# Why is most street photography black and white?



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 19, 2014)

Hi all,

I always wondered why street photography is mostly black and white?

Is it we (the photographers that do street Photography) just follow what has been an unwritten rule?

What else are the reasons... I posted a blog post here: http://www.andreastimm.com/photo-posts/why-is-most-street-photography-black-and-white/ 

Would be interested in your opinion!

Photo I attached: “Color Street Photography” – Munich, Germany, 2014


----------



## Trever1t (Dec 19, 2014)

it looks gritty and most lighting isn't ideal


----------



## pgriz (Dec 19, 2014)

"Street" is usually depicting the relationship of the subject to the environment.  B/W tends to reduce the distractions and allow us to focus on the key elements.


----------



## photoguy99 (Dec 19, 2014)

Tradition.


----------



## Didereaux (Dec 19, 2014)

Andreas Timm Photography said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I always wondered why street photography is mostly black and white?
> 
> ...


As pgriz said ""Street" is usually depicting the relationship of the subject to the environment. B/W tends to reduce the distractions and allow us to focus on the key elements."  Which is spot on.   The image you posted would more likely fall into the abstract genre.


----------



## sashbar (Dec 19, 2014)

It is partly tradition/shooting style  and partly an aesthetic preference. A lot of street photographers are inspired by old masters like HCB, who used to shoot b&w in the days when most photography was b&w as was the documentary. HCB said intelligent geometry and composition were almost a physical pleasure to him, and b&w helps that.  These old photogs developed their concepts, that have been copied or   followed since. Often b&w was a necessity due to a chaotic colour schemes of a street scene. Later many street photogs started to travel to places like Far East or Latin America and exploring the opportunities of colour, and now there are many who shoot in colour only. For some great masters, like Webb, colour is now the main language of a street photo. One can not say street photography is b&w only these days, quite contrary. But the problem of colour is that, though a powerful instrument, it makes it more difficult to shoot street. It is just another dimention that has to be right. Having said that, modern street gives more opportunities for "easy" colour shots, like the one you have posted. The colour scheme of a modern street in US and Europe is vastly different compared to 70-50 years ago. On the other hand modern cameras with fast focus and wide dynamic range allow for more difficult street exposures that work with colours, like edge lit compositions etc. 
I love colour and almost never shoot street b&w.


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 19, 2014)

Trever1t said:


> it looks gritty and most lighting isn't ideal



Hi Trever1t - agree most street photography looks gritty and lighting is typically not perfect. So do you think this is on purpose or it "just happens" when people do street photography?

Cheers,
Andreas


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 19, 2014)

pgriz said:


> "Street" is usually depicting the relationship of the subject to the environment. B/W tends to reduce the distractions and allow us to focus on the key elements.



Hi pgriz,

makes sense - so B/W is just more simple, focussed...

Cheers,
Andreas


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 19, 2014)

Didereaux said:


> Andreas Timm Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Hi all,
> ...


----------



## Trever1t (Dec 19, 2014)

purposely. Have you ever heard the expression clean as the streets? No? Me either.


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 19, 2014)

sashbar said:


> It is partly tradition/shooting style and partly an aesthetic preference. A lot of street photographers are inspired by old masters like HCB, who used to shoot b&w in the days when most photography was b&w as was the documentary. HCB said intelligent geometry and composition were almost a physical pleasure to him, and b&w helps that. These old photogs developed their concepts, that have been copied or followed since. Often b&w was a necessity due to a chaotic colour schemes of a street scene. Later many street photogs started to travel to places like Far East or Latin America and exploring the opportunities of colour, and now there are many who shoot in colour only. For some great masters, like Webb, colour is now the main language of a street photo. One can not say street photography is b&w only these days, quite contrary. But the problem of colour is that, though a powerful instrument, it makes it more difficult to shoot street. It is just another dimention that has to be right. Having said that, modern street gives more opportunities for "easy" colour shots, like the one you have posted. The colour scheme of a modern street in US and Europe is vastly different compared to 70-50 years ago. On the other hand modern cameras with fast focus and wide dynamic range allow for more difficult street exposures that work with colours, like edge lit compositions etc.
> I love colour and almost never shoot street b&w.



Hi sashbar,

thanks for your reply and the feedback. I am just trying to do street photography more in color, but as you mentioned above: "It is just another dimension that has to be right". I fully agree! But this somehow also says: Traditional B/W street photographers are somewhat lazy... right?

