Anyone here is a street photographer? How do you deal with all the cringe? Because everyone gets pissy; it's cringy as hell getting in their business. I thought people would be way cooler with what we're doing.
>>4526351You just do it then nod/say thank you. Throw them some change if you want to be nice.
>>4526351You got to learn to hate them and get off on annoying them.
>>4526352>slip em a fiver and tell them to fuck offftfy.OP unless you're prepared to front on a rando after they call you out / get up in your shit, then you just need to be prepared to take one in the jaw. Even in my "nice" part of town, you absolutely run the risk of random meth head claiming you're following them home or some fuckwit-tier shit. Either front up or put up.
>>4526371Pepper spray or gun in america. Sorry about the migrants that get in your face about photography in Europe. It's what you deserve, but still sucks.
Before you read any of the following drivel, remember that if you are not a handsome, charming guy, don't even bother - that is the per-requisite. I dabbled with street for about a decade. A few times a year, as a fun challenge, usually going with a friend to see who can capture the better shot. I told myself that I'm not shooting the usual buskers, backs, and beggars, but looking for "interesting scenes, lighting, or characters"... I guess. It is, in fact, very cringy to take random peoples' photos and disrupt their day (how would you like it?). Street photography only really works in busy cities where people are too distracted to notice you. And be real with yourself - you are literally a voyeur, and calling it an art form is a way of justifying your perversion. I work in a busy downtown area and see the socially inept types walking around with their pride an joy Fuji toy - do you really think that they have earned the social license to take your mother's/ daughter's picture without permission? I am not talking about legality here. These days, I'll include strangers as elements in photos, but I've come to terms that blasting people in the face Gilden style or taking hip-shots should be shamed and has no place in western society. >>4526353This right here is the only way to approach street. Be a complete sociopath.
>>4526351>use 85mm lens (doesn't look like you zoom very far)>move with a group of friends>pretend to aim at an intersection or a landmark and wait for them to enter the frame>take the shot and immediately turn around and casually walk away, as if you didn't even notice them (don't make eye contact outside the viewfinder)>got to popular tourist spots, where everyone else is also lugging big cameras around
>>4526351Tried to do some "street photography" today, it just seems meaningless to me, bunch of random people doing random things that it doesn't really matter all too much
>>4526447You gotta find nice compositions n shit like that. Or just use a flash with a 28 or 35 and cram it in interesting looking people's faces to get closeup shots of them.
>>4526449>Shove a flash in people's facesThis is the path to getting a camera shoved up your asshole.
>>4526490That's why you carry pepper spray and a bodycam as well lmao. First amendment rights are supposed to uncomfortable, sorry snowflake!
>>4526447that's the challengehow do you turn the ordinary into something that is worth looking atbecause it is hard and scarce it is valuable
>>4526447i like this picture actually. everyone face is so expressive even the dog XD. good shot
>>4526351Hi, I’m a street photographer in Mexico City and the State of Mexico; I’ve also done street photography in various other states and municipalities across the country. In five years, I’ve only had two confrontations, and both occurred in upper-class neighborhoods; in areas considered lower-class, I’ve always felt safe and welcome. Here are a few valuable tips: 1. Don’t hide. What do you think looks more suspicious: someone photographing people while hiding behind a tree, or someone taking a photo openly?2. Be pleasant, smile, talk to people after taking the shot, and show them what you’re doing; you’re taking something from them, so give them at least your attention in return.3. If someone asks you to delete the photo or tells you not to take it, don’t push the issue; we don’t do this to have a bad time or to make others have a bad time.A couple of things you shouldn't do:Don’t be intimidating.Don’t run away.Don’t make people feel bad.I understand that every country and location is different depending on the local mindset, so it’s up to you to adapt to your surroundings.
m43 + bright telephoto prime is your friend.
