Photographing strangers

dnme

as the title says, say you are walking around town, have any of you any advice for photographing people?

I'm interested in getting people in natural settings (prefer to capture them without being obvious). Is it ok to capture folks without telling them? do you tell them afterwards, does it matter? how do you point a big black box at folks without being obvious ?

Covey

Engage people - talk to them, smile etc.
Get in close - longish lenses aren't the best tbh.
Have a plan - know what your looking for and how to get it.

Have fun.

T.

Rb

I can't see how wearing a gorilla costume could hurt either.

jenny2hat

I don't see the problem with it, but knew someone before who would go and demand that their photographs be deleted O_o
Just make sure they don't know...be casual.

Covey

jenny2hat wrote: »

Just make sure they don't know..

Why be secretive, what's the advantage ???

jenny2hat

Covey wrote: »

Why be secretive, what's the advantage ???

In case they don't like being photographed without permission?

Covey

Then don't do it. Would you like that if you felt that way.

Forgot to say in my first post.

Respect people.

Slidinginfinity

jenny2hat wrote: »

I don't see the problem with it, but knew someone before who would go and demand that their photographs be deleted O_o
Just make sure they don't know...be casual.

There are people out there who react badly when they discover someone secretly taking their photo. Recently almost got in a physical altercation with a idiot who 'thought' I took a picture of his partner. He was mistaken but that didn't seem to matter to her.

Covey wrote: »

Why be secretive, what's the advantage ???

The only advantage I see is you get a unposed/real moment.

Covey

Slidinginfinity wrote: »

The only advantage I see is you get a unposed/real moment.

There are numerous ways of doing that, probably to much better effect , than sneaking around in the shadows and having little respect for people, though.

humberklog

There's loads of different ways of taking pictures of strangers in public. For me I break it down into three simple catagories depending on what type of picture I want to take. These three seperate approaches give me 3 different looks from the subject and dynamics to the final image.

1. Ask for permission, they'll immediately become aware of themselves.
2. Subject notices the camera but don't ask permission, just snap away.
3. Photograph subject with out them knowing anything about a camera on them.


I put up some examples on the Combing the Streets thread a good while back. That threads on page 2.

jenny2hat

Just be careful, you never know with people.

Covey

Agree HK except for no. 1.

You just require a bit more patience and know how to get a completely "unposed" shot.

dazftw

Waist level viewfinder ftw

Walk and shoot at the same time.. Its a hell of alot harder but it makes you less noticeable.

Stop and point the camera straight ahead of you and you should be able to catch the person in the left/right hand side of the frame as there walking past.

If you see someone sitting down that looks interesting.. ask them! (im still having problems with this)

Im starting a series on peoples lower half, from the waist down. I saw a photo like this before and it always made me wonder what that person looks like but ill never know :rolleyes: I have a few already and I quite like how its turning out.

humberklog

Covey wrote: »

Agree HK except for no. 1.

You just require a bit more patience and know how to get a completely "unposed" shot.

Well sure, sure Covey. Mind you I find No.1 the most risky in terms of getting exactly what you want because when you involve another person in the composition of the photo (when you snap without asking or with their knowledge they aren't exacxtly involved in the process) then the variables are mutiplied as you really never know how someone will react in front of the camera. You've really got to ride your luck more when you openly involve strangers.

Covey

humberklog wrote: »

Well sure, sure Covey. Mind you I find No.1 the most risky in terms of getting exactly what you want because when you involve another person in the composition of the photo (when you snap without asking or with their knowledge they aren't exacxtly involved in the process) then the variables are mutiplied as you really never know how someone will react in front of the camera. You've really got to ride your luck more when you openly involve strangers.

True to an extent. However, you'll probably increase your "success" rate quite a bit. Engaging the person and asking to take "a few shots" doesn't mean they have to be taken there and then. Thats when the bit of banter comes into it

humberklog

Covey wrote: »

True to an extent. However, you'll probably increase your "success" rate quite a bit. Engaging the person and asking to take "a few shots" doesn't mean they have to be taken there and then. Thats when the bit of banter comes into it

Indeed it is, but I find it easier to break it down to those three point and fron those polints you get strands (or sub sections). If you break it down to as simple as possible it's much easier to crack on and get over your inhibitions. I'll have a scoot about for some new examples.
But yeah I do agree with you but that's part of the discovering and fine tuning.

Covey

Yeah I agree as well. I'm not saying every shot should be "ask first", but the overriding principal should be respect people.

CabanSail

For this street shot.



She seemed to be quite happy with the attention. She did look directly at me & smile, but I was looking at the back of the camera & missed it. In this case the subject seemed to be happy with the attention.

I have taken people on the bus, where it's quite obvious I am pointing a DSLR around & had no problems. I did not want to ask as it would have spoiled the moment I was trying to capture.

The only time I had a weird experience was using my G9 on the London Underground. There were some people in close contact that made interesting contrasts. This bloke next to me kept yelling out "He's taking pictures, he's taking pictures" Nobody else seemed to mind & I was not interested in photographing him.

There was also the incident of trying to do Long Exposures of the Luas at Stephens Green & got hassled by the Veoila CSO's & their Security Thugs. I asked the Thugs in Yellow jackets to show me some ID or Authortity & they just kept saying that they have it because of their Yellow Jackets (I have one like that at home) so I wanted a photo of them so I could identify them when making a complaint. They were very shy & said I was not allowed to photograph them.