Best,
Andreas


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 19, 2014)

Trever1t said:


> Have you ever heard the expression clean as the streets?



Hmm.. no sorry, but that may be due to not being a native english speaker... so what does it mean and how does it relate to my initial post and the question why street photography is typically B/W?

Tx.

Cheers,
Andreas


----------



## sashbar (Dec 19, 2014)

Andreas Timm Photography said:


> Hi sashbar,
> 
> thanks for your reply and the feedback. I am just trying to do street photography more in color, but as you mentioned above: "It is just another dimension that has to be right". I fully agree! But this somehow also says: Traditional B/W street photographers are somewhat lazy... right?
> 
> ...



Not necessarily. Colour photography can be as lazy, it all depends of demands and expectations.  A top b&w street photog who spends hours on the street every day and says four good images in a year is an excellent return, can hardly be lazy .


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 19, 2014)

sashbar said:


> Not necessarily. Colour photography can be as lazy, it all depends of demands and expectations. A top b&w street photog who spends hours on the street every day and says four good images in a year is an excellent return, can hardly be lazy .



Hmm... good point!


----------



## runnah (Dec 19, 2014)

Cause it would just be a snapshot if it was in color.


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 19, 2014)

runnah said:


> Cause it would just be a snapshot if it was in color.



Ha!!! This is kind of what I put as "Reason 3" in my blog post here: Why is most street photography black and white? - Andreas Timm Photography

So maybe a but radical view... but you just confirmed it... B/W is easier to make a photo look cool! 

Cheers,
Andreas


----------



## photoguy99 (Dec 19, 2014)

Bad street, i.e. most of it, is b&w to make it feel more artsy.

Good street is a different thing, and needn't be b&w. But good street is partly good street because of its connection to and respect for tradition, it often is b&w.


----------



## sashbar (Dec 19, 2014)

As for filthy streets, Trever is right. But sometimes you can have a go.


----------



## pgriz (Dec 19, 2014)

To me, the issue is basic.  Does colour contribute or detract from the subject being presented?  It's like portraiture - sometimes the colour provides an additional depth to the image, and sometimes removing it helps convey the mood better.  I think that colour in "street" is more difficult to shoot because it can make the picture more "pretty", whereas the photographer may be wanting it to be more "gritty" (as Trever1t noted).


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 19, 2014)

photoguy99 said:


> Bad street, i.e. most of it, is b&w to make it feel more artsy.



Hi photoguy99,

yup agree... this is what I said here: Why is most street photography black and white? - Andreas Timm Photography 

Cheers and all the best,
Andreas


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 19, 2014)

sashbar said:


> As for filthy streets, Trever is right. But sometimes you can have a go.
> 
> View attachment 91496



LOVE IT!!

Thanks,

Cheers,
Andreas


----------



## bribrius (Dec 19, 2014)

runnah said:


> Cause it would just be a snapshot if it was in color.


too a large extent, yeah.  I think people see colors first. you don't want them looking at the color of her jacket to distract, make bw. Want them reading the sign but not distracted by the sign color, make bw. want them to see what is in the guys hand not that red building behind him, make bw.  Street photography, not that I know much, seems a fine line from a snapshot as it is subtle somewhat. So if the viewer doesn't see what you do, it is a snapshot.  A really nice color street photo people probably call a portrait. But the colors are more to glorify the people, show in a certain character or create a mood. Not so much try to get any subtle message through.
The genres kind of blend with somewhat fuzzy lines at times, cityscape, street, street portrait, abstract. And a lot of people take snapshots and make them bw and call them "street".   For a street photog, which I am not one, I don't think shooting in color or bw is a matter of how good they are. I just think that VERY  few situations present themselves that would actually work as good in color getting through to the viewer.  It would have to be a situation you are trying to get across that would not be detacted or distractable by color. One where the color doesn't distact but actually points the viewer easier to what you want them to see.  and how many are them really..

don't know why everyone slams snapshots on here. I actually love snapshots.


