Graham Smith wrote:
Thank you Chuck,
<snipped all of the stuff that is making me squirm> :-)
Yup, shut up. Soon you will have me thinking that I'm a real photographer, I never want that to happen. I might just start to take myself seriously and that goes against my whole ethos :-)
Back in 2008, when I first thought that street photography might be for me, I did struggle to get the confidence to point the camera directly at a person but I soon overcame that. In very few of my pictures is the subject aware of the camera, this is very deliberate on my part. I want the subject to be interacting with their environment, their thoughts, not with me or my camera. People fascinate me.
Graham
Thank you Chuck, br br <snipped all of the stu... (
show quote)
I absolutely do not mean to make you squirm! On the other hand I think you are absolutely a
real photographer, whatever that is (know it when I see it &c). You have "the eye." You know, especially in street photography, how to take what you see and run it through that clumsy-in-the-way box thing and make it come out as you saw it, and that to me is certainly one definition of a "real photographer." I've seen folks on the Hog take issue with the differences between "amateur" and "professional," and that tends to another "angels-head-of-a-pin" thing
(I feel that you may call yourself a "professional" if the bulk of your income is derived from the sale of your pictures), but "amateur" comes from the Latin root "love" and yada yada, so what the ultimate difference is, I think, whether you can translate what you see into a picture that shows others what you saw, and makes them want to linger and study.
The reason I joined The Hog was that, after lurking for a few weeks and studying the digests, I perceived that this was a hugely diverse community of people with a common interest, but in all stages of development (no pun intended), from utter "newbie" (a term I dislike) to grizzled pro, and every possible thing in between. When I was in school we were urged
URGEDto spend as much time as possible looking at as many
already-accepted-as-museum-quality pictures of all kinds as possible: paintings, photographs, whatever, and do what this spinoff section is doing: critique. Answer the basic questions: if it's good, why? Do you like it or not? Why?
So, not to make you fidget, if I were still teaching a class I would tell my students to Study Graham Smith's Street Stuff! Look how he prints (yeah, I know, but these look like prints). Look at his subject placement. Look what he includes. Wonder what he didn't. If you want to do street photography, Graham Smith is one of the masters you want to emulate until you find your own style.
That's what I'd tell 'em, but I still wouldn't do it myself. I prefer to shoot stuff I'm pretty sure won't shoot back. :-D