Toronto Photography Meetup Group

I was wondering who are some of the members here who shoot mainly street photography?

Ryan (Metrix) does a lot, he's become quite decent at it

I have met Matrix a few times and Vilk is someone who I quite often meet in the city. I don't think these two dudes call themselves street photographers, they're more like photo artists.

I guess what I wanted to know is if anyone here shamelessly admits to being a street photographer, something which I do.

I guess I've been called worse When I'm taking photographs I'm pretending to be a photographer. Sometimes I take photographs while on the street so yes sometimes I'm pretending to be a Street Photographer.

who cares about labels, we all shoot in the street

I don't even like my stuff...so if you don't like what you see join the f'in club.

When it came to the catty photographer I thought the wedding had the street beat....however, I remember the days of usenet when you didn't dare to provide links to your own stuff before posting unsolicited about another's work. Oh, the good old days

Winogrand said "street photographer? I think that's a stupid term. I have a booked called the animals, are they going to call me a zoo photographer?" LOLOLOL

Still waiting to see who admits to the disease...

There are quite a few on here that shoot street. Whether they call it that or will involve themselves in the discussion is another matter.

Its not possible to be an all-round photographer. One should pick one genre and stick with it... Personally I fail at portraits, fashion, still life, food, pets, weddings, or any other form of photography that requires one to be "creative". I like to photograph people in their environment - which is the city. I'm pretty clear what is my area of interest photographically, hence I admit to being a street photographer.


One thing which puts most amateurs off from street photography is the cult of the Leica. But then again in order for one to become a street photographer its essential to overcome all that nonsense and find one's own method... Now when I see someone with a Leica, my automatic reaction is, there goes another poser pretending to be a street photographer, not a nice thought but my experience has validated that bias.

Complete shit. Speak for yourself.

I don't even feel half satisfied with my street photography, always in doubt and raking my brain how to improve and add to that another genre and my brain cells would implode.

Let's see your street photography then, show us your flickr/web page or something. I learned a long time ago that pictures speak louder than words (cliche)

We're our own worst critics. I do tend to agree that most will be better at a specific genre of photography. However, if photography flows in your veins, then you can never fail in any. It's just a different POV.

Most people out of politeness would praise any picture and some really don't know any better, so its best to be one's own critique... In fact sometime one should just reject a picture because its liked by others lol that's one way of editing.



www.500px.com/workprints

More like documentary photojournalism than street photography, but then again, it's just labels

You just described Vilk. Then again he had the good sense to sell much of his Leica gear You really should be less prejudice, it will hurt your chances getting anywhere in your quest to become a better photographer.

Not that you have to prove anything but you should also consider adding some more recent and varied work when showing people your portfolio. One protest shoot is but a starting point.

The heart of street photography is social documentary and photo-journalistic/editorial aspect of it. This is something that people fail to realize. All great works of street photography are social documentaries, from Robert Franks's The Americans to even Alex Webb's Istanbul.

Street photography never works as single images, it has to be a series and it has to have a theme or narrative going on in the background. At the heart of street photography is photojournalism, but more like editorial work. Its not just randomly shooting at anything that walks... While that's where everyone starts, ultimately a street photographer needs to find a subject or work on short-term projects like the photos I posted, or a long term project.



Then I succeeded in my goal.

Vilk makes fun of me and I try to make fun of him. He calls my camera girly and I say he needs to get a real camera (digital) so me and Vilk are cool sniping at one another.


And if you're really interested in my work, next time you see me in one of those lame street festivals, ask me about it. I'm not ready for internet fame - yet.

No interest in asking about your photography, photography is a visual media, a photograph is an object, to talk about photography without a photograph is just a lot of BS. Anyone can call them self a ???? Photographer but it means nothing without the photograph!


P.S. If your attitude is that they are all lame events why bother going?