----------



## bribrius (Dec 20, 2014)

sashbar said:


> It is partly tradition/shooting style  and partly an aesthetic preference. A lot of street photographers are inspired by old masters like HCB, who used to shoot b&w in the days when most photography was b&w as was the documentary. HCB said intelligent geometry and composition were almost a physical pleasure to him, and b&w helps that.  These old photogs developed their concepts, that have been copied or   followed since. Often b&w was a necessity due to a chaotic colour schemes of a street scene. Later many street photogs started to travel to places like Far East or Latin America and exploring the opportunities of colour, and now there are many who shoot in colour only. For some great masters, like Webb, colour is now the main language of a street photo. One can not say street photography is b&w only these days, quite contrary. But the problem of colour is that, though a powerful instrument, it makes it more difficult to shoot street. It is just another dimention that has to be right. Having said that, modern street gives more opportunities for "easy" colour shots, like the one you have posted. The colour scheme of a modern street in US and Europe is vastly different compared to 70-50 years ago. On the other hand modern cameras with fast focus and wide dynamic range allow for more difficult street exposures that work with colours, like edge lit compositions etc.
> I love colour and almost never shoot street b&w.


good post. you have done your research it seems. I shouldn't have even posted you all have this covered I agree with all of you. lol.


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 20, 2014)

bribrius said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > Cause it would just be a snapshot if it was in color.
> ...



Good point of view... 

I like snapshots too! And the really good ones I call street photography!


----------



## The_Traveler (Dec 20, 2014)

Unfortunately, there is always that group of shooters who will shoot meaningless pictures, convert them to BW, beat the crap out of them with software and declare them to be 'street.'


----------



## sashbar (Dec 20, 2014)

My biggest problem with street photography is that I would love to develop a consistent style, that is recognisable and allows to create a coherent body of work, but I simply can not afford that luxury. Street photography is extremely time consuming, and with full time job and two kids there is simply no time left.
I simply can not afford to be too selective and I just shoot what I see on the street.  I can not say "This is an interesting scene, but not what I am after". That is probably one of the reasons many casual street shooters go for B&W. They may claim this is more artsy, it is deeper, creative and blah blah.. but in reality (with some exceptions - dig Pascal Riben for some seriously good b&w street shooting. Then, again, he is not your typical Sunday shooter) it is just easier to have a more or less consistent/coherent B&W body of work, than if you use colour. All backgrounds in B&W all of a sudden start looking the same.
On the other hand street photography is such a broad genre, you can develop some colour sub-genres these days. A wall with people passing by such as the OP image is almost such a sub-genre, just like this:
Walls and People | Photography Forum
One thing is certain - never mix colour street shots with B&W. It does not look good or professional.


----------



## pgriz (Dec 20, 2014)

Sashbar, I can echo your observations on the time it takes to do this well.  When I joined my local photo club, we had an exhibition of "street" by one of our members.  The images were, for the most part, B/W and looked like casual snapshots at first glance.  The looking at them some more, we would become aware of how the various elements tied in together and made for a compelling coherent whole.  After the presentation, there was a lot of interest in how the images were created, with some members opining that the photographer was just really lucky to be in the right place at the right time.  He explained that in fact, the images were the result of at least several weeks of work, during which he scouted out the appropriate areas, hung around long enough to be accepted by the local street people, waited for the right weather and light, and then anticipated the "moment" when everything would come together.  Plus additional post work to give the image the feeling he had when he took the image.

We've gone on some workshops where he was involved, and it became clear to us why his images were usually quite a bit better than ours.  He took the time.  Most of us didn't.


----------



## sashbar (Dec 20, 2014)

pgriz said:


> Sashbar, I can echo your observations on the time it takes to do this well.  When I joined my local photo club, we had an exhibition of "street" by one of our members.  The images were, for the most part, B/W and looked like casual snapshots at first glance.  The looking at them some more, we would become aware of how the various elements tied in together and made for a compelling coherent whole.  After the presentation, there was a lot of interest in how the images were created, with some members opining that the photographer was just really lucky to be in the right place at the right time.  He explained that in fact, the images were the result of at least several weeks of work, during which he scouted out the appropriate areas, hung around long enough to be accepted by the local street people, waited for the right weather and light, and then anticipated the "moment" when everything would come together.  Plus additional post work to give the image the feeling he had when he took the image.
> 
> We've gone on some workshops where he was involved, and it became clear to us why his images were usually quite a bit better than ours.  He took the time.  Most of us didn't.



 That's the difference between the guy who knows what he is doing and the one who is just wandering around with his camera and shooting people left and right hoping that some of it will come up interesting on his 'puter screen. 

