ncammack
Loc: American Southwest (Lots of beach, no ocean)
Hello all,
I'm pretty new here at UHH and stumbled across the Street Photography section which I find quite fascinating! As my post title says "Is Street Photography Always B/W?" If so, why is that?
I took the following a while back, would you say it qualifies as street photography even though it's color?
Thank you for any responses,
Neil
ricardo7
Loc: Washington, DC - Santiago, Chile
ncammack wrote:
Hello all,
I'm pretty new here at UHH and stumbled across the Street Photography section which I find quite fascinating! As my post title says "Is Street Photography Always B/W?" If so, why is that?
I took the following a while back, would you say it qualifies as street photography even though it's color?
Thank you for any responses,
Neil
Trust me, that is probably one of the best examples of Street posted here in a long time... for reasons you may not realize. But to BW vs color first.
Street is an unusual genre because we aspire to photograph intangible relationships between tangible objects in a way meant to fully characterize the intangible. If your photo shows off all the characteristics of a person it is portraiture not Street. And that is part of why there aren't as many color Street images as BW.
Color adds another layer of complexity. It is hard enough to photograph an intangible concept in BW, and much harder to deal with it in color. The commonly seen color adjustments, specifically saturation, destroy the ability to characterize a scene where it is the relationships rather than the objects themselves that are important.
Never the less there are many very good Street shots that use color very effectively. Your image is pretty nice, though you may or may not agree with what it means to others. Lots of times the way a Street shot demonstrates a relationship is by showing some interesting but unintended quirk. Lots if images of people strolling past shop windows or an odd sign are examples.
Yours, in front of a building with a sign relating to scientology (most people think it is a cult) with a seemingly unsuspecting observer and with a sign that says "free stress test" is just too much! And color doesn't hinder it at all.
ncammack wrote:
Hello all,
I'm pretty new here at UHH and stumbled across the Street Photography section which I find quite fascinating! As my post title says "Is Street Photography Always B/W?" If so, why is that?
I took the following a while back, would you say it qualifies as street photography even though it's color?
Thank you for any responses,
Neil
In some places, one has to pay for the Stress Test!
Street photography relies on interpretation. As mentioned above, color is another layer that can complicate, make, or even diminish the interpretation of the image. The B&W is for the most part tradition. But it also is a means of concentrating the story in the image.
In History of Art, it can be seen the various schools of interpretations. The same holds for the photographic arts. "Street Photography" is more a statement of the locale of the shot. What is shot is as diverse as what can be found on a street, from a simple pebble in the tar to a blow out riot of people on the street. The vision of the photographer is open to the interpretation of the viewer. Color can be part of that image. So can motion be a part.
PS, after the stress test, one may be required to take the "dreaded" Color Test! (I remember those "good old days", reading about the birth pains of Scientology! I am actually older than the cult!)
To me street photography is showing the relationship and contrast between man and the urban environment.
Stephan G wrote:
... "Street Photography" is more a statement of the locale of the shot. What is shot is as diverse as what can be found on a street, from a simple pebble in the tar to a blow out riot of people on the street. The vision of the photographer is open to the interpretation of the viewer.
That is a gross, but common, misunderstanding about Street Photography. It has virtually nothing to do with a location.
The word "street" refers to a community rather than a roadway. The boundaries of the community might be in a building, on a beach, in a forest or at the side of a road.
The vision of the photographer is no more and no less interpreted by the viewer. Some people try to imagine every possible story that any photogragh could be representing. But as with other genres the photographer's intent is to direct such imagination to a particular place.
The intent with Street Photography is to photograph the abstraction that is the intangible relationships between tangible objects that are examples of "the human condition" and any environment where it exist.
Because the subject is an abstraction itself, Street Photography is one of the more difficult genres of photography.
A quick simple answer. NO.
ole sarg wrote:
To me street photography is showing the relationship and contrast between man and the urban environment.
Why an urban environment? That may well be your prefered style, but it defines only a style and not the genre.
Lots of Street is done in rural locations.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.