>>4526661Vitiligo ass camera
>>4526661f3.5 is not bright
>>4526683That clearly says f1.8, so yes, that is a fast lens, even if it loses a few stops adapted.And 3.5 is more than enough for daylight shots. Might even have to stop down to preserve highlights.
oh boy, a street thread>>4526447what strange comments. "meaning" isn't something i think many photo people prioritize in evaluation of a photo. maybe if we're talking about art photography or magnum stuff, then sure, meaning comes closer to the fore. but imo there's a significant gulf between magnum standards and /p/... i don't really understand your post, because even if you want to focus on that, there's quite a bit of meaning and 'matter'ing in that pic. certainly more than most of rpt
>>4526696>That clearly says f1.8, so yes, that is a fast lensRatio matters for fuck all in terms of actual performance.Total aperture iris diameter is what you want. You can't cope your way around physics. Using that is barely above using a phone.
>>4526696>it says f1.8It's f3.6 exactly. The FOV of the "75mm" is the same as 150mm on a normal camera. You know the F number is focal length divided by apparent aperture right? 75/1.8 = 150/3.6. Do some math. Same aperture size. It's not a fast lens. Denying this means thinking your phone has an f1.8 lens on it.This does mean it's actually possible for a 150mm f3.6 for FF to be made that's about the same size, but it's just that no one has invested in making the optical formula for a lens almost nobody will buy so the closest autofocus lenses are things like the sigma 90mm f2.8 for FF/APSC and the marginally slower and shorter fuji 16-80 f4 zoom (basically the same size as the m43 prime).>And 3.5 is more than enough for daylight shots.Unfortunately an ISO 800 equivalent sensor (average m43 that isn't FF sized and even more expensive) is not, especially not when basically every APS-C camera is within less than an inch and 1/4lb of the same size/weight and can soak up much more light.Cope all you want but micro four thirds setups are expensive, perform poorly, and offer nothing useful over APS-C. The actual cameras, not just the theory surrounding them, aren't very good. Fuji and sony obsoleted the whole system 10 years ago. This is the sole reason /p/ is so full of samefags forcing sony/fuji hate memes (they're what's left after the /m43/ general was liquidated).
>>4526563Fellow Mexibro, that's at the Basilica, right? I try to reserve myself to parks. Cool to see someone from the same place here!
>>4526741I literally wrote>even if it loses a few stops adaptedWhy the fuck would you need 800 at f3.6 during the day?Have you ever even used a camera?And no, I use a Z6, not MFT, so I don't need to "cope".
>>4526776Así es, la mera basílica. Los parques me parecen en general muy aburridos, pero tu foto es interesante.Prefiero la calle, el barrio, con la gente haciendo cosas de gente. Saludos carnal.
>>4526820A mi me falta perderle ese miedo, la verdad no me gusta mucho fotografiar gente. Pero al menos las recomendaciones que das, pues creo que funcionan bien. Mañana iré a Coyocan, a ver que encuentro interesante.
>>4526844Aprovecha que estás en México, jeje; acá la gran mayoría de las personas son bien dicharacheras. Te juro que te vas a sorprender de lo amables que son tus compatriotas.Aprovecha, las marchas como la del orgullo, los días festivos, las fiestas de pueblo, en esos momentos a la gente no le importa ser fotografiada. Es más sencillo empezar por ahí que tratar de salir cualquier jueves normal.
>>4526447YJK
>>4526447looks like AI
Why does no one in this thread consider respecting people’s dignity and privacy? You live in a house, correct? Ok, so then you are punching down when you photograph people in their lowest states. Often times they are suffering from mental illness. And quite frankly there is already enough photos of homeless people and poverty porn already on the market. Maybe just consider a different subject to photograph or start talking to people like humans before feeling entitled to photograph them.
>>4527091>start talking to people like humansSir, this is the backwater shithole know as /p/ on the backwater shithole known as 4chan. These street faggots just want insta fame or some shit and homeless niggas are just low hanging fruit.
>>4527091>Why does no one in this thread consider respecting people’s dignity and privacy? Lol.
>>4527091No privacy in public. It's really that simple.
>>4527091let me guess, you don't mind flock cameras
>>4527311Tesla car with 69 cameras on them constantly recording everything they pass by. -> :DSome chud with his film camera attempting(and failing) to make art. -> >:(
>>4526999whose tongue is that, wtf
>>4527091What privacy?