Luck is a factor in "street" though. It is hard to argue. 

I would suggest a simple formula:

L = (T/365 - fcd) x V 

Where L - luck, T - time spent on the street, fcd - wrong exposures, V - your vision

But it is like poker, the more you shoot, the less of a factor is luck.


----------



## bribrius (Dec 20, 2014)

sashbar said:


> My biggest problem with street photography is that I would love to develop a consistent style, that is recognisable and allows to create a coherent body of work, but I simply can not afford that luxury. Street photography is extremely time consuming, and with full time job and two kids there is simply no time left.
> I simply can not afford to be too selective and I just shoot what I see on the street.  I can not say "This is an interesting scene, but not what I am after". That is probably one of the reasons many casual street shooters go for B&W. They may claim this is more artsy, it is deeper, creative and blah blah.. but in reality (with some exceptions - dig Pascal Riben for some seriously good b&w street shooting. Then, again, he is not your typical Sunday shooter) it is just easier to have a more or less consistent/coherent B&W body of work, than if you use colour. All backgrounds in B&W all of a sudden start looking the same.
> On the other hand street photography is such a broad genre, you can develop some colour sub-genres these days. A wall with people passing by such as the OP image is almost such a sub-genre, just like this:
> Walls and People | Photography Forum
> One thing is certain - never mix colour street shots with B&W. It does not look good or professional.


i think you do pretty well.
i don't even try to shoot street. i just have a camera with me much of the time. i am at a store i see something, i shoot it. i am out to photograph some city building and see something, i shoot it. Like my coffee shot whatever that was. i was having lunch at a restaurant, i shot it. if i see it and i have a camera i may consider shooting it. I dont normally go out sitting or walking around looking for it. i don't have the time nor the wish to walk around or drive around looking for someone to take a photo of.  i couldn't imagine being gone for a day and coming home and telling my wife i didnt come up with a single shot because i didnt see anything "street" worthy. Like there isn't more productive things to be done. Much rather explain i am going shooting for three hours to shoot x thing and have images usable when i get back. The guy with the umbrella in the snow storm, i was out taking storm pics anyway i just happened to see him. Totally accidental. And im not that good at this.


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 20, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> Unfortunately, there is always that group of shooters who will shoot meaningless pictures, convert them to BW, beat the crap out of them with software and declare them to be 'street.'



Thats true! On the other hand: If then people like it... its fine. I guess it is just overall difficult to define what is "good" street photography and what is "bad" street photography. As it is difficult to articulate that for other photography genres.


----------



## bribrius (Dec 20, 2014)

Andreas Timm Photography said:


> The_Traveler said:
> 
> 
> > Unfortunately, there is always that group of shooters who will shoot meaningless pictures, convert them to BW, beat the crap out of them with software and declare them to be 'street.'
> ...


you spend eight hours walking around you probably make your snapshot street anyway just because otherwise you have to admit you just wasted eight hours of your life


----------



## pgriz (Dec 20, 2014)

Brian, it's not quite a waste of time, just like when you go fishing and you don't come back with something, it wasn't a waste of time.  Sometimes, the process of doing is more important than the end result.  That is a lesson my grandfather taught me, a callow 8-year old kid who couldn't understand why the fish weren't biting.  Only many years later did I appreciate the wisdom in his words to live in the moment, and IF we caught something, then it would be a bonus.


----------



## Gary A. (Dec 20, 2014)

I shoot enough Street where I could be classified as a Street Photographer. For me, it all depends on the image, not the genre. Some images I convert to B&W, others I keep color.


----------



## bribrius (Dec 20, 2014)

Gary A. said:


> I shoot enough Street where I could be classified as a Street Photographer. For me, it all depends on the image, not the genre. Some images I convert to B&W, others I keep color.


that first one needs to be converted to bw it looks like a snapshot.  LOL!
second one is nice..


----------



## gsgary (Dec 20, 2014)

Here's one of the best still alive that was one of the first to change from b+w to colour 12 Lessons Joel Meyerowitz Has Taught Me About Street Photography - Eric Kim Street Photography Blog


----------



## gsgary (Dec 20, 2014)

I shoot most of mine on B+W film but sometimes use colour film


----------



## photoguy99 (Dec 20, 2014)

Might as well ask why so much Art photography is b&w. The answer is the same.

