Why is Street Photography the Cancer of Photography? [EXIF data

gr8 b8 m8 I r8 8 out of 8

>>3061094
It's not, you're just a pleb

I dont think its cancer.
In my own opinion i think people are missing the point of street photography.
Its more of a way to show a small part of peoples lives and to get an emotional response from the viewer.
Street photography to me is about being at the right place at the right time capturing something that might be interesting from peoples lives.
Anything else is just taking portraits of random people.

>>3061094
/p/hotography is the cancer of photography.

>>3061094
Pictures taken today will be interesting in 20-30 years.

Because it's an exploitative genre that hasn't had anything new to say, with the exception of Philip Lorca DiCorcia's series Heads and also Google Street View, since Robert Frank published The Americans 60 years ago.

It's basically an extremely pernicious form of class and race tourism for suburban white guys who have just moved out of their zoo photography phase. They feel like they need a little danger to give their work some heft, and so they head into the dangerous inner city to plumb its depths for photos of business people walking in front of big billboards, wrinkly hobos and angry old Russian grandmas.

I just like taking creep shots.

>>3061180
pretty much this
it is also a shooting style that lends itself to /p/ros who have a striking lack of imagination.

street photo without people is the answer

>>3061180
>views straight from the polisci dept.
>name is literally fucking cuck
Seems legit.

>>3061180
This and people just thinking taking a picture of a random person with no permission is art

Are pictures of buildings and open urban spaces considered street photography or landscape? people are not the subject, though there may be people in the shot btw

>>3061180
and which avenues of photography are interesting to you?

depends on which city

Streets of New York/London/Tokyo? Yes that's cancer

Streets of Mogadishu/Damascus/Caracas? Now that's interesting street photography

>>3061180
street photography is still zoo photography

>>3061379
>the one who has never taken a nice street photograph because he's too scared of strangers

>>3061385
>Mogadishu/Damascus/Caracas

That's even more cancer. The middle class white lacking inspiration and wanting work that is "meaningful", so he books a trip to a shitty poor city to add his own snapshits to the millions already documenting third world poverty, all the while his own wealth and the money he blew on the trip and his gear relative to the people are lost on him

>>3061412

damn. that was some deep shit man

>>3061412
I mean, those aren't poor cities, those are crime riddled hellholes close to warzones

>>3061426

so you like getting robbed?

>>3061427
no? I wouldn't travel to those cities. But seeing street pictures from there is actually interesting and it poses a challenge for the photographer, whereas taking pictures on the streets of London or NYC is like fishing in a bathtub with dynamite

>>3061143
This guy gets it

>>3061180
>>3061385
>>3061412
>>3061429
These guys don't.

>>3061377
underrated

>>3061729
So you think you're important enough to be the judge of who is redpilled enough to qualify in your little talent show you host on an anonymous image board? Congratulations.

Requires no gear, no skill. Even if the pictures are great anyone else can recreate it.

>>3061094
Because it makes all photographers look like intruding assholes.

>>3061737
No, he is human enough to give his opinion where he goes. You're deluded enough to tell him he cant?

>>3061094
Because it makes viewer extrapolate what he percieves. If you are ok with it, it's not.

>>3061730

How the fuck is it underrated, retard? He noticed my trip code has cuck in it and then accused me of having liberal leanings? Shocking observation, Sherlock.

>>3061382

It's not about the genre, my man, it's about the approach. I like street photography when it's intelligent and offers a new approach, insight or technique. It rarely rises to that level. 99% of it is just a lame retread of the great masters, all the way down to corny shit like taping up your logos, exalting upon leica, and all of the aforementioned cliches in my other post. And it's not about subject matter, it's about approach and intent. What are people actually trying to say with their street photography? How often is it anything more than just "hey look at this guy" or "ooh nice light!"??

>>3061888
trips of truth.

>>3061737
No. I say that that people that state street photography is cancer by itself rely on the perspective the coments I cited describe.

I wouldn't think of giving my opinion in an open imageboard, god forbid.

>>3061412
You're retarded

>>3061381
>Are pictures of buildings and open urban spaces considered street photography or landscape?
pretty sure that's architecture/urban photography m8

>>3062145
Nah that's just called gay son

street photography isn't inherently bad, there have been many great photographers for whom street photography was their bread and butter and they produced truly amazing shots, it's just that for 99% of photographers it ends up being looking at people just fucking walking, sitting or doing nothing, the photos tell no story, they aren't artistically great, they are just empty moments in mundane days

>>3062020
But your leanings aren't liberal at all.

Rather, you're the bun-wearing tight-arse for whom any depiction of the lower classes must happen according to various overriding concerns of "respect" and "non-exploitativities", in effect scrubbing them of any verisimilitude. It's academic wankstains like you who'd forbid evidentiary photography of the police beating up a suspect on the grounds that it violates the suspect's privacy, while conveniently shielding the police from a career-ending court judgement.

Which is to say, a fucking cuck. As per the label.

>>3062742
>verisimilitude
Fuck off isi

>>3061390
Only if you're in the ghetto.

>>3062742

that straw man is fucking tight man

tell me more about the stuff i never said

>>3062020
Triggered.

File: IMG_7321.jpg (1MB, 4000x3000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 4000x3000px

>>3061379
In public places, permission is not required as there is no guarantee of privacy short of someone "peeping up your skirt" and the like.

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

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon PowerShot SX130 IS
Camera Software	Picasa
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Lens Size	5.00 - 60.00 mm
Firmware Version	Firmware Version 1.01
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	180 dpi
Vertical Resolution	180 dpi
Image Created	2014:05:10 14:07:12
Exposure Time	1/320 sec
F-Number	f/5.0
ISO Speed Rating	200
Lens Aperture	f/5.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	28.00 mm
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	4000
Image Height	3000
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Unique Image ID	d4f26c2944e412c00000000000000000
Exposure Mode	Program
Focus Type	Auto
Metering Mode	Evaluative
Sharpness	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Contrast	Normal
Shooting Mode	Manual
Image Size	Large
Focus Mode	Single
Drive Mode	Single
Flash Mode	Off
Compression Setting	Fine
Macro Mode	Normal
Subject Distance	65.530 m
White Balance	Auto
Exposure Compensation	3
Sensor ISO Speed	192
Image Number	134-7321

>>3061094
Why is this board the cancer of photography?

>>3061737
Who is hosting a talent show? There aren't even many photos posted in this particular thread period. Anon was speaking from an artist/photographer level to explain WHY people like to do street photography and what the meaning behind it is.

As for me, I am still at the point of amateur shots of random people - but oh well, plenty of weirdos around who would be interesting enough to photograph.

I wish I had an actual creative eye/mind.

>>3061743
In a sense you are right and in a sense you are wrong.

Anyone can take random pictures of people on the street,with their phone or any other camera. I will grant you that.

However, that doesn't mean it's good and that doesn't mean it "captured a moment". Additionally, gear is *generally* required to emphasize a feeling or emotion in photo that a flat photo with no depth of field (in other words just an average photo).

Really good photographers CAN accomplish great photos even with the most basic of camera, but it isn't as simple as you are making it out to sound.

>>3062277
This. I love taking pictures of people but most the time you ARE catching people in random, largely meaningless moments.

>>3061412
wow how profound

>>3062913
in the US, in Europe many countries have different privacy laws

>>3063025

I can vouch the UK is pretty much the same as the US. If you can see it in the street you can take a photo of it.

With obvious caveats of reasonability with regards to breaching other laws around not being a terrorist or a pervert.