>>4526820very cool>>4526999nice trips but looks super back focused...what was the fstop?
>>4527451>>4527605This is just random photos of people
>>4527608welcome to street photography
>>4527608Poor people, to be exact. Normal people are having friends over for a back yard BBQ. They are not sitting around on the street.>>4527615Yep. Pretty much the definition of it - poverty porn.
>>4527608is there a point you're trying to make?
>>4527605Yes, I had it at f/8, but I think it was a step closer than it should have been. Still, I like it.
>>4527790>dude Kubrick lmao
Just take pictures like you are lighting a cigarette.
>>4527790fixed this with AI to get closer to the action
>>4527878Soulless. Don't use AI on shit bud. The whole point of photography is you'll never get it perfect.
>>4527880 All because the old way was more "pure" doesn't mean it's inherently better.
>>4527886Um yes it does.
>>4527878Still too far if I'm being completely honest with you family
>>4527878I don't like using AI; I don't do street photography to get perfect shots—I let them be as they are.But everyone is free to do whatever they want with their camera and their images.
>>4527886Yes it does. AI belongs in the workplace, but not here. If AI adds, removes, or changes anything, it's not a photograph and never will be. It's a computer generated image. You are down there slightly below the people doodling furries and elves in krita/sai/blender. Method matters and doesn't - if the method is divorced from the medium (ie: a robot arm splattering paint at random does have different(less) value than a human arm emotionally splattering paint at pseudorandom) it changes things.In the future, if you can't provide the original full size 50mp+ 14+ bit raw, it won't even be considered a photograph.In the far future, if you can't submit the original negative for analysis, it won't be considered a photograph and digislugs will have buyers remorse. Kodak will have government contracts for supplying 120 and 4x5 roll film to state press agencies. The predominant camera for taking photography seriously will be a 120 format rangefinder since SLRs will be lostech.
>>4526563>Don’t make people feel bad.I have never seen a single street photo that actually tried to make their subject look good.Usually it's a noisy composition with an extremely unflattering angle and lighting set up trying to be "gritty".People don't want to be seen as "gritty" in photos. Yeah there's no reason you *have* to listen to that but don't pretend that's not what you're doing.>>4527173"i'm not touching you, i'm not touching you, i'm not touching you">>4527311>>4527312Actually I hate both of these, I dislike the digital panopticon. Chud with camera isn't the most egregious violation but it will feel the most personal to most people which is why it gets such a reaction.
>>4528012You can still assault someone without physical contact. It becomes battery if you touch them.I think your observation on what feels most personal is true even if it is the least meaningful. Many people thoughtlessly accept the "it's for your own safety" argument for security cameras watching their every move or have just become used to it. It's why the idea of creating your own privacy in public by wearing a mask or whatever seems ridiculous to them.In america you can do a "freedom of information act" request, entirely anonymously, and request the surveillance footage from any surveillance cameras facing the publicly accessible areas in government buildings like post offices, dmv, etc.
>>4527790> Some place resembling a market and a public toilet> Niglets> AIYep, that's American street photography.
>>4528008NOOOOO YOU CANT IMPROVE THE PICTURE IT MUST STAY FLAWED FOREVER OTHERWISE ITS SOULLESS REEEEEEEE
>>4528020Correct. Now go back and retake that picture of the kids playing.
>>4528020
>>4528020I see no lies there.
>>4527875nice shot, but can you elaborate? i've never smoked.
>>4528308Go buy some and figure it out yourself. Smoking is cool.
>>4526820>>4527994>>4528308The only half-decent photos ITT btw
>>4526351Creep hobography? Miss me with that gay shit.Why would you even want photos of random people looking at you with anger or disgust all over their faces?
>>4528319no. cigarettes smell like garbage plus that money could go to film and photo gear.>>4528331no points for the tongue pic?
>>4528336Just bum stogies off people. Once you start smoking they don't smell bad.
>>4528402>bro just stop taking showers! It's been months and I smell fine!Smoking makes you reek with a ten foot radius.
