What's up with this new generation of photographers shitting on street photography and showing major concerns over "invasion of space" and other types of "ethical concerns"? What will happen to the major achievements of 20th century photography if no one is claiming it? Is this also a sign of woke times? Now ethics matter more than art or truth? Isn't it a given that an artist needs to have giant balls if he want to make good work? How street photography is different from realism in art? Is the description of someone by writer is more "unethical" than the photograph of some person? Why are zoomers afraid of reality? Wasn't Tichy darling of /p/? What happened? How should we deal with these question?
>>4471105Street was always shitter tier let it die nothing of value is lost
Taking photos of non consensual people is a rapey and disgusting perversion. There is nothing more mentally sane and satifying than photographing someone who is happy to be photographed
>>4471105At least in Europe, there has been a big push towards privacyOn the photo side, the street genre got oversaturated by all the youtube wannabesSome of the hate, especially here, is the typical hating on what's popular>>4471106Street was popular and well liked here 10-15 years ago
>>4471109I don't consent to you using those words, you are disgusting
>>4471110When every zoomer fucknugget with zero career prospects tries to make themselves into an """influencer""" and sticks their retarded vlogging persona into every corner of everyday life, yeah, it's no surprise the general consensus is fuck street photography.Nothing of value was lost anyway. Taking frames from a CCTV feed or gopro hidden in your pocket is about the same level of quality and infinitely easier
>>4471106And replace it with what? The snoozefest that is documentary photography?
Let's call things what they are? People on this board reapond negatively to an Ashkenazi smugly flashing random people in the face, not to "street photography".
>>4471105because "street photographers" go around being deliberately invasive of others space, know that they are being invasive and then are offended/act surprised that somebody might find it invasive. If you're going to be a cunt, knowingly, then own it. Don't turn around and play victim or make fun of your chosen subject when you did something you know is antagonistic.>>4471113Taking frames from a CCTV feed would actually have more artistic merit than running up and flash photoing randoms with a shitty point and shoot.
>>4471122>implying street photography isn't as boring
>>4471166>seethes in all street photography threads.
>>4471105At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter. Taking a photo of someone doesn't harm them in any way, regardless of what the person may think.
>>4471200BUT MY EGO!
>>4471167Compare Walker Evans' American Photographs with Brassai's Paris by Night and tell me which one is more entertaining.
>>4471106shut up libtardi'll take street over 90 percent of all of the gearfag shit on /p/ you queers would rather argue DxO scores than actually go outside and use your shitIf I ever bamboozle my way into a janitor position on here this board is going to get cleaned up overnight lickety fucking split
>>4471244meant that for >>4471109 but you're both fags
>>4471244>Sugar explicitly states if he's ever handed a shred of power he will use it to crush opinions he does not agree with because they hurt his feelingsWow. What a shocker.Some of your content on this board is legitmately good, but you might actually a massive nigger if that's your plan.
>>4471173Schizo? I lurk this board almost exclusively. I don't think I've ever posted to a street photo thread.
>>4471282> I don't think I've ever posted to a street photo thread.The street photography threads around here tend to have a somber lack of street photography in them, so we forgive you for thinking you've never participated in one. And yes, you did it again, you just posted in one.
>>4471281Maybe I should instead, just to grind sugar down. Could be fun. After all, I was a right winger for most of my life, so I have the maximalist authoritarian militant intolerance, but I actually read the fucking bible so I'm a goddamn lefty libtard now, and oh boy am I out for vengeance. Simple fucks all mistakenly believed it when they were told it's the hippy pacifist peacenik lefties that are your enemies, but they are not. It is those of us who are apostates who are the greatest danger, because we already know & are well versed in what these vile scumbags bring to a fight, and we have scores to settle, and a tangible reason for revenge.
awsome i love having this thread every month. surely this time will be different
>>4471291>based vengance paladin on a warpathGott mit uns
>>4471291You sound like someone who doesn't exist.
