ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore

Today I was in Philadelphia with my wife. We cam across a fellow sitting on the street with a sign that said "Travel and Smile". As I was walking past him, he said to me: "Smile". So I sat down on a bench next to where he was sitting on the street and replied: "I'll smile for you, if you smile for my camera". He agreed and I smiled and started shooting. Then my wife approached him and offered him some money which turned his attention from me to her. I, of course, kept shooting. Lately on this forum there has been discussion about the merits of interactive street photography and candid street photography. This set will offer three shots. The first is a color shot of the man interacting with me. The second and the third shots are B&W conversions where he is interacting with someone else. So my shots of him when he is interacting with my wife are more candid because, while he was aware that I was still there, he was not paying attention to me. I'd be interested in discussing the impact of the interactive vs the candid shots. I'd also be interested if you think none of these photos have any impact. If you wish to comment on the processing, that could also prove beneficial to me. I think I would prefer not to have any edits posted in the thread; but if you feel that an edit would illuminate your point more than typed words, then I would certainly not object. I'm very inexperienced in street photography and my goal for this post is to get information that will help me improve. Any comments that will further that goal are much appreciated.
Erich

no. 1

(Download)

no 2

(Download)

no. 3

(Download)

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

This should be an interesting thread, and while I'm not against one-on-one interaction when shooting Street there are two distinct messages here.

The first image is one you might find in a travel album of someone you know or have met. There's a feeling of knowing, a personal relationship if you will, and therefore a lack of mystery. The sign adds to the story of course, but the image is more I Know Them than anything else.

The second and third images then speak more to the man himself, his situation, and his wonderfully captured outlook on life. Motion, crop, composition, and processing aside, the message is clear that this is one happy man whose made it his mission to share the feeling with others!

I'm no processing wiz so I'll leave that to others, but if I may suggest the next time the opportunity arises consider shooting at more an eye-level. Your third image overrides this, but for most shots eye-level is best giving a sense of intimacy and adds the the overall feeling of it all.

Well done on the series, and thank you for starting what I hope to be an amazing discussion. S-

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

Also note: Making A Point by ebrunner

ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore

I read your comments with great interest. The processing, of course, can go many ways; but I did think it was interesting to see how the photos differ when the focus of the subject switched from me to my wife. Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

I like that you took both, and thinking about it again wonder if the impact would be different if you processed the first like the second or third. S-

ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore

I processed the photos in LR. So, I should have the original RAW photos. Right now I've got to get to bed. I'll look for them and maybe post them tomorrow.

color, uncropped, minimal pp of No. 3 above

(Download)

Billyspad Loc: The Philippines

I hope you can find this guy again as he is wonderful sensor fodder. Glad to see you now talk with your subjects Erich its much more interesting than just shooting from afar where the only intention is to get a shot that wows the viewer on whatever site you choose to show it. The enrichment to ones life one can get by a chance meeting with a total stranger is hard to explain and possibly one needs to do it to fully understand. Candid is just too easy and apart from a technically perfect outcome hopefully, gives one nothing in return.
Using your wife as a decoy is a great idea. You have got interaction going and a tamed model. Smart move fella.
I would never have have used a bench to sit down on its a barrier of sorts plus benches are for old folks . If he was not drinking or smelt like a dustcart I would have asked to sit near him on the floor when requested to smile. I never wear my good duds to go out and shoot street. When the niceties were over I would start to shoot from his level talking with him about whatever he wishes to talk about. Tell him a joke pretend to swig his booze. Once you have him relaxed and happy with your presence he is yours to do with as you wish. And yea pay him and pay him well for his services. I never give money to people who I think will spend it on booze simply because I loathe the affects of alcohol. So if its a drinker I go and buy em a Big Mac and fries or similar and at least that way they get a reasonable meal inside them.
The impact of these shots is a little lost as your not on his level and as St3v3 pointed out number 1 does look like a shot of a friend. The other two shots miss showing the eyes so we do not actually see this mans inner soul. Now if St3v3 wishes to believe that sitting on a sidewalk and begging makes him happy and he is actually a happiness missionary then he can believe that.
I have yet to meet a street dweller or a beggar who would choose his life if offered the opportunity to relive it. Next one you meet ask to swap places and see what they say. So I have a feeling what we have is a happy exterior with an interior that does not quite go with Mr Smiley. Only the eyes can reveal that.
Without the eyes we cannot know him. Is he an entrepraneur who smiles to make cash, is he mentally challenged, is this a guy with a past he regrets, kids he does not see now? We need a window to view his inner self before we can say if he is happy etc

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

The last image, the same as number three except in color, is the best. It's not particularly good as such, but it is indeed a wonderful learning tool.

The processing on 2 and 3 is exceedingly distracting and at least for me does absolutely nothing for the images at all. Number 1 has the processing just about right! But it very clearly is not candid, is not the person as he interacts with the world or how his life relates to his surroundings.

The real problem with all of them is that what you photographed was indeed the relationship between life and surroundings, but it is your life, not that man's life. You can clearly have a fun and smiling, but short, discussion with someone you look down on. The images reek of a higher level of superiority. Ooops; you don't want that.

If you insist on shooting homeless people begging in the streets, at least get physically down to their level, or lower. Don't make a big deal, or any kind of a deal, out of the homeless/beggar/destitute aspect. If they have character in their face or clothing, capture that. Skip the hat or can that is out for a donation. You can make a million technically correct photographs like those, but none of them convey a clear message that isn't insulting to the photographer even more than to the subject.

Try to capture respect. Get a shot that you can show to his mother or his children with pride.

ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore

This fellow made it easy for me to interact because he addressed me first. The bench was a concrete extension of the bridge he was sitting on. I understand what you mean by it creating a barrier. I was right next to him; but I did not get on his level and that could have made all the difference. I doubt that I will see this man again; but he was important for me because he opened up and was willing to let me into his world. That would be the difference that interaction makes. It was typed conversations I've had with you that were still swirling around as I walked through Philly yesterday that got me to think differently about the photos I was taking. I don't think that I will ever get away completely from candids; but I did enjoy talking to the people I photographed. The shot of the woman registering people to vote came about after a conversation with her about whether or not I was registered. Then, after talking to her, I asked if she would pose for a photo. To me that photo shows that she was a bit timid and more interested in revealing her job rather than her self. There is, however, just a hint of a smile behind that sign that makes me happy. I think I enjoyed photographing her more than the unfortunate fellow on the bridge. http://static.uglyhedgehog.com/upload/2016/9/17/t1-631024-that_s_my_message.jpg I wish I had gotten his eyes better than I did. I agree with you that they are very important. Food for thought. Thank you.

ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore

I don't really have a superior attitude toward the less fortunate. I'm saying that; but, without realizing it before you pointed it out, my photograph is indeed saying the opposite. I never even considered that aspect. I agree with your ideas on pp. As I look back on them, the grunge technique is, perhaps, more about what my impressions are and less about the reality as it was presented to me. Increasingly my favorite shot of the day is becoming : http://static.uglyhedgehog.com/upload/2016/9/17/t1-631024-that_s_my_message.jpg . I found it interesting to talk to her and it is not looking down on her or what she is doing. It is not a candid shot; but I'm not thoroughly convinced that an effective street shot has to be candid. By talking to this woman and getting her to allow me to take a posed shot of her, we still get a sense of the moment and the surroundings. (although a wider shot might have been more effective in this regard). Again, thank you for taking time to offer your insights. I've learned a lot from these photos and the reactions and discussion they have produced.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

I see a lot of insight in what you write. You are probably more than 50% right about not actually having a "superior" attitude, in that it is maybe just slightly so. Enough that you are not consciously embarrassed by taking photographs that say exactly that. Whatever it is that it means, you'll get very sensitive about it as time goes on. You'll find people you really like, and then discover that some people see nothing but a bum in your photographs of them! Ouch. After that you may take some, but they'll never be seen by anyone else. They'll get culled automatically.

The lady with the ballot is just toooo cool. The more I look at it the more I see. How much context needs be in the image??? Exactly that much! :-) It's that same bit from Gestalt Theory as described by Arnheim: "When nothing superfluous is included and nothing indispensable left out ..."

ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore

I'm very pleased with the photo of the woman. I think I got lucky with that one. As soon as I made the exposure, I knew that I was going to like the photo. In the original, her face was in deep shadow and I was sorry that I had not used fill flash. By selectively brightening the shadow on her face I was able to get the same feel as fill flash would have produce.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

I haven't read the other comments, though I saw the word "processing" as I scrolled down

I enjoyed #1 for he seems an engaging person whose personality shines in difficult circumstances.

The pp in #2 and #3 seem a little over-done because I noticed that before I noticed the person - as I was scrolled down through the three initially.

Erich, I don't have advice as this is not my area of photographic interest, but looks like you received lengthy comments, so hopefully you are receiving useful insights. I'm very interested in your journey!

jgordon Loc: Boulder CO

I have a friend named Mike who was homeless for five years here in the town where I live. His fall into homelessness was triggered by a serious mental illness. He still has the illness but now he takes medication to help control it and his life is pretty much under control these days.

Mike has become an advocate for the homeless members of our community. As part of that work he has taken up photography. He goes around town to the places where homeless folks tend to congregate and interviews and photographs homeless individuals. This is part of a national project to show the humanity and individual stories of homeless people. Mike tells me that the results of his work, and the work of others in various cities around the country, are collected and published. I have not seen the resultant work, but this discussion has reminded me that I need to do so.

Mike has explained to me that one of the worst parts of being homeless is that the housed members of the community refuse to interact with you. It is, he explained, like being invisible. People look through you and around you and make great efforts to avoid eye contact. Mike believes that one of the most important things that can be done for our homeless neighbors is to recognize their humanity by saying, “good morning” or “hello.”

I have not had tremendous success in making images of homeless folks. Part of the reason is my own squeamishness about intruding on or taking advantage of their plight. As a result, I generally don’t take such photographs without first engaging my subjects in some kind of conversation and asking permission to take pictures. My experience is that many homeless folks seem to appreciate the human interaction. I also often contribute some money to the collection plates the homeless often use.

Based upon my limited experience, I think interaction with the subjects in this kind of photography is often a good thing. When homeless folks sit around all day in a public place with nothing much going on in their lives, their faces can show a kind of dullness. When I interact with them, their internal humanity seems awakened and their expressions become more animated. I think the examples used to start this discussion illustrate some of that. What I have learned from this discussion is that taking such pictures from eye-level may be an effective technique. I’ll think I’ll give that a try.

I don’t love the three images that started this discussion. The lighting somehow seems harsh to me. However, I think they show an interesting human being, I would encourage ebrunner to do more of this kind of work and see where it takes him.

ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore

There has been a lot of information passing hands in this thread. I agree with your comments about the processing. It is over-done. I've changed my mind on how to handle the pp. For me, the grunge look does not work. It could be that I don't have the subtlety to pull the look off. On the other hand, B&W and the use of judicious pp can be very effective. I think as a pure "street" photo, the woman with the voter registration sign really works well. Thanks Linda.