks might have heightened that vulnerability, because after all, that's the purpose of terror attacks.


----------



## limr

smoke665 said:


> thereyougo! said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think part of the problem is that people have been whipped into mass hysteria by the media.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 38 years ago, I made my first trip to NYC. As a country boy accustomed to meeting people on the street, smiling, speaking, and exchanging greetings, I was somewhat taken back by the what I encountered on the street there. Not only would people not speak, smile or greet one another, they would go out of their way to avoid eye contact of any kind. However, in a restaurant, or lobby, or other inside locations, I didn't notice any of  that. I suspect that people feel more vulnerability on the street than elsewhere. The recent terror attacks might have heightened that vulnerability, because after all, that's the purpose of terror attacks.
Click to expand...


No, that's just New York. When you're out on the street, you have somewhere to go, things to do. There isn't much time to be friendly to literally thousands of other people who are out on the street. When you live in a city with millions of other people and privacy is at a premium, you find ways to make public spaces a bit more private. Part of that is fewer random interactions when you're walking. And very little eye contact on the subway. Once you are somewhere inside with the purpose of interacting anyway, then interact away.


----------



## smoke665

limr said:


> No, that's just New York



There's a little bit of it in every large city, but it might be a little worse in NY. The thing I found interesting was if you tried to initiate eye contact with someone, they would quickly avert their eyes.


----------



## limr

smoke665 said:


> limr said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, that's just New York
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's a little bit of it in every large city, but it might be a little worse in NY. The thing I found interesting was if you tried to initiate eye contact with someone, they would quickly avert their eyes.
Click to expand...


Maybe, but it's not like it has gotten "worse" since 911. It's always been that way. New Yorkers just don't make eye contact out on the street very often. 

And I use quotation marks around "worse" because I don't care to judge the behavior. It's different behavior, not better or worse than the behavior in other cities. Actually, when I travel to other parts of the country, I quite frankly find the need to constantly smile and acknowledge random strangers on the street to be stressful and exhausting.


----------



## waday

Like @limr said. I wouldn't consider "no eye-contact" to be the end all answer to personalities, or any type of negative connotation. It's just something that's not done, because people have places to be and there are literally millions of people in the City. It's quoted that 8 million people ride the subway every day. 

When driving, if you don't take your chance, you'll be passed. It's not that drivers are less courteous, or meaner, it's that there are so many cars that you have to go when given the chance. That chance is usually a second or less. You want to change lanes? Put your turn signal on, and merge in. No one is going to hold your hand while doing it. We're all adults and treat each other like it. 

NYC isn't a zoo, and it's not "scary". It's a city full of people, normal people, like you and me, just trying to live their lives.

The wife and I frequent all the time (the wife grew up in Brooklyn and still has family there). People hold doors open, apologize when bumping into you, stand to the right on all escalators to let people walking up the escalators to walk past on the left, and let people get off the subway first before trying to enter.

Rarely do I make eye-contact or say hello to people in my own neighborhood in the suburbs of Central PA, let alone in a city with millions of people. Walking through Target? I don't say hello to anyone, why would I? We live in close proximity, we're not friends. I do wave and say hello to direct neighbors; I'm not an as5, and I like my neighbors. The same happens in NYC. It may not seem like it to visitors, but those who live in NYC know the people living on their block, living in their building, and thus are courteous to them as you are to your neighbors.


----------



## smoke665

waday said:


> I wouldn't consider "no eye-contact" to be the end all answer to personalities, or any



Not by any stretch, I just said I found it odd that there was a different persona on the street then when "inside". Inside the people were very friendly and open. Met some great people there. 



limr said:


> I quite frankly find the need to constantly smile and acknowledge random strangers on the street to be stressful and exhausting.



LOL, you'd really be exhausted in the south!


----------



## Braineack

i do my best to avoid talking to people in public, nothing good ever comes from it.


----------



## limr

smoke665 said:


> LOL, you'd really be exhausted in the south!



I was! It's why I won't live there again


----------



## table1349

waday said:


> Like @limr
> 
> NYC isn't a zoo, and it's not "scary". It's a city full of people, normal people, like you and me, just trying to live their lives.