>>4471105a real photographer will ask a person to take photos when they're doing pointless tasks throughout a whole daytaking a picture when there are a lot of people in a space it's alright though
>>4471291>but I actually read the fucking bible so I'm a goddamn lefty libtard nowSounds like we didn't read the same bible or something, must be some American jew subverted crap you're reading.
>>4471281I would probably delete 90 percent of the gear threads. we have a gear general. this place used to be a learning experience and now its a bunch of retards arguing over dumb shit just to argue.There's a lot of stuff I don't agree with but that doesn't mean it should be deleted, but most of the gear threads would get pruned and every film vs. digital troll thread would be gone the second I saw it.Maybe it's better I don't be a jannie lmao
>>4471105Photography is art, and street isn't art. It's journalism of the Mundane.
>>4471339>every film vs. digital troll thread would be gone the second I saw itJust admit it's because you couldn't tell the difference in those fe2fucker threads lelJust like people couldn't tell between my APS-C and FF samples.
>>4471339The only rule we need enforced is to have a stickied gear general and all other gear threads are deleted immediately. All gear discussions goes in the gear thread. That's it.I'd make a rare exception for the very topical or the very niche gear topics, but general shit like hurr durr I bought a <gear> what am I in for can get fucked.Retards are allowed to have wrong opinions but that's different the the board being flooded with 19 gear threads.>>4471340Correct. Rare cANON sane thought.>>4471341I kind of miss fe2fucker. At least he did interesting stuff. Poopcam was retarded but in the type of interesting and poorly named way. He actually got banned huh.
>>4471345>Correct. Rare cANON sane thought.He's just trying to one-up cinefag who claims photography can be art but doesn't have to be and that street isn't art. Which is actually saner than what cANON is spouting here.
>>4471348Let me quote Ansel Adams:"You don't take a photograph, you make it".Therefore if it's taken, it's not a photograph. Call it a photographically recorded image if you want, "photo" for short. But when one says "photograph" or "photography", it's the art.
>>4471340Have you ever given a definition for art?
>>4471341Your 200x400 samples comparing ancient low tech cannot dslrnosaurs? Even more dishonest than the "which ones are snoy" cope collage.
>>4471358Not as dishonest as your post, comrade. They were 1000px wide as specified by the sticky. Let me guess, you "need" more? If given a 25MP MFT picture and a 20MP FF one you'd probably pick the 25MP one as FF if cropped to 3:2 ratio.>>4471352I'm going to give you a machine-translated, trimmed-down definition from a philosophical encyclopedia I have at hand: "Art is a form of creativity, a means of human spiritual self-realization through sensory and expressive means (sound, body movement, drawing, words, color, light, natural materials, etc.). The distinctive feature of the creative process in art is the inseparability of its subjective and objective determinacy. Emerging as the result of the creativity of a specific subject, a work of art acquires a transpersonal character in its being. The properties of the content and form of a work of art, as well as the way it is perceived, not only testify to the creator's psychological uniqueness but also characterize the collective forms of experience and the direction of thought inherent in the culture of the era that gave birth to it."To be fair the translation doesn't do full justice to the original, but English is a bit limited when it comes to nuanced matters.
>>4471368>uhm excuse me, they were sized for third world screens which are the only screens that really matter, and everyone is totally as blind and retarded as meLmao micro four thirds has essentially exited the camera market> If given a 25MP MFT picture and a 20MP FF oneThere are no good 20mp ff cameras, just canon piece of shit blobs with mft dynamic range, so, it's basically mft vs mft but the canon "full frame" achieves a sharper image and better rendering with fewer lens elements and less expense which means it remains superior for relevant photography and only worse at pedo creepshots because the zoom lenses are larger (but also, faster)>mft's crowning achievement: sometimes equaling a crappy canon DSLR that's old enough to vote, by spending 5x more moneyI wonder why the crop cope hit the turbo button lately... here are some posts that seem to have angered the mft shills>>4471127>>4471256>>4471270
>>4471377If you want to defend FF then just state there's lenses that have no MFT equivalent, don't write that embarrassingly wrong bullshit. Make it 24MP FF if you want, point remains unchanged.