>>4528407I dont think you understand. Only squares will think you smell bad and who cares about squares?
Do you have to be somewhat autistic to do this kind of photography?
Firstly if you’re gonna do street, you really have to shoot film. Digital street is just bizarre to me.
>>4528464Yes.Manlets who don't want to travel anywhere or do anything interesting but who want a unique photo that will go and stalk busy streets waiting for le art to walk on through.Photography should be of things that matter to you or other people. If you wouldn't frame it on a wall in 24x36 for people to see, then you are doing it wrong.
>>4526351>Anyone here is a street photographer?Does using a telephoto lens and taking photos of people from the drivers seat of a rental car count?
>>4528717Proceeds to share a boring, soulless photo.
>>4528933>Proceeds to share nothing because he has nothing
>>4528933>why yes, I hate formalism, how could you tell>if it's not a photography of the human zoo, it's boringyep, that's a streetcuck
I only like it when the people are unaware or okay with the shot. If they notice that they are being photographed they usualy have an expression like their soul was taken away
>>4529016
>>4529018
>>4529016i like eye contact pictures myself. i agree it can be tough to get one without a scowl or different expression than they had prior>>4528933top kek. i've noticed that street photography in particular tends to bring out the most bizarre and incoherent remarks from people. i love how it incites them to reveal their worldview with great efficiency. especially fun are these posters who condescend on a genre from behind the blandest picture you've seen or no picture at all>>4528409phillip morris rep pls go
>>4529016what were you going for on this one?
>>4529053>Street snapshitter is confirmed square.Go figure.
>>4529070I am somewhat fascinated by the young women in my town who seem to enjoy taking pictures of them selves or of each other as their main hobby or form of lifestyle. And I'm aware of the irony of me taking a part in it.I also liked the sign on the right, the lines that connect the scene and the colours from and reflected by the water.I really like your shot. You pulled off intimacy without getting her face in the frame. The light bounces off nicely from her shoulder, her arm and the chair. The blurry people in the background add a nice layering.I may would have cropped a bit in, to thin out the structure on the bottom of the frame. The person walking out on the right kind of lets me leave the scene - also with her foot pointing towards the right side.
It’s kinda fun
>>4529170unfotunately, No Fun is Allowed in photography!>>4529083ok well imo, the moment is pretty thin so you need to bring the composition or other qualities. i just don't really get the framing with an odd aspect plus all the action cramped into the bottom with a lot of empty water in the top half. it made me think you were trying to show me the green water
>>4529016>>4529083So far these have more of an "I'm a creep wanting to photograph young pretty girls in my city, but I'm so afraid of getting caught I do it from 15m behind them" sort of vibe. Do you have any good photos?
>>4527886Yes it does
>>4529393Thank you for your feedback.
>>4529396The usual evidence that street togs are closet creeps. Nothing new here.
It's real simple- First, look and act like you belong there. Pull that off and 90% of the time no one will notice or care that you're taking pictures. If you do draw attention, take the shot, lift the lens up and act polite but slightly impatient for them to "get out of the shot". Works every time.
>>4528308Thanks!You do it like minding your own business. Naturally. Its like having a new tattoo, the first days you think everyone sees it and that all the attention is on you. And that is just your mind.The more time it passes, more you realize you are invisibleand everybody is blinded by the cloud of their own problems. You are invisible, take advantage of it.
>>4527733That's what we're asking you.
>>4526351You wear all black with a mask and sneak around behind garbage cans and stuff.
One of the reasons street photography sucks these days is that everything is just so prosaic. I'm not going to find meaning in a fat dude in a tee shirt. Modern city life is ugly and meaningless so your pictures will tend to be too.