Apparently you don't go to the Vinegar Hill area much.  As for a zoo, yep New York City is a zoo as is the whole east and west coast.  As for normal people, we do not have a naked cowboy with a guitar, a naked cowgirl or anyone like this person wondering around anywhere near here.


----------



## limr

gryphonslair99 said:


> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like @limr
> 
> NYC isn't a zoo, and it's not "scary". It's a city full of people, normal people, like you and me, just trying to live their lives.
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently you don't go to the Vinegar Hill area much.  As for a zoo, yep New York City is a zoo as is the whole east and west coast.  As for normal people, we do not have a naked cowboy with a guitar, a naked cowgirl or anyone like this person wondering around anywhere near here.
Click to expand...


Then stay out.


----------



## table1349

limr said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like @limr
> 
> NYC isn't a zoo, and it's not "scary". It's a city full of people, normal people, like you and me, just trying to live their lives.
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently you don't go to the Vinegar Hill area much.  As for a zoo, yep New York City is a zoo as is the whole east and west coast.  As for normal people, we do not have a naked cowboy with a guitar, a naked cowgirl or anyone like this person wondering around anywhere near here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then stay out.
Click to expand...

But sometimes it's interesting to go to the zoo to see all the weird and exotic critters they have there.


----------



## jcdeboever

Braineack said:


> i do my best to avoid talking to people in public, nothing good ever comes from it.



That's unfortunate.


----------



## limr

gryphonslair99 said:


> limr said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like @limr
> 
> NYC isn't a zoo, and it's not "scary". It's a city full of people, normal people, like you and me, just trying to live their lives.
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently you don't go to the Vinegar Hill area much.  As for a zoo, yep New York City is a zoo as is the whole east and west coast.  As for normal people, we do not have a naked cowboy with a guitar, a naked cowgirl or anyone like this person wondering around anywhere near here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then stay out.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> But sometimes it's interesting to go to the zoo to see all the weird and exotic critters they have there.
Click to expand...


How about cooling it with the insults?


----------



## smoke665

I never found it a zoo, "interesting" maybe. Generally stayed at the old St. Moritz or The Plaza and did a lot of people watching during down time. I prefered the St Moritz because of its proximity to Columbus Circle which was always interesting. Never knew what or who you might see. Enjoyed so many fine restaurants and shows, lot of memories. The 911 attack struck home as I'd entertained there many times. Now I'd probably need to take out a 2nd mortgage for a trip.


----------



## table1349

smoke665 said:


> I never found it a zoo, "interesting" maybe. Generally stayed at the old St. Moritz or The Plaza and did a lot of people watching during down time. I prefered the St Moritz because of its proximity to Columbus Circle which was always interesting. Never knew what or who you might see. Enjoyed so many fine restaurants and shows, lot of memories. The 911 attack struck home as I'd entertained there many times. Now I'd probably need to take out a 2nd mortgage for a trip.


I'm thinking that this would require about a third of the state to accomplish here.


----------



## DanOstergren

I personally have too much anxiety to take a stranger's photo without asking first or without having been hired to photograph an event. Perhaps you should dress more like a confused tourist and people wont be so shocked that you took their photo?


----------



## Kenneth Walker

I find having an articulated screen a bit of a bonus on my Panasonic....most of the time people don't know you are taking a shot, even if they have registered your presence. I find I can sit sideways on to the subject, camera in my lap, with the rear screen folded out. here's a favourite.....


----------



## jcdeboever

Kenneth Walker said:


> I find having an articulated screen a bit of a bonus on my Panasonic....most of the time people don't know you are taking a shot, even if they have registered your presence. I find I can sit sideways on to the subject, camera in my lap, with the rear screen folded out. here's a favourite.....View attachment 137047



I hate flip screens, I can see your point though. I need to break out my Airesflex TLR soon, I love that thing.


----------



## limr

jcdeboever said:


> Kenneth Walker said:
> 
> 
> 
> I find having an articulated screen a bit of a bonus on my Panasonic....most of the time people don't know you are taking a shot, even if they have registered your presence. I find I can sit sideways on to the subject, camera in my lap, with the rear screen folded out. here's a favourite.....View attachment 137047
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hate flip screens, I can see your point though. I need to break out my Airesflex TLR soon, I love that thing.
Click to expand...