Most photography is just documentation of what's in front of the camera. This includes commercial work, snapshots, etc. In these cases color is appropriate. It makes the record, the document, more complete.

When you're making Art, you're reaching beyond the document. You're trying to say something about something. Your photo has a purpose other than making a record.

In this case everything about the photo should be pulling toward the goal. Unless color is somehow integral to the point of the image, it should be eliminated. Just like everything else that's not pulling toward the goal.

So, often, the photo is not about color and color is therefore eliminated. Is it about form, or light, or human interaction, or love, or sex? There's a good chance your photo doesn't need color. Color is therefore going to be a distraction.

Plus, it looks artier.


----------



## The_Traveler (Dec 20, 2014)

some pictures benefit from color, some pictures suffer from it.


----------



## runnah (Dec 20, 2014)

I think street is a genre that is very hard to do well and therefore most of what you see is garbage which pollutes your perception.


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 20, 2014)

runnah said:


> I think street is a genre that is very hard to do well and therefore most of what you see is garbage which pollutes your perception.



Agree. But its sometimes difficult to tell. Just posted a new street photography photo in my blog where its not so clear:

I actually took it as a snapshot (not really planned, I did not wait for an hour or so to get the right shot...), but I actually would classify as a "street photography" photo as it tells a story - I hope .

Check: http://www.andreastimm.com/photo-posts/blackwhite/hand-in-hand/


----------



## runnah (Dec 20, 2014)

This where i would disagree. I see lots of these type of "person walks infront of ad" photos. I don't really think they are street as you can just sit there and wait for a man/woman of various ages/race/income and form a story for each one, but it's not a genuine moment.

To me street tells a story that is more than just a chance passing of a billboard.


----------



## sashbar (Dec 20, 2014)

Andreas, we all got it straight away that you are promoting your blog with this thread, but .. Could it be a bit more measured, please?  It may have negative effect and people with just stop clocking on the link. 
It is a good practice on this forum to post your photos here rather than make people go to members' sites.


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 20, 2014)

Hi 


sashbar said:


> Andreas, we all got it straight away that you are promoting your blog with this thread, but .. Could it be a bit more measured, please?  It may have negative effect and people with just stop clocking on the link.
> It is a good practice on this forum to post your photos here rather than make people go to members' sites.



Hi Sashbar, thank you for the feedback. I was not sure it would be appropriate to post photos directly. I will do going forward!

Tx.

Andreas


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 20, 2014)

runnah said:


> This where i would disagree. I see lots of these type of "person walks infront of ad" photos. I don't really think they are street as you can just sit there and wait for a man/woman of various ages/race/income and form a story for each one, but it's not a genuine moment.
> 
> To me street tells a story that is more than just a chance passing of a billboard.



Hi sunnah, I would disagree here. While "person in front of billboard" may not be a very unique or creative street photo, but its still a photo of that genre "street photography".

I guess my point is that a perceived quality issue can not be the deciding factor whether a photo is part of a genre. Even a bad landscape photo is a landscape photo.


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 20, 2014)

gsgary said:


> Here's one of the best still alive that was one of the first to change from b+w to colour 12 Lessons Joel Meyerowitz Has Taught Me About Street Photography - Eric Kim Street Photography Blog



Thanks for sharing - very interesting read.


----------



## sashbar (Dec 20, 2014)

runnah said:


> This where i would disagree. I see lots of these type of "person walks infront of ad" photos. I don't really think they are street as you can just sit there and wait for a man/woman of various ages/race/income and form a story for each one, but it's not a genuine moment.
> To me street tells a story that is more than just a chance passing of a billboard.



I lot of iconic Cartier-Bresson's images tell no story whatsoever. This is the fundamental difference between street photography and documentary. Documentary/journalism is dead if there is no story. Street photography is dead if all you think about is a story.


----------



## runnah (Dec 20, 2014)

sashbar said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > This where i would disagree. I see lots of these type of "person walks infront of ad" photos. I don't really think they are street as you can just sit there and wait for a man/woman of various ages/race/income and form a story for each one, but it's not a genuine moment.
> ...



Well and I may not be explaining myself properly. HCB has street photos but they are certainly more artistically pleasing.

I just find the walks in front of stuff photos super lazy and hamfisted attempts at telling a story.