>>4471382>m-muh equivalence...Allow me to dig up doghair's bone herehttps://archive.palanq.win/p/thread/4454569/#4455121ff gets a brighter more detailed image with mathematically equivalent settings. equivalence is just a theory. maybe it works fine when comparing an om1.2 with a canon 5dIII, but higher tech cameras like the nikon z7ii, fuji gfx100s, hasselblad, sony a7rv, nikon zf, fujifilm x-t5 are all more than capable of visually busting equivalence.equivalence is just a theory. it's a theory about ideal, normalized cameras shooting according to rigid guidelines in a consistent test environment. this doesn't happen in real life. it's not relevant to real life. for whatever reason, full frame ended up being better than micro four thirds in the majority of real life situations, and now olympus is out of business.
>>4471377>micro four thirds has essentially exited the camera marketI feel like there was a point before the big three graduated from DSLRs into MILCs, since they were still rather big and different enough.Once Cannikosnoy pumped out mirrorless cameras it was over for M43.
>>4471385The dog moved from the light source.>>4471389>I feel like there was a point before the big three graduated from DSLRs into MILCs, since they were still rather big and different enough.They downgraded to MILC.
>>4471391Lol your entire worldview is based on being a coping micro four thirds fanboyWhy are the worst gearfag posters (cANON, moop, olympanon) always coping foolturds fanboys? The entire mu-43 forum is pure gearfag cancer and the most obnoxiously retarded gearfag youtubers are all crop copers… i wonder, was full frame max specs just the gearfag entry point, and crop cope the gearfag destination? People who actually enjoy photography seem to gravitate away from flagships and crop cope and towards midrange ff and high end aps-c.
>>4471393did m43 raped your dog or what
>>4471393kek, you couldn't be any more wrong. I don't like MFT because it's inherently untrustworthy, being MILC. FT I do like, but the resolution is a joke for today's standards and the one thing they offered, extreme viewfinder magnification, is nearly equalled by the Pentax K-3 III, all with a larger viewfinder. The sensor reach of MFT is basically equalled by the 90D as well, with a real viewfinder to seal the deal.
>>4471395now post your photos so we can laugh>inb4 you don’t
>>4471396At least you're honest about your intentions after losing the argument.Funny how you chose to focus in the gear to avoid facing the fact that street isn't photography though.
>>4471400>404 photo not foundhe called itcandid street photography is art because it is the conscious selection, exposure, framing, and retouching of ephemeral moments in real lifeand most street is art because its stagedcry if you may but know the world disagrees with you because you are stupid, not because it is a jewish conspiracy, just like the world went (back to) full frame because crop fucking sucks, not because of a sony yaluza conspiracy and equivalence.
>>4471404>because its stagedthat's not street>cry if you may but know the world disagrees with you because you are stupid, not because it is a jewish conspiracy, just like the world went (back to) full frame because crop fucking sucks, not because of a sony yaluza conspiracy and equivalence.Equivalence is actually why. 35mm hits the sweet spot of a multitude of factors from cost to ergonomics to dynamic range. It's a natural format if you will. Everything converges to it. It's about the same size as human retinas.
>>4471412shut up canon go take your gearfagging somewhere else
>>4471105Mortality of street photography would have been a more interesting thread topic.
>>4471412You have started and lost this argument hundreds of times. Redoing it until you happen upon someone unable to disprove you will not transform your coping gearfag lies into truth. You are just a typical impoverished fatnik.
>>4471439You just admitted the so-called street that is staged is art because it is staged. Candid street is a game of luck, not photography. It's turning the camera into a slot machine and you even get to call some forgettable crap a jackpot to pretend the pathetic hopeful button pressing activity bears fruit. Some people get luckier and get some actual jackpots but it's far from art. Now, there is documentary photography which involves some vision. Unlike the so-called photography of the likes of Mark Cohen. Street "photography" is nothing more than a group of hacks praising each other, with some in the club having access to making it a way of laundering money. It does a huge disservice to the art of Photography by being fraudulently sold as such.