Yup, I was going to say, use a TLR  Or better yet, I sometimes use my Praktica, which is a 35mm camera with a waist-level finder. That confuses people.


----------



## jcdeboever

limr said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kenneth Walker said:
> 
> 
> 
> I find having an articulated screen a bit of a bonus on my Panasonic....most of the time people don't know you are taking a shot, even if they have registered your presence. I find I can sit sideways on to the subject, camera in my lap, with the rear screen folded out. here's a favourite.....View attachment 137047
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I hate flip screens, I can see your point though. I need to break out my Airesflex TLR soon, I love that thing.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yup, I was going to say, use a TLR  Or better yet, I sometimes use my Praktica, which is a 35mm camera with a waist-level finder. That confuses people.
Click to expand...

I wish I could find a good one of those. Actually, I have been looking for a waste level finder at a reasonable price for my Nikon F, not much luck.


----------



## table1349

limr said:


> gryphonslair99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like @limr
> 
> NYC isn't a zoo, and it's not "scary". It's a city full of people, normal people, like you and me, just trying to live their lives.
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently you don't go to the Vinegar Hill area much.  As for a zoo, yep New York City is a zoo as is the whole east and west coast.  As for normal people, we do not have a naked cowboy with a guitar, a naked cowgirl or anyone like this person wondering around anywhere near here.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Then stay out.
Click to expand...

Well if this is an example of that New York friendliness I believe I will.


----------



## The_Traveler

I tend not to ask permission or to try to get so close that I startle people.
My intent is to take a picture of a scene and not to be part of it or influence it.

This is more easily done if you have good knowledge of your camera and good timing.
Generally my camera is at waist level, I frame the shot in my head, raise the camera, shoot and then drop the camera.
Unless the person is looking directly at me, by the time the motion attracts his/her eye, the camera is back down again.

More important (much) to me is that the picture actually has content that has some meaning or emotion and isn't just shadows, shapes and grain.

the first two are in NYC, the third in front of Union Station in DC.


----------



## pgriz

Photographing people is not much different from photographing wild-life.   You can either go for the startle reaction, or you can get them used to you to the point that they ignore you.  The latter takes more time and more involvement, but in the end that investment of time can be quite good in terms of images captured.  It's a question of trust.  

A photographer who is a member of a photoclub that I'm in, is well known for the amazing imagery that he comes back with from his travels.  He explained that his way is to become part of the community (sometimes being there for days), until they accept him as being another member of the community, and then they start opening up and revealing a lot more of themselves than they otherwise would.  He recently had an exhibition of some of the images he made in places like Afghanistan, India, Sri Lanka, Kenya, South Africa,  where he was trusted to capture images and moments that no "outsider" would be able to see.  As he pointed out to us, without that trust, he cannot, and will not take the images.  He also only uses the images that the people allow him to use - he invariably does a show for them with the images he captures, and if anyone objects to an image being shown, he takes it down.


----------



## Madison6D

It is hard to capture some quality street photography, but not so much. Nice thinking about street photography.


----------



## chuasam

Would you personally like a stranger sticking his/her camera right in your face?
i wouldn't.


----------



## table1349

Interesting perspective that pertains to this thread.
Every Photo Comes with Built-In Debt, or: The Ethics of Photography


----------



## Dikkie

DanOstergren said:


> Perhaps you should dress more like a confused tourist and people wont be so shocked that you took their photo?


Good advice.

I'm always dressed like a confused tourist  


Fred von den Berg said:


> I also like to use a wide angle lens, so keeping things discreet is the key.


MMM, with a wide angle lens, you need to get pretty close to get people close in the picture. It's more discrete if you have a tele lens and shoot from far away, no?


----------



## nerwin

I think shooting street with a 70-200 2.8 and trying to be discrete defeats the purpose lol.


----------



## Gary A.

nerwin said:


> I think shooting street with a 70-200 2.8 and trying to be discreet defeats the purpose lol.


It sorta depends on how you use it.  If you shoot down the Street at 200mm it becomes somewhat discreet.





