Redpill me on why "street photogs" shoot with film

>>2883466
there's nothing discreet about raising your phone to about eye-level and pointing it at someone. people have no idea what you plan on doing with such picture.

with an enthusiast camera, people can connect it to photography, especially if its obviously a film cam (who the hell shoots film for nefarious purposes)

File: download.jpg (340KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 1000x667px

Contax rangefinders are autofocus. The G2 is quite quick and accurate as well as having an incredible lens lineup. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a smartphone that has a better lens than that 45mm/f2 planar

That being said street photogs dont just use specific cameras. You can use whatever you want as long as you're fast enough with it

Nobody is stopping you from using a phone or forcing you to use a leica it's just fun to use whatever feels good

I've got a g1 with the 28mm/f2.8 biogon and it's great but I've never shot street though

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	FUJIFILM
Camera Model	X-T1
Camera Software	Digital Camera X-T1 Ver1.00
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.4
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	53 mm
Maker Note Version	0130
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Image Created	2014:07:24 19:48:24
Exposure Time	1/250 sec
F-Number	f/4.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	1600
Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Brightness	2.9 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	35.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3456
Image Height	2304
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Unknown
Sharpness	Normal
White Balance	Auto
Chroma Saturation	Normal
Flash Mode	Off
Macro Mode	Off
Focus Mode	Auto
Slow Synchro Mode	Off
Picture Mode	Manual Exposure
Continuous/Bracketing Mode	Off
Blur Status	OK
Focus Status	OK
Auto Exposure Status	OK

>>2883466
Honestly it's brand brain washing
It's why people will wear a Rolex rather than a generic watch
Any thrift store compact camera can take photos like some bourgeois rangefinder, for 1% of the price of one

>>2883473
it's also a style thing.

i dont know how people like using phone cameras without a tactile shutter button. that's probably the only reason I hate taking pictures with my phone, pressing the dumb screen awkwardly with my thumb and pressing some other on-screen "button"

>>2883473
I've got an mju-ii that I like to use for street and I'm perfectly happy with it

However pick up a leica and give it a go and you'll see why people like dishing out a bit more for their 'bourgeois rangefinder'

I'd never buy one but I can definitely see why people would use them for street

>>2883479
A lot of phones you can use one of the side buttons as a shutter button

That being said its still really weird to focus and stabilize a phone

>>2883473
haha, this is the mark of a poor man

you dont need a range finder to shoot street but you do need manual control.

being able to control dof and shutter speed are crucial for good street photography

an ae1 with a 50 1.8 takes the same photo as an m6 with a cron, but the leica is smaller and lighter and therefore might be better for street shooting

also pre focusing is a big part of street shooting, something you cant do with most point and shoots or phones

two other benefits of rangefinder cameras over slr would be the lack of finder blackout and the ability to see whats going to come into your frame before its in your frame

Two situations for you while out.

>shoot street with a film camera
>person gets arsey with you
>flip over camera and point to back
>just film
You can even lie if you're that type of person. It's a project, I'm an art student, you're not the focus etc.

>shoot street with a mobile phone/Digital cam
>photo available to be seen
>well show it to me then
>let me see your gallery
>delete that
One problem with having digital. The other problem is if you're a male there's the classic creep stereotype. Social media has also made people more concerned about what you're going to do with an image.

I don't really shoot street that often but I can tell you why I prefer using a film camera over a smartphone etc.
I will always have control over my shutter speed or aperture. If I can change lenses I can get a focal length longer or wider than a 28mm eqv. I also don't need to hope the camera has enough light to focus or it's focused properly. Pretty much all lenses are fully manual. You'll also worry a lot less about batteries.

As for using a rangefinder? No blackout in the frame. Can see scene around your framing. Quick to focus for a MF lens if you're used to the lens. No mirror to slap. Sometimes slightly smaller, so easier to fit into a bag.

It's all up to personal preference. At the end of the day you're still raising a camera to your eye or holding an item people are used to noticing.

>>2883490
According to our based God Kenneth, an M6+Cron weighs 860g, whilst an AE-1P+50/1.8 weighs 750g.
The Canon is 1cm deeper and taller, and 3mm wider.

