Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

In a Photo Gallery thread entitled "Question for street photographers" the OP, ozmerelda, asked "would it be possible to have a street photography section?"

A year ago I didn't expect it would be worth it, but since then there seems to be a lot more interest in strictly Street Photography. At this time that seems best placed in the "People Photography" section, but is that actually proper? Most of what goes into the People section are portraits, either studio portraits or people pictures, such as candids or environmental portraits, all of which have people as the subject.

But with Street Photography people is not the subject. The subject is life. The relationship between people and our surroundings. Strictly speaking Street does not require a person in the photograph (and for that matter doesn't require a street either).

Street Photography is an image of the tangible evidence of a non tangible subject.

Perhaps discussions about Street would become more specific, and maybe more animated and interesting, if there was a section just for that genre of photography?

At least it's worth discussing.

anotherview Loc: California

Wikipedia defines street photography this way:

"Street photography is photography that features the chance encounters and random accidents within public places. Street photography does not necessitate the presence of a street or even the urban environment. Though people usually feature directly, street photography might be absent of people and can be of an object or environment where the image projects a decidedly human character in facsimile or aesthetic."

This definition does set this field of photography apart from others.

I so some street photography, and find it attractive at times. It can capture the flavor of things.

A few pictures from Ensenada give some examples of mine. I'd post to a forum here for street photography.

Photography Vendor, Ensenada Harbor


Shopping Stalls, Ensenada Harbor


Concrete Pour, Ensenada

Dan821 Loc: Traveling........

I think that is a great idea for a street photography section.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

I'm not real fond of the Wikipedia definition ... but I don't claim to have a better one off-hand. From my perspective, Street Photography certainly is different from Portrait Photography, because the identity of people is relatively unimportant - instead their relative individuality (i.e., we don't care that much who they are, but we do care that we aren't all clones) and their interactions with each other / their environment is what matters.

I definitely feel this is a distinctive form of photography worthy of a distinct section here.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Wikipedia, with crowd editing, changes what it says about Street Photography too often! But I don't mind that definition at all. And you are right that it is apart from other genres, in particular "people photography" or "portrait photography".

Your images are wonderful examples that make the point very well!

I was thinking about what to write as an introduction or welcome message for a Street section, and in addition the the Wikipedia definition think it might to interesting to counter balance with a definition from Garry Winogrand on one of his sarcastic moments:

"There's no such thing as street photography and even if there were, it isn't what I do...I photograph animals. That's it! If you want to do a history of zoo photography, I'll participate."
Garry Winogrand

Just to have a little perspective... :-)

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

I should thank member ozmerelda for saying so in just the right way at just the right time. That got my attention, in particular that others would be interested.

And thank you for chipping in too!

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

I pretty much agree about the Wikipedia definition. Over the past few years it has been edited in odd ways, and I'm one who has tried to bring it back a little closer to a definition that used to be available from the London Festival of Photography, which seems to have disappeared now entirely. I've insisted that it state people, streets, and an urban environment are not required. What I object to are including characteristics that are common, but not necessary, as part of the definition, such as candid or anything except unposed (which should be there and isn't). I don't like the "chance encounters and random accidents".

But, it isn't bad as it is!

I do like zoo photography.

travelwp Loc: New Jersey

I agree. I love street photography and would definitely participate in such a section.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

More wishful thinking with no one volunteering to be available 24/7 to administer and monitor. Until that little detail is worked out the current "gallery" and "people" section have it pretty well covered.

kruchoski Loc: Albuquerque, NM

Yes, interested in Street Photography as well as UrbEx and architectural abstractions.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

Does that mean you're volunteering to administer the proposed section?

ozmerelda Loc: Osprey, FL

Perhaps it could be administered by more than one person and in more than one time zone.
Oz

JoeJoe

I love street photography for its candid look on life and some notable practioners of this art like Vivian Maiers work are legendary (watch Finding Vivian Maiers) Before politics ban candid shooting due to invasions of privacy.... and we lose another chapter in history

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Terrific! Part of the purpose of a new section would be to specifically encourage you and others with a history of Street work to post more examples and discussion about what Street Photography is to you.

Apaflo Loc: Anchorage, Alaska

Terrific! Part of the purpose of a new section would be to specifically encourage you and others with a history of Street work to post more examples and discussion about what Street Photography is to you.