XP1 @ 200mm

Sometimes it isn't.




XP1 @ 200mm

Sometimes being upfront with your activities is better than discretion.  For me, much of the attraction of shooting Street is the challenge of shooting in a potential hostile environment.  I like the heightened challenge of shooting in full photo regalia than hiding what I'm doing and sneaking wide angle shots from the hip. It is all a personal code.


----------



## nerwin

Gary A. said:


> nerwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think shooting street with a 70-200 2.8 and trying to be discrete defeats the purpose lol.
> 
> 
> 
> Sometimes being upfront with your activities is better than discretion.  For me, much of the attraction of shooting Street is the challenge of shooting in a potential hostile environment.  I like the heightened challenge of shooting in full photo regalia than hiding what I'm doing and sneaking wide angle shots from the hip. It is all a personal code.
Click to expand...


I've only done very little street stuff because where I live but I'd feel weird shooting street with a telephoto unless I'm shooting something specific. Honestly, if I was going to shoot street, as in taking candids of people, I wouldn't even use a DSLR, I'd probably use something like a Ricoh GR because its compact and not flashy whatsoever, its very discrete. But yes, you are absolutely correct, we all have a personal code. That's what makes street photography so unique!


----------



## Fred von den Berg

Dikkie said:


> DanOstergren said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps you should dress more like a confused tourist and people wont be so shocked that you took their photo?
> 
> 
> 
> Good advice.
> 
> I'm always dressed like a confused tourist
> 
> 
> Fred von den Berg said:
> 
> 
> 
> I also like to use a wide angle lens, so keeping things discreet is the key.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> MMM, with a wide angle lens, you need to get pretty close to get people close in the picture. It's more discrete if you have a tele lens and shoot from far away, no?
Click to expand...



Being discrete doesn't mean you have to be in a far off position, outside the scene you want to photograph, like a sniper waiting to get a clear shot. For me, it means being in close to what interests you without affecting or changing things. Have you ever watched one of those short films where polar bears or gorillas walk through a scene and nobody noticed?


----------



## Gary A.

Fred von den Berg said:


> Dikkie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DanOstergren said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps you should dress more like a confused tourist and people wont be so shocked that you took their photo?
> 
> 
> 
> Good advice.
> 
> I'm always dressed like a confused tourist
> 
> 
> Fred von den Berg said:
> 
> 
> 
> I also like to use a wide angle lens, so keeping things discreet is the key.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> MMM, with a wide angle lens, you need to get pretty close to get people close in the picture. It's more discrete if you have a tele lens and shoot from far away, no?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Being discrete doesn't mean you have to be in a far off position, outside the scene you want to photograph, like a sniper waiting to get a clear shot. For me, it means being in close to what interests you without affecting or changing things. Have you ever watched one of those short films where polar bears or gorillas walk through a scene and nobody noticed?
Click to expand...

No to the film, but yes to what you said.  It is all a mentality thing, you need to blend into the street as if you belong ... ultimately, no different than a mailbox or a street lamp. When I was shooting news everyday, I developed those skills to blend into the background and become relatively unnoticed.


----------



## limr

nerwin said:


> I think shooting street with a 70-200 2.8 and trying to be discrete defeats the purpose lol.



Defeats what purpose? There is no single purpose in street photography, and no where does it say that you have to be right in the action, in someone's face. Andre Kertesz, for example, shot some beautiful street photography and he often used a longer focal length.


----------



## bert0324

limr said:


> nerwin said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think shooting street with a 70-200 2.8 and trying to be discrete defeats the purpose lol.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Defeats what purpose? There is no single purpose in street photography, and no where does it say that you have to be right in the action, in someone's face. Andre Kertesz, for example, shot some beautiful street photography and he often used a longer focal length.
Click to expand...


I think he simply meant that such a lens is not "discrete", not that he was referring to any purpose of street photography.


----------



## nerwin

Yes, I meant the lens not being discrete.

You can shoot street with any focal length but you may get some rather interesting looks walking around taking pictures of people with a huge tele!

I find using a discrete setup has a lower chance of being noticed but then again, I'm not someone who would shove a camera in someones face like Eric Kim.