I completely disagree with this. I do not consider myself any sort of expert in street photography, but I do know ALL photography, especially street photography, is about that that defining moment. Yes a series can be very powerful in relaying something more complex in nature, but some of the most powerful images are "one offs" that capture the essence of what the photographer is trying to relay to his/her audience, or society in general.

lol, shooting with a leica doesn't necessary have anything to do with street photography. I shoot my m9 for everything i enjoy shooting it with .

I'd love to have a M9 and I will shoot with it even if people call me a poser, but that is because I like rangefinder type viewfinders not because of Leica brand... Right now, I'm seriously considering Sony Nex-7, and with cheap classic Zuiko lenses it can be a very serious kit.

The problem is not Leica M cameras and their lenses, the problem is those who abuse Leica cameras and lenses as a means of conspicuous consumption and then go on the internet forums and try to bully the green amateurs into thinking that Leica M is the only camera for street photography... The famous Eric Kim uses the $5000+ Summilux 35/1.4 at f16! (hyperfocal) so he won't have to focus - that pretty much sums up the Leica idiocy, isn't it?

When the first time I got interested in rangefinders and sought help online, none of those posers told me start with a fixed lens RF like Olympus 35Sp or Konica Auto S2, they got me to buy a Leica M and a cheap CV lens, and of course later on I learned my lesson and in fact those two cheap fixed lens RFs run circles around a M body with that Cheap CV lens - not only with reliability, ease of use (reloading) but also their lenses were far superior to anything from CV and I never had a Leica lens so I wouldn't know about that.

Anyway, the table has turned on Leica cult with Fuji X100, Xpro and Sony Nex-7, the game has changed overnight.

Don't you have your own brain?

What sort of stupid question is that?

With the 'in your face' type of street photography which seem popular these days hyper focal makes total sense since you don't have time to focus, manual or auto. You quickly take a photo and run away. Don't see what's idiotic about it. I think it is an **** thing to do since I think personal space should be considered even in public but the idea behind the technique makes sense.

Its not that, its when you buy a $5000 Leica lens and shoot at f16 and use flash, you might as well buy a $100 lens from ebay and it will be the same thing.

All lenses are not created equal. I have never used a leica lens (can't afford one), but I have bought enough Nikon lenses to know there is definitely a difference between something inexpensive (consumer grade) and an expensive professional grade lens. f16 does not equalize all lenses, far from it. sorry to be blunt, but your inexperience is showing through if you think a $5000 lens and a $100 lens being shot at f16 will produce the same results (with all other variables being equal).

Look up diffraction.

And I suggest you look here (scroll down)

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutori ... r-size.htm

- there is not set point of when diffraction sets in - you can't assume its at f16. Besides the point. a cheaper lens will still show worse results or a higher quality lens - even with diffraction setting in. There are too many variables in camera/lens combinations and in sensor size, etc to make any sort of blanket statement as you are.

What a polarizing subject. "Street Photography" has to be the worst label ever created. It's a stupid blanket label for anyone who likes to document life through the lens of a camera. Stop worrying about what others are doing, what they are shooting and which gear they are shooting it with.

Why does it matter what Eric Kim is shooting with? Does it matter if he knows how to use his camera? Does it matter how much he paid for it? He's been shooting for less than 5 years, he's having fun and doing something he's passionate about. If he makes enough money to buy a gold plated, Swarovski encrusted Leica M9; why wouldn't he? If even just to see which camera feels best in his hand and is comfortable to use 8 hours a day. Trust me when I tell you, he doesn't take himself or his critics seriously.

If a painter imagines or records a scene on canvas using a wooden handled brush or a golden handled brush do we judge him based on the brush he used? Whether his hand was worthy of the expensive golden brush or the wooden handled brush? The results speak for themselves.

A camera is a tool that records scenes that you see and envision in your mind. A person with a good eye and sense of composition will be able to take great photos whether they know how to use the camera in their hands or not. Photography isn't about the camera's it's about the RESULTS.