>>4471588street photography is jewish photography
>>4471589And every bit as fake as the cookie ovens
An open challenge to anti-street photography niggers:If you think that street is as easy as pressing a button then feel free to pick up some 40$ ricoh and become the next Daido Moriyama. We will discuss further after you have become the next Daido Moriyama. Thank you.
>>4471593>open challenge to anti-street photography chads>do some street photographyNo. I refuse to lower myself to your standards.
>>4471603Cope harder tranny
>>4471340Photography can be art but it doesn't have to be, it's weird that you insist on picking this hill to die on. The word "photography" predates the idea that it could be considered an art.>>4471348That would explain the absurdity. >>4471351That is a based quote, but while he was talking about photography in the context of art he wasn't really talking about what you're implying here (that merely taken photos aren't photos). He meant that *his* photos are made, not taken. Because he's an artist, not a spray and pray hack. Hence his other quote about the "machine gun approach to photography".>>4471593I already proved that Daido Moriyama and Garry Winogrand's photography are easily accessible if you try. Winogrand's most celebrated photos are just a pale imitation of Walker Evans's least important work.It's not that we can't do it, it's that we don't want to.
>>4471593There's your yellow nigger
>>4471105>>4471105>muh streetshitsIt’s trash, for trashy people. No one is impressed by spraying 1000’s of low-effort snapshots and picking out the few “human interest” images that don’t fully suck balls. If you want to be a fucking journo, start with a goddamn story you tards, otherwise there’s no fucking substance to your images, and no one has any reason to look at them bc the worlds already up to its eyeballs in quantity over quality generic content.Tech Co’s desire to Hoover up the revenue stream devalued photography as an art form to total worthlessness, just like they did for music, movies, TV, books, and everything else in humanity that ever had any value. Enjoy your economy where the only thing in it is billionaires buying and shutting down other billionaires and everyone else rotting in the gutter.
>>4471606>>It's not that we can't do it,Lol street isn't as easy as raping dogs. >>4471607Do you masturbate to these photos?
>>4471588I don't agree that snapshits aren't photography, just not art photography. But if we replace "photography" with "art" in your post, I fully agree.>Mark CohenIf he weren't a jew it would be completely unbelievable that he's praised by anyone at all. But the early life gives sense to what would otherwise seem like a bad joke.>>4471608>It’s trash, for trashy people. No one is impressed by spraying 1000’s of low-effort snapshots and picking out the few “human interest” images that don’t fully suck balls. If you want to be a fucking journo, start with a goddamn story you tards, otherwise there’s no fucking substance to your images, and no one has any reason to look at them bc the worlds already up to its eyeballs in quantity over quality generic content.Agreed>Tech Co’s desire to Hoover up the revenue stream devalued photography as an art form to total worthlessness, just like they did for music, movies, TV, books, and everything else in humanity that ever had any value. Enjoy your economy where the only thing in it is billionaires buying and shutting down other billionaires and everyone else rotting in the gutter.I think there is a place for art photography still, you just have to ignore the flood of garbage around it.>>4471610So predictable, you get pwned and all you have to give back is some impotent lashing out. The reason you hatefully accuse me of bestiality is because I'm an iconoclast and demolished your street fake gods.
>>4471612The only thing you have demolished is a dog anus
>>4471614>doubles downLife of the stupid street shitter. Go back to taking creepshots, retard.
>>4471617STOP fucking dogs
>>4471618I never started. It would be like asking a streetshitter like you to stop doing art, you never made any. That's why you're a streetshitter.
>>4471619Dog rape is not okay
>>4471604Ad hominem. Not even a good one at that. Do you just string together some buzzwords and hope that'll be enough to prove your point?
>>4471606Just because it wasn't yet seen as such it doesn't mean it wasn't art. The very technical limitations made it almost impossible to do non-art, because you needed to direct to get anything that wasn't a blurry mess.
>>4471606>Hence his other quote about the "machine gun approach to photography".Please note he calls it an "approach to photography", they approach photography but never touch it. There is an attempt to do photography but it's not bold enough to actually do it, they just expose negatives.