----------



## photoguy99 (Dec 20, 2014)

The sign thing was always cheap, and now it's wildly overdone. As mentioned, it's easy. You set up and wait for a bit.

There's nothing of the classic 'street' tropes in it except perhaps a mild surrealist joke.


----------



## sashbar (Dec 20, 2014)

runnah, I hear what you are saying. These shots are tempting because it is easy. Referring to the "Hand In Hand" photo by Andreas, I posted "Hand In Hand" one as well, the one that you did not rate at all and so did the guys on Urban Picnic, so you must be right. Probably a meeh stuff and quite kitschy. But.. I like it  - just because of the colour. If not the colour, there would have been nothing in it. B&W would have been seriously awful. But I like the colours here and therefore declare it a Street Shot.  
Sorry,  can not resist posting it again.. it relates to the subject of our discussion.. just turn away..


----------



## bribrius (Dec 20, 2014)

street photography. Photo of a street.


----------



## kdthomas (Dec 21, 2014)

I can tell you that when I'm out making my baby steps into street, I like B&W in post because many times I can tweak the color channels in an image, make a red jacket darker, or the yellow ribbons stand out in a girls hair, etc. But aesthetically, I think it isolates the subject, and his environment and removes the distraction of color.


----------



## Andreas Timm Photography (Dec 21, 2014)

sashbar said:


> runnah, I hear what you are saying. These shots are tempting because it is easy. Referring to the "Hand In Hand" photo by Andreas, I posted "Hand In Hand" one as well, the one that you did not rate at all and so did the guys on Urban Picnic, so you must be right. Probably a meeh stuff and quite kitschy. But.. I like it  - just because of the colour. If not the colour, there would have been nothing in it. B&W would have been seriously awful. But I like the colours here and therefore declare it a Street Shot.
> Sorry,  can not resist posting it again.. it relates to the subject of our discussion.. just turn away..
> 
> View attachment 91524


Yup  - like it too! Maybe both our photos are a bit cliche, but they are not bad and they are street photography 100%!

And @sashbar: Your's is even in color  Referring  back to my original topic of this threat.


----------



## sashbar (Dec 21, 2014)

Andreas Timm Photography said:


> sashbar said:
> 
> 
> > runnah, I hear what you are saying. These shots are tempting because it is easy. Referring to the "Hand In Hand" photo by Andreas, I posted "Hand In Hand" one as well, the one that you did not rate at all and so did the guys on Urban Picnic, so you must be right. Probably a meeh stuff and quite kitschy. But.. I like it  - just because of the colour. If not the colour, there would have been nothing in it. B&W would have been seriously awful. But I like the colours here and therefore declare it a Street Shot.
> ...


----------



## The_Traveler (Dec 21, 2014)

the hard part of street photography is finding new and interesting content. 
repeating work is like telling a old joke to the same audience.
It isn't your own work but a copy.

I understand new photographers have to start somewhere but everyone has stark trees against a colorful sky or a beach scene of a brilliant sunset.
Give me a break.


----------



## photoguy99 (Dec 21, 2014)

If you're shooting a witty gag of a person versus a sign, the one thing it isn't is street.

No matter how generous you are with the definition of street, surely there had to be some sense of depicting some truth, be it a surface truth or a deeper one, of what is actually there, of the event or interactions or life unfolding.

The gag is inherently false, and detracts from any truth you're showing.

Not to say HCB et al didn't shoot some gags. They did.


----------



## sashbar (Dec 21, 2014)

photoguy99 said:


> Not to say HCB et al didn't shoot some gags. They did.



So did many great street photographers.
"Surely there should be some depicting of truth.".  Really?

Check City of a Hundred Names by Alex Webb. This is a photo book about Istanbul.  A masterpiece. Is it depicting  any truth about this Turkish city and it's street life?

Istanbul natives react to this book in a rather funny way - they are angry, accuse Webb of disrespect and claim that Webb images do not represent their city. They just do not recognise the place where they were born and lived.

I think it is in fact a great compliment. It is easy to depict reality with a camera. That is what it was made for. That is what every photo journalist can do. But it is so difficult to create reality with a camera. That is what Webb does so beautifully.

But his naive critics just could not tell photo journalism from street photography and did not understand his kind of street photography as a genre. They were looking for the truth or a story, some meaningful interactions, some recognisable characters and places and all that stuff that in HCB eyes was boring dull. Alex Webb did not give a damn about it. So did H. Cartier-Bresson. And that is why their work is timeless.