>>2883530
well fuck me then

still true about the viewfinder blackout and the better framing abilities tho

File: TP-GX8 18_zpssuskujup.jpg (185KB, 1000x665px) Image search: [Google]

185KB, 1000x665px

>>2883511
Yeah i'm going to have to say no to both of those scenarios. Sure a smart phone might raise suspicion but certain digital cameras won't. I think you just have to look the part. For example a DSLR is big and just gives off this paparazzi vibe when you're on the streets with it, either that or really tourist. It's just too conspicuous and large. On the other hand something like a Fuji or any retro looking camera such as an Olympus MFT camera will give you this vibe of 'artist' or 'quirky hipster' and not some creepy dude. Of course you still have to look the part or just not look like a pervert. Most mirrorless cameras these days offer silent mode/ electronic shutter which makes taking pictures more discreet. Right now i'm shooting with a GX8 and i can easily pull it off as a film camera by turning the screen on it's back (pic related) and the tilt evf makes it look like a quirky film camera. Again, it's not really about the camera, it's more about appearances. my advice to anyone is to stop looking like a nervous pervert and smile/ look approachable. Also stop giving shitty excuses like 'i'm an art student' just tell it how it is, you're an artist and you're out to improve.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	SONY
Camera Model	ILCE-7M2
Camera Software	PhotoScape
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/4.0
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	36 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	350 dpi
Vertical Resolution	350 dpi
Image Created	2015:10:02 14:43:28
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/13.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	250
Brightness	-3/1280 EV
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Light Source	Flash
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	36.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	3008
Image Height	2000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Manual
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal

>>2883542
Different strokes for different folks. It doesn't necessarily apply to me.

I also see more creepshots online from M4/3 users than any other system that isn't a mobile phone.
Digital cameras have their own shortcomings compared to film cameras and vice versa.

Also, it's really very, very silly to mention silent mode/ES making a camera more discreet in the same thread that asks why people use film compacts or rangefinders.

>>2883466
>I'm not a lowly creepshooter with a blue collar job and a fat spouse, I'm a sophisticated flâneur. Approximate my cultural capital and dispair.

>>2883542
>its a film camera
>no really
you fucking assclown

People shoot street on film because they want to put on the artistry and craftsmanship of the classic masters like a cape that gives them superpowers. They want to claim an air of legitimacy and they want to mimic an aesthetic.
>but also film is a technically superior medium for fast candid shooting thanks to its exposure latitude and its suppression of are-bure-boke style defects through grain and low resolution and its masking of compositional failures with black and white

>>2883566
>I also see more creepshots online from M4/3 users than any other system that isn't a mobile phone.

Pretty sure you're just trolling here.

As far as mentioning silent mode, it's not very silly since many photographers dislike cameras with loud shutter slap and covet cameras which have relatively silent operation. It's why people love cameras like the Konica Hexar AF.

>>2883542
So you're saying lie about the camera, but not what your doing. Sounds so much more shady bro.

>>2883542
And to you and to OP and this whole thread. Maybe it's not about appearances or the cameras or anything else. Maybe people just like shooting what they want to shoot. Maybe some people just like shooting on a 50 year old film camera with no justifiable reason. I know I do.

Hell, go shoot in the street with large format if that's what you wanna do.

You guys gonna stop every person riding a bike and ask them why they're not driving a car?

>>2883587
I'm saying that if you wanted to, you could lie about a digital camera being analogue. I'm not one of those people so i ended the post with a statement about being honest and truthful about your intent.
>sounds so much more shady bro
right, because telling people you're using a film camera is much more shady then lying to them about what you're going to be doing with the images. The people stopping you to ask what you're doing don't care what camera you're using, they care about why you are taking a picture of them.

>>2883588
I don't understand what you're getting at. I was defending digital cameras because that anon before said that it was better to shoot film than it was to shoot digital for street photography. Defending digital doesn't mean i'm condemning the use of analogue cameras. I don't care what you use, just stop spewing bullshit about a certain camera or phone not being suitable for the task. A camera isn't going to make it more acceptable for you to take pictures of strangers, it goes both ways and it comes down to how you present yourself.

File: IMG_3148PCsm.jpg (442KB, 750x1000px) Image search: [Google]

442KB, 750x1000px

I find I get way less looks shooting street on my phone than any other camera I've used (mirrorless, rangefinder, 6x6 with waist level).

If you're shooting something on your phone people just assume your instagraming some lame artsy shit or snapchatting. Everyone already has the phone held up to their face 24/7 anyway.