----------



## limr

One doesn't have to be walking on the street in order to shoot "street."

Methods, techniques, gear - all this relies on exactly what one wants to accomplish. Close up, far away, discreet, non-discreet...there are many ways to accomplish these objectives.

To use Kertesz as an example again, his shot were often from above, featuring people in a wider context. Looking at his street photographs as a whole, it seemed to highlight the private moment in a public space, or isolation amidst a crowded city. He wasn't mingling, he was watching.

So maybe the lens isn't discreet, but _how_ and _where_ one uses the lens can be. And if someone wants to be out on the street, mingling, but still be discreet using a long focal length lens, then they don't have to use a huge dslr lens. There are smaller options available.


----------



## The_Traveler

There are many physical ways to be discreet besides using a small lens-camera body or being far away.
Stay with the movement of the crowd so that you're not visible as a boulder in the flow.
Move smoothly not erratically. Don't continually look through the lens at the world.  Frame the image in your mind, make adjustments on the camera body before it's raised, then raise the body, take the image and smoothly lower the body again.

Don't stare at people, don't fixate on your target, keep your eyes moving.
Back when I was shooting demonstrations, I would circle through the crowd, shooting and once people got used to me being there, they ignored me.
Yesterday I sat in a coffee shop, read  book, poked at a tablet, drank coffee, looked at pictures on my camera and eventually took some, no one noticed.
Have the idea and manner that nothing big or important happening here, just move along.


----------



## Fred von den Berg

I suppose it boils down to whether you get better results being discreet or discrete, which aren't quite the same thing. I personally like to be in close but still remain discreet, just minding my own business with a small camera; but in so far as I try not to affect the scene this means, hopefully, that I'm also discrete. When I really am discrete, at a distance with a zoom lens, I feel more awkward about things.


----------



## The_Traveler

How nice to see a discreet use of both _discrete_ and _discreet_, each with its own discrete place.


----------



## oldcamera

I always use a 35mm on my Leica or Nikon. Here's an example from Oaxaca Mexico. http://borderzine.com/wp-content/gallery/david-smith-soto-street-photography/lovers-2009.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## The_Traveler

oldcamera said:


> I always use a 35mm on my Leica or Nikon. Here's an example from Oaxaca Mexico. http://borderzine.com/wp-content/gallery/david-smith-soto-street-photography/lovers-2009.jpg



Super picture.
Almost makes me want to shoot film to get this look constantly.


----------



## jcdeboever

I have had fun using my Instax Printer (fits in cargo pants pocket) when on the street. Most people are simply amazed by it and brings a great deal of happiness. To me, it's about having fun and hopefully make some people smile.


----------



## table1349

I'm just going to add this.  It is part of an article I read quite a while back that I think not only provides some good in site but some food for thought.

_"The Code:


Shoot with Respect.


Life is a two-way street. Shoot how you would want to be captured if you were on the other end of the camera. To me shooting from the hip is sneaky. Sneaky is disrespectful. I tried shooting from the hip. When I was finished I wanted to take a shower. Other photogs are fine with shooting from the hip, they call it stealth … and that’s okay, I don’t give a rat’s what others do. Shooting from the hip just isn’t me. Remember that you are on your subject’s street. That is where they work and play. It is their front yard and their backyard … treat it with respect.

Shoot in the Open


I prefer shooting everything with two cameras. One camera setup with for long and the other camera setup for wide, I don’t change my preferred shooting methodology for Street.  I shoot with the EVF.  I shoot with a camera bag hanging off a shoulder.  I shoot in plain sight. That is part of the Challenge of Street for me, to capture the exceptional photograph according to my code.

I do not believe in stealth as a ‘real’ and effective camouflage for Street photography.  I just don’t think it works well, if at all. I’ve seen photogs go to great lengths to hide the camera … to hide what they’re doing. They’ll tape the camera; hide the camera in a bag, et al. No matter what you do, it is still a camera. To me the only difference between a 1D with a 70-200 and an X100s is that the subject can see the 1D from a mile away and the X100s from half a mile.  I find that ‘blending’ in works best for me. My stealth is to integrate into the Street, to hide in plain sight. I try to be as much a part of the street scene as a mailbox or street lamp.  This is a mental thing. Similar to highly trained elite forces willing themselves to be a rock, or bush or tree. Blending in has served me well shooting news and shooting Street.