Of course their vision is way above witty gags. But the sad truth is so many can not see behind witty gags at all.


----------



## sashbar (Dec 21, 2014)

The_Traveler said:


> the hard part of street photography is finding new and interesting content.
> repeating work is like telling a old joke to the same audience.
> It isn't your own work but a copy.
> 
> ...



 Nothing new under the Sun.


----------



## photoguy99 (Dec 21, 2014)

So street is pretty much just anything?


----------



## sashbar (Dec 21, 2014)

photoguy99 said:


> So street is pretty much just anything?



Pretty much yes.


----------



## gsgary (Dec 22, 2014)

William Klein was slatted for his 1956 book on New York because of the way he mad it look but I expect he was telling the truth


----------



## Vince.1551 (Dec 22, 2014)

B&W images blocks out a lot of distractions and hides unfavorable lighting conditions 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## psreilly (Dec 22, 2014)

Well here in Boston it makes sense cause B&W is more gritty, and since it's a gritty city (for the most part) it goes along with it's vibe... I don't think B&W street photography looks quite as nice in warm climates with warmer tones. Best cities IMO for B&W street photography are London and New York, especially during winter months


----------



## AsmaMohd (Dec 22, 2014)

Black and white images have a timeless look to them, they are instant classics.  Black & White is simple, these images tend to look more dramatic due to the contrast.


----------



## gsgary (Dec 22, 2014)

Short video, similar to the way I shoot, same camera but I don't talk to people


----------



## photoguy99 (Dec 22, 2014)

Holy crap, you too?!!?

I ALSO point the lens at **** and then press the button! It is like we are twins!


----------



## Gary A. (Dec 22, 2014)

psreilly said:


> Well here in Boston it makes sense cause B&W is more gritty, and since it's a gritty city (for the most part) it goes along with it's vibe... I don't think B&W street photography looks quite as nice in warm climates with warmer tones. Best cities IMO for B&W street photography are London and New York, especially during winter months


Boston, the flower of our democracy ... the home of our independance ... gritty ... say no more!


----------



## psreilly (Dec 22, 2014)

Gary A. said:


> psreilly said:
> 
> 
> > Well here in Boston it makes sense cause B&W is more gritty, and since it's a gritty city (for the most part) it goes along with it's vibe... I don't think B&W street photography looks quite as nice in warm climates with warmer tones. Best cities IMO for B&W street photography are London and New York, especially during winter months
> ...



Well when you're from the part I'm from there's not many flowers..


----------



## gsgary (Dec 23, 2014)

photoguy99 said:


> Holy crap, you too?!!?
> 
> I ALSO point the lens at **** and then press the button! It is like we are twins!


****ing hope not


----------



## sashbar (Dec 23, 2014)

gsgary said:


> Short video, similar to the way I shoot, same camera but I don't talk to people



And this guy is shooting film.   I can only imagine what would happen if he switched to digital.


----------



## gsgary (Dec 23, 2014)

sashbar said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > Short video, similar to the way I shoot, same camera but I don't talk to people
> ...


I can easily shoot 4 rolls in an hour if I'm on a roll


----------



## AsmaMohd (Dec 24, 2014)

gsgary said:


> Short video, similar to the way I shoot, same camera but I don't talk to people



It would be great if this guy would have shooted this video in digital as well, and at the end he would have compared both.


----------



## gsgary (Dec 24, 2014)

photoguy99 said:


> Holy crap, you too?!!?
> 
> I ALSO point the lens at **** and then press the button! It is like we are twins!


Wide angle and very close and fast


----------



## gsgary (Dec 24, 2014)

AsmaMohd said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > Short video, similar to the way I shoot, same camera but I don't talk to people
> ...


I would guess he likes film beter than digital like me


----------



## chuasam (Dec 25, 2014)

More Hipster points


----------



## AsmaMohd (Dec 26, 2014)

Check out this video by Shanks FX, *Film vs Digital*: Can you tell the difference? 
FILM vs. DIGITAL  | SHANKS FX | PBS Digital Studios | ClipMine


----------



## gsgary (Dec 26, 2014)

chuasam said:


> More Hipster points


----------



## gsgary (Dec 26, 2014)

chuasam said:


> More Hipster points


It is also a nicer camera to use


----------