>Mfw when I shoot photography with a d3300

You guys forge the number 1 rule of street photography: be obvious

Just smile at people, interact and take pictures with their tacit consent. Or take the picture as if it was the most normal thing in the world, smile at them afterwards and say thank you with a thumb up while leaving relaxed, at a small path. Let them know you're not going to do anything wrong with the pictures.

File: NYC-Parade-174.jpg (246KB, 1000x666px) Image search: [Google]

246KB, 1000x666px

>>2883469
Good point, particularly if you are not the "stealthy" type. Usually, if I shoot people walking about, there's some interaction. I used a cell phone one time only in NYC, and it was really uncomfortable.

>>2883473
Using a rangefinder is a lot more fun than using a cell phone camera. Using a Rolex is about the same experience as using a Timex.

>>2883592
Maybe this is true if you're stealthy, or more "environmental" vs. being more direct and close with people

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Leica Camera AG
Camera Model	M8 Digital Camera
Camera Software	2.005
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/1.0
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2016-07-15T08:16:52-04:00
Exposure Time	1/180 sec
F-Number	f/6.7
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	320
Lens Aperture	f/6.7
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Center Weighted Average
Light Source	Unknown
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Image Width	1000
Image Height	666
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	0000000000000000000000000000099D

>>2883542
>For example a DSLR is big and just gives off this paparazzi vibe when you're on the streets with it, either that or really tourist. It's just too conspicuous and large. On the other hand something like a Fuji or any retro looking camera such as an Olympus MFT camera will give you this vibe of 'artist' or 'quirky hipster' and not some creepy dude.

You're just repeating blogrot. Bullshit designed to make you buy meme cameras because they sell better online than serious cameras and such twaddle appeals to your ego

File: 1466579344681.jpg (19KB, 478x308px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 478x308px

>>2883466
>Phone cameras almost produce quality of film

>>2883606
I don't read blogs. Why are you so keen on projecting? What is a meme camera? What is a serious camera? I just shoot with whatever suits me. I don't buy cameras to appeal to my ego, i buy cameras because i need them to do a certain job. So much projection.

>>2883609
>will give you this vibe of 'artist' or 'quirky hipster' and not some creepy dude

Riiiight

>>2883610
It's true. Certain aesthetics appeal to certain crowds. What's so hard to understand? You think they made the new Pen F with pro photographers in mind? No, they made it to appeal to fashion conscious people who have an affinity to vintage things. There is such a thing as technology being fashion accessories.

>>2883613
The idea that the average joe on the street thinks "that guy has a DSLR, he must be a paparazzi" or "that guy has an Olympus, he must be a quirky hipster or an artist," is just fantasy. Most of the time, if they register you at all, they likely just think "uh, dude with a camera."

You may feel good about your fashion accessory, and that is fine. But you are only noticeable to others like you. No one else gives a shit. When you raise something to your face, whether it is a camera or a cup-cake, no one will notice the flavour

>>2883630
>You may feel good about your fashion accessory,and that is fine

Hey buddy, keep projecting. My camera isn't a fashion accessory and i don't treat it like one. I'm not trying to impress anyone. There is such a thing as a less imposing camera. Raising a phone vs raising a D810 with a tele are totally different. To a lesser extent a Sony Nex will raise less attention than a DSLR. The smaller the camera the less imposing it is. There is no right answer and it's highly contextual and different people will react differently to a camera being pointed at them. It's not as black and white as you put it. "When you raise something to your face, whether it is a camera or a cup-cake, no one will notice the flavour" fucking laughable. "when you raise something to your face, whether it is a camera or a gun, no one will notice the flavour" jesus haahahahaha.

Use whatever you have and like m8. Fuck what anyone else thinks, fuck having to explain your personal preferences, especially fuck all the street photography whiners who just argue online and don't even go out to shoot.

They're just tools. The results are what matters, not the process.

>>2883654
The only right answer is Sony.

>>2883599
>thumb up
yuck

My thought is that a digital camera implies the idea to the subject on the street that the photographer may just be taking thousands of photos and not really thinking much about or putting much value into the photos they take.
Most people don't want a photo taken of them if they think it will be unflattering.

On the flip side, with a film camera these days people on the street feel the photographer is more inclined to put some thought into it before committing the frame to film.

File: 1467803596894.png (761KB, 1125x630px) Image search: [Google]

761KB, 1125x630px

>>2883675
>My thought is that a digital camera implies the idea to the subject on the street that the photographer may just be taking thousands of photos and not really thinking much about or putting much value into the photos they take.