Appropriate Dress


When I shoot Street I dress as I would when shooting news.  I wear closed-toed shoes, (no sandals), long pant (jeans or khakis), short or long sleeved shirt (no T’s or tank tops, no messages whatsoever), … I try to look ‘professional’ … as in I am working … as in I am not here for entertainment … as in this Street is not the Zoo.


Shoot and Walk


This is the shooting methodology I suggest for the neophyte.  Shoot and walk, shoot and walk, shoot and walk. If someone gives you the evil eye or shouts at you just keep walking.  Don’t stalk an interesting subject … if the shot is there grab it … if not don’t linger there will be another shot in another half block. As you develop a Street Sense you’ll get the vibe of the Street of the people around you and you’ll have a better sense of when to linger when to stalk and when to get the hell out. But until then, just shoot and walk. If someone starts a friendly conversation … participate of course. Speaking to a subject prior to releasing the shutter, asking for permission to take their photo, more often than not, will completely alter the image from what you first saw and desired to capture. So usually I don’t converse prior to shutter release. I tend to like some eye contact between subject and camera. I try to release the shutter at the very moment the subject recognizes the camera and before the mood I sought to capture is changed.

Be Aware


Always be aware of your surroundings and the people around you. When I’m not snapping away I’m moving … looking here … looking there … looking forward … looking back … looking at everybody. I’ve only been accosted once by non-security personal in all my decades of photography all over the world. That was in Los Angeles, my hometown. It was by this huge guy who I think had a mental problem. After taking his snap, he attempted to grab my camera. So I went back to basic, shoot and walk, and starting walking. He started following … well more like chasing as I weaved in and out of the pedestrians crowding the sidewalk. Finally I said to myself enough is enough and I ducked into a restaurant and the giant didn’t follow. Time for a break and I order a bite. I don’t eat/drink while ‘on-assignment’ shooting Street which is distracting and ties up one’s hands. I think my vigilance has reduced the odds of robbery and maleficence. Thieves, I presume, look for an easy target, a tourist with a coffee in one hand, bumbling around the street without any real direction, unaware of their surroundings, makes a much easier target than an alert professional with street smarts. Awareness may save your neck, your gear and will increase your keeper rate.



Identification


I always have a handful of business cards with me for those who are interested. The cards have my name, cell phone and website. Often I will carry a printout of “The Photographer’s Rights”. I’ve never had the need to pass that information out. The cards are a very good tool for lowering of tensions or in some cases complete disarmament and a cessation of hostilities. People respect, (remember that respect thing), if you’re working much more so than if they suspect you’re on holiday out for a stroll at the zoo.


Know Your Rights


Take the time to know what you can and cannot legally shoot. This has nothing to do with Respect or Challenge … just common sense. Do some research on the internet to familiarize yourself with your rights. Print out a few copies of “The Photographer’s Rights” and always take a few with you. The Constitution protects and ensures the Street photographer to work the streets. But there are a few catches like private property and an individual’s expectation of privacy. As an example, say a pedestrian has a wardrobe malfunction and disappears into an alley to correct the malfunction. There is an expectation of privacy created by the person diving into the alley and the Supreme Court states that expectation of privacy supersedes the fact that the person is in a public street. “So don’t go chasing that person into the alley, give them their space and respect.”


Remember that just because you have the legal right to capture an image, does not mean that you should.

Street Ethics


I tend to shoot everything … even kids. Yes, children. Children have no greater right to privacy than an adult.  A mother bear type has never accosted me, frothing at the mouth, telling me about her children’s civil rights and of laws that don’t exist.


(Then again I’m not sneaky about how I shoot … which may or may not have any bearing.) Just because you legally can do something, does not make it ethically right. I no longer shoot the homeless. As a former journalist, I recognize that there are at least two sides for every story. I also recognized that my homeless photos were only telling my side of the homeless story. I knew what I had to do to shoot homeless with a fair and equitable presentation. So until I sit with them and spend some time with them and learn and capture their story … my images were exploitive at best. So I no longer shoot the homeless.  For me, I don’t see a real challenge in shooting homeless. Unfortunately the homeless are plentiful and they usually are sedentary.  What challenge is there in shooting something you see everyday that doesn’t move?