>>4531160>le heckin DEEP shot of people in gaudy sportsball clothes walking down the street
>>4531175ah, i should have known the snideposter was a different anon. a nophoto, even. i've found that strategy works to some extent. it depends on what shot you're trying to get, and in what situation>>4529501you're welcome>>4529019focus seems too shallow here unless you wantd to highlight the text on the metal bar
>>4526351Street photography is the laziest, jewest kind of photography and only exists to launder money in jew galleries
>>4531433spiritually jewish post
>>4531435A lot of famous photographers are Jews though. Whether their fame is manufactured or not. They probably have a bigger concentration in street photography too. I'll bet a million bucks
>>4531441Google leica freedom train and realize whyAlso remember shitty film boxes used to cost as much as nikon z9s relative to peoples income then, film was relatively expensive as it is today, and there was no 1hr photo so you needed the spare room and equipment which meant photographer = money to spare
The difference between street photography & taking creepshots is the same as the difference between flirting and sexual harrassment. There is no difference
>>4531160>>4531175imo, get closer btw
>>4531469Deign, sir, to tell me: What is the meaning of your *fine art piece*, Black Lady Putting Glasses on with Intentional Camera Movement to Blur iPhone?
>>4526447Lens/body ?
>>4526351>Anyone here is a street photographer?ESL moment.
>>4531442>Google leica freedom train and realize whyThat has very little to do with jews perverting photography. For example Winogrand's mother immigrated to the US in 1921 through Ellis Island. Of his father it's known he was established in NYC by the mid '20s.The Leica thing is an anecdote with no bearing on their prevalence in street. Street much like other jew degenerate art exists in its jew form because of their degeneracy.
>>4528655This
>>4531160This is like photojournalism for people that are scared to go to a war zone. I'm sure in 70 years when everyone is a dirt poor slave this stuff will be cool but right now it's not aesthetically pleasing and not journalistically consequential.
>>4528655Subject is more important than the medium.
>>4532111Subject is king, and the kingdom of street is trash
>>4526447>bunch of random people doing random thingsthisit's only popular because it's a recording of a certain time, no different from interviews in a magazine people think "wow i can be famous like that one photographer" - yeah they became famous after take a billion snap shits, and after they died they chose 30 of them
>>4531465> Zero empathy momentThe difference is the subject wanting it or not.
>>453231899% of street photographs are taken without consent
>>4532340>>4532318Outward facing security cameras are recording people 24/7 without their consent.
>>4532340Oh no, think of peoples privacy when they're outside in the public!
>>4532340Consent can be given in the moment or post factum.
>>4532342>>4532369No wonder that with this attitude, people don't like to have you around.
>>4526447
>>4534606That fake grain looks like absolute SHIT.
>>4534612>the industry standard grain simulation looks like shitLet me guess, you think OLPFs are "good", have an olympus and use lightroom too
>>4534613>I cannot think for myself and that is a great thing!It looks like mushy fake shit and I don't give a damn what a bunch of chartnerds say.
>>4534625real film looks like mushy fake shit too. thats why i prefer sony mirrorless. the photos look like real life.
hi, i'm looking for a beginner camera for around 500$ for a street photography. Do yall have any recomendations?
>>4534649Yeah, learn what photography is. Street photography is an oxymoron because it implies taking instead of making. You don't take a photograph, you make it. Street is more like journalism of nothing. When it becomes photography (posed for example) it stops being street and becomes portraiture.
>>4534643>completely mindbroken by the tripsHopefully your little meltie doesn't last too long.
>>4534655The mods already cracked down on his shitty thread from last night
>>4534656That clearly hasn't stopped him and he instantly ban evaded to continue driving everyone away from /p/. No matter how much I hate to say it the obsessed spammer has proven canon right.
>>4534657How did he exactly prove you right? Right about what?
>>4534659>youSchizo retard.
>>4534661>refuses to elaborate
The tripfags won.
>>4534659About this for starters >>4530561
>>4534657>everyone shitting on the nophoto gearfag tripfag that spams its nophoto opinions is the same person and RUINING PEEput your trip back on nophoto
>>4534676See>>4534661Nice projection btw. Kek
>>4534666This one was a trvke too >>4534115
>>4534676It's more your obsessive temper tantrum level responses that are the problem. You are just as much of a nophoto as canon and cinefag and I dont see them making meltie threads crying about their parasocial relationships crashing and burning.