Fucking epic meme! Sides are splitting!

>>2883675
>with a film camera these days people on the street feel
No they don't. They think you the photographer is a quirky hipster or an artist

>>2883696
Well I don't dress like a hipster, and yes, I'm talking about art. That's the ultimate goal of street shooting right? Creating art. Artists tend to think about what they're doing. Snap shooters don't. And people in public don't like having their photo taken by a snap shooter.

>>2883700
Since when was taking snapshits of hoodlums on the street 'art'?

>>2883675
I've seen tourist snapshitters (taking pictures of tourist traps, taking pictures of friends in front of things, etc) in the city using K1000, no joke

>>2883707
>>>/ic/
fuck off you blithering retard

>>2883708
>sends me to /ic/

Thanks, i can finally enjoy art that takes skill and effort.

>>2883707
I'm not saying the photos aren't snapshits, I'm saying the impression given to others is that they won't be snapshits.

Phones are shitty cameras. Picture quality may be the most important thing, but there are several other variables where phone photography is shite compared to any half-decent DSLR or mirrorless.

As for film, that's more of an aesthetic choice than anything. I personally enjoy shooting film more than I do digital, I don't even bother to look at the pictures. The act itself is more satisfying. Plus, the viewfinder on my Nikon FG makes me cream.

>>2883754
>I don't even bother to look at the pictures.

>>2883755
I shoot two decades old colour film that was preserved in a kitchen closet, why go through the effort

>>2883757
Why even bother>>2883757
with the film? Go out and shoot with an empty camera.

>>2883778
Come on, that's not the same. I still enjoy the sound and the manual action. I do store the film in my fridge and might one day develop it. I consider it to be some form of occupational therapy, rather than actual photography.

>>2883700
>And people in public don't like having their photo taken by a snap shooter.
Lol, people in public either;
a) Don't like having their picture taken
b) Don't give a fuck
The idea that they base their willingness to be photographed on what kind of camera you are using is just gear faggot vanity.

>>2883781
>>2883778
>>2883757
Didn't Winogrand have a huge warchest of stuff he just never developed or looked at?

>>2883630
I think you overestimate how oblivious people are about camera gear.
Of course this is anecdotal evidence, but I get stopped so many times in the street, cafes and pubs by people who want to look at my cameras, whether I'm shooting rangefinders, SLRs, compacts, view camera ("is that a Hassleblad?") or TLRs. They never have anything useful to say about them, or even anything to suggest they are at all interested in photography, they mostly just like the look of them.

>>2884173
It's the same sort of thing with any special interest item or hobby. I drive a motorcycle, all I fucking hear from people is "oh I used to own one of those", "isn't that dangerous", "have you crashed yet", "aren't you scared of crashing" and "how fast does it go".

People are interested but not interested enough to have any sort of knowledge past anecdotal shit they hear

Shooting street with a TLR has to be one of my favorite experiences. People are instantly disarmed by it.

>>2884181
>>2884173
A TLR is a slightly different beast because you are not bringing something up and covering your face.

I get the same using a compact with a flip up screen at waist level. People think you are looking at your phone

>>2884169
Was that on purpose or just because he shot so much that he didn't have the time/money to develop it all?

>>2884276
2,500 rolls of undeveloped film, 6,500 rolls of developed but not proofed exposures, and about 3,000 rolls only realised as far as contact sheets being made

>>2884181
I've shot some portraits with a TLR and it's really crazy when looking down at the viewfinder with magnifier, you see someone looking straight at you in a way that would be really weird and uncomfortable if you were looking at them with an eye level viewfinder. But of course, from their point of view, they're not looking into your eyes, you're peering down at the ground.

I find portraits easier with waist-level viewfinder for that reason. Less awkwardness.

>>2883599
it takes a certain personality to not be awkward in public places snapping photos. For some it just takes practice to become more at ease. When walking around don't slump over looking down and avoiding eye contact. Soak up the scenery around you, look at people with a slight smile but don't stare. Take a shot and nod while moving on.

I was shooting in my town today and just about 2 out of 5 people were walking around with their phone cameras to their faces.

tldr if you act like a creeper you are a creeper. Don't point your camera at a woman below the chest level at women walking near or in front of you and don't zoom in on children behind a tree

>>2884181
I've noticed photography and riding are such similar demographics it's spooky. Spec obsessed, always comparing, always wanting to talk about the gear. Total boys club too.