Think about what you are shooting. Think about how you would feel if you were the subject and the subject had the camera. Think about it when you take the shot and think about it later when the shot is processed.  Often, shooting with Gestalt, can make an image whose principal value is shock into a meaningful sublime image. Shock can be great … but often shock is so overpowering that it becomes the only message.


Shoot by listening to what drives you … listen to your gut and heart."_

Full Article:  

This guy had a good career at street photography/news 
photography and his wisdom about the matter might be something to think about.


----------



## Gary A.

Smart Guy.


----------



## table1349

Gary A. said:


> Smart Guy.


No, that would be you.


----------



## bribrius

Haven't really had a problem but i dont do this much? Only if i see a "gotta have " shot i guess or i think i see something worth shooting? I have had police called on me 1 time. They looked through my camera photos and said i was in my "legal right" and left again. I was confronted once but eased the tension down. Most people just ask why or look confused. I usually have just said "it's something i do" and introduce myself pleasantly. The last one that got upset at me was actually ANOTHER photographer which apparently submits photos for a newspaper here and has a website but doesnt like his photo taken.. Odd eh? I hardly ever shoot street though unless i see something and happen to be there. And have little experience.


----------



## bribrius

Well i guess the lady running for city council was upset when i took a photo of her smoking a cigarette. So maybe their been a "few". Generally i dont bother people or do a lot of that stuff though. Well i guess the bank too. They said it was illegal to take photos in a bank. But they had me on video right? Certain people (you know if they look like they doing a drug deal or carry a weapon) you might be better off avoiding....


----------



## bribrius

Oh and the walmart incident....


----------



## AlanKlein

Street photography subjects are always friendlier if you have big breasts.


----------



## denada

i've changed my strategy. i shoot and walk. which i see is mentioned in gryphonslair99's post. zero connection with my subject. i don't smile (unless they smile at me, most recent example is a kid that was taking a photo of me with his mom's iphone and the mom though it was hilarious that i whipped a camera out in turn), i don't apologize, i don't explain. my body language is the same as if i'm late for a meeting. no one has accosted me severely since. i've heard a a few "hey, did you just take a picture of me?"s as i walk away, and i either completely ignore it or say "you bet" with a tone of finality -- nothing comes of it.

the blogs that say smile, compliment, and everyone will be nice are nonsense. act like you're in the city because that's where you are. and that's where i spend most of my life, so it's not hard for me to put off a "i'm working; don't talk to me" vibe.

i also don't care about the weird pride thing. 25 percent of my shots are from the hip. gives me a different angle and i'm not trying to prove anything by putting a camera to my face. it does not hide the fact a photo was taken; they can tell when you point a camera at them no matter where you're holding it from. what it does, in addition giving you variation in angels, is give them less chance to make a stupid face because it's faster. plus i've started using 28mm, so it gives me an extra arm's length. when i say "from the hip" that's usually reaching out at them with the camera.

i often ask for shots despite the zealots speaking against it, especially if it's a pretty girl or the marginalized like transgender. street portraits look great.

common sense all the way. i don't shoot dope boys, homeless, or the mentally ill. duh.

reading about street photography before trying it was a huge mistake. photo books of styles you enjoy are all that's of benefit. but i'm happy to have my style started and i'm ready to develop it much further.

if you take street photography that isn't a bunch of shots of old ladies walking away, you will encounter conflict. you gotta decide if it's worth it. i think it is.

one girl i was stuck on the subway with asked, "what thefuck are you doing?" but she was making eyes with me before i started snapping and i needed to use a flash because it was in in the subway, so i know there was going to be conflict. when i replied "taking your photo" like it was a silly question she shrugged and started posing. she smiled and said bye to me as she got off at her stop. another guy pulled out his leica and snapped a shot of me in return. the reactions you get are part of it.


----------



## Braineack

cool story.


----------