>>4534666Last but not least my favorite one from this feud: >>4529378I think that last line was the one that broke schizoanon.
>>4534686If only it were just cANON and cinefag he spergs about. You can't have any discussion without him making into Adobe being to blame for his favorite brand having moire issues, it's fucking insane. Today there was this mention of some Olympus in the gear thread. He somehow made it about Adobe vs Capture One.
>>4534686>>4534657>>4534688>he thinks its all one guy>y-y-y-you're ruining /p/ nooooHaha you will never put your trip back on
>>4534689
>>4534689You're so far gone you think it's reasonable to have regular meltdowns about moire, two tripfags and adobe.Disclosure: I am >>4534691
>>4534692>>4534691you're either cANON or cinefag, or part of the problem. "anonymous". Too special to use a name like everyone else huh?
>>4534688That's what years of consistenly losing console wars does to a schizo.
>schizo identifying schizo going insane and samefagging up a storm trying to figure out which schizo to complain aboutYou love to see itGet a better hobby than 4chan meta-drama loser
>>4534694>You either agree with everything I have to say or you are the ENEMY AND MUST DIE! I am the virtuous one because I say so!Binary thinking is incredibly low IQ. You got mindbroken by years of losing consolewars and now you're singlehandedly ruining /p/ with a months long temper tantrum over simple disagreements about cameras lmfao touch grass bro
>>4534697Lol your going insane over a name field
>>4534698>your retard confirmed lmao
>i know who it is! I KNOW WHO IT IS!>its the guy who made all the posts I disagree with!>he has all the opinions I don't like!>he said everything I wouldn't!>he always disagrees with me! its always the same guy!>ITS HIM! ITS ALWAYS HIM! It's the guy who pisses me off! ITS ALWAYS HIM! Its all the same guy! ITS HIM! I KNOW IT!This is like 70% of modern 4chan now
>>4534700At least the hyper cope being posted in this thread is really funny.
>>4534699Gottemhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EE-xtCF3T94
>>4534694>>4534696>>4534698For some reason, you thought that posting this would put you on the moral high ground.
>>4534703it's over, anakin
>>4534704Go ahead, reverse search the image. You'll find a conversation about street photography. Couldn't help myself, had to feed your delusions.
>>4534705cANON has a point. You have an unhealthy obsession with this website. It has never mattered what 4chan thought of more successful photographers than you. At the end of the day, they are still successful, and you are still nophoto.
>>4534706When did cANON say such a thing? k3kCouple in convertible btw
Cinefag has an unhealthy obsession with this website. He seems to think that if he complains about jews taking better photos than him enough times, it will do something.It will not.
>>4534713This garbage snapshit is what you're defending as "better than" my photos lol
>>4534715It tells a story about feminism, cuckoldry, and the jeeting of wall street. Photographic genius. You're too much of a libtard to get it. It's literally an IRL wojak meme.
>>4534717Whatever, huscuck. I think the only reason you're mad at us is because you're a jew and we're awake. You tried to harass Ambush too.
>>4534719Meds
>>4534720>t. the guy who has a daily melty thread about "the tripfags ruining /p/"
>>4534722>Does /p/ dislike me?>No its the one person i'm obsessed withThis is the meltdown some loser had have eggchad all over again>>4534700Trvth nvke
>>4534724You're the guy trying to make chaos with tripcodes so yes
It's sad how this tripfag is so obsessed with totally anonymous posters that he sees them everywhere, even in standard 4chan shitposting
>>4534728True. He always melts down and blames some random retard who beat him in a photobattle instead of just dealing with the fact that multiple people dislike him>moop! doghair! tim! tom! huskyfag! isi!>i stubbed my toe the last person to piss me off on 4chan did this
>>4534728The behavior ITT is exactly what you announced you'd be doing in the thread that got wiped>>4534730See, here you are. Tom was based and I respect doghair's dedication to the craft.The dickwad from Bristol peaked in his India trip.
>>4534731Schizo>>4534700Kek
>>4534731Did you just call doghair a non-artist?