AnCatDubh

I don't think any form should be dismissed or that there is a correct way of doing it. Yes, of course respect should always be in your thoughts but I think this should extend to all styles / genres of photography.

I wouldn't knock the completely unaware shot. It of course depends on the person but the 'naturalness' of the composition when it's good is near next impossible to recreate if they are aware in any shape or form of a camera pointed at them. One exception to this of course is the situation that you have asked permission and then remained with your subject while they conveniently forget about you for a time.

Formal street portraits can be wonderful - this where you've engaged, requested permission, and got that fabulously sharp shot with everything in control.

Informal shooting / candids / snapshots where there is no time to prepare - you are simply capturing something as it happens in a documentary way; people coming and going, Grafton Street on a Saturday afternoon, the wait for the luas, or whatever; can often produce brilliant compositional results (perhaps a little crop needed ).

With the candid street portraits you can and will get a great load of c**p which has to be binned straight away - people walking into your shot / persons with strange unnatural looks on their faces, etc.. But for the moments that you 'click' (pardon the pun) it can be nothing short of magical.

The one aspect I think is awkward is if a subject becomes aware of the photographer, and immediately has the guard up, - particularly if the photographer persists to get the shot. This is unlike Cabansail's approach where the lady knew she was being photographed and was into 'it'. It made a nice picture at the end of the day because the subject was comfortable with it.

Beno

I know that when i was in Nigeria most people didn't like getting their picture taken. Mainly because they always felt that you were going to use it against them. Another reason was that some of them felt that every picture was taking a part of their soul!!!

But once they knew you most of them would come you and ask you to take a picture of them

*eadaoin

one night recently on the luas there was a guy taking photos without asking permission. he was doing it kind of sneakily, like holding the camera in a way that suggested he wasn't taking photos but we could hear the shutter clicking. he was holding it with the back facing down towards his body, so there was no way he could have seen what the photo was going to look like, only a rough idea of what he was capturing. it was really weird and made me uncomfortable, i personally don't see the point of taking photos that way when you've no idea of whats in the viewfinder.

he took a photo of my boyfriend & i when we looked away & my boyfriend got quite angry, he didn't like the sneakiness of it and i think he felt a bit like the guy was taking liberties. if he had just directly been taking photos, or even asked permission perhaps we might have felt better about it.

another time at a bus stop on georges st this guy had his camera hung around his neck by the strap so the back of it was resting on his stomach & he was just clicking away, again with no good idea of what was in the viewfinder and it was just plain weird.

i think it's better to ask people's permission first, you never know when you might meet someone who won't like how you're acting.

Rb

*eadaoin wrote: »

one night recently on the luas there was a guy taking photos without asking permission. he was doing it kind of sneakily, like holding the camera in a way that suggested he wasn't taking photos but we could hear the shutter clicking. he was holding it with the back facing down towards his body, so there was no way he could have seen what the photo was going to look like, only a rough idea of what he was capturing. it was really weird and made me uncomfortable, i personally don't see the point of taking photos that way when you've no idea of whats in the viewfinder.

he took a photo of my boyfriend & i when we looked away & my boyfriend got quite angry, he didn't like the sneakiness of it and i think he felt a bit like the guy was taking liberties. if he had just directly been taking photos, or even asked permission perhaps we might have felt better about it.

another time at a bus stop on georges st this guy had his camera hung around his neck by the strap so the back of it was resting on his stomach & he was just clicking away, again with no good idea of what was in the viewfinder and it was just plain weird.

i think it's better to ask people's permission first, you never know when you might meet someone who won't like how you're acting.

You'd better not let your boyfriend know there's hidden security cameras on the luas so.

*eadaoin

Rb wrote: »

You'd better not let your boyfriend know there's hidden security cameras on the luas so.

i think he might already be aware of that from all the CCTV signs and announcements

one way or another it's important to be aware that sneakiness may anger some people, it's just something to keep in mind if you're thinking about that approach.

Anouilh

I'm beginning to wonder if women may not have an easier life as street photographers. Nobody seems to take much notice of me when I take street shots, but I have worked out a way of looking non-threatening. Mostly I take in the full streetscape, and if people happen to be in the frame, I wait until they move into a pleasing position.



Working on the photos afterwards to make people less recognisable is probably worth doing, as I have here.

However, there are so many photographers on the streets people are generally relaxed with them. Travelling on public transport is another matter. I would find it odd to take photos of fellow travellers.

AnimalRights

I took on the Army and won. :cool:

gerk86

Anouilh wrote: »

Mostly I take in the full streetscape, and if people happen to be in the frame, I wait until they move into a pleasing position.

Yea, I was doing that when I took this. Pretending to be taking the background. Although the fellow could have been just trying to avoid the busker eyeballing him and not even seen me....

duffarama

I was reading Kirk Tuck's blog today and this entry applies to this thread

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2009/10/irrational-fear-of-people-in-public.html

Engage people for better pictures

humberklog

duffarama wrote: »

Engage people for better pictures

Hmmm....I'd say engage people for a better photo where you require the subject to be engaged in the photo. That sentence doesn't take in the photos where you want to capture people completely unaware of the camera and are busy doing the thing you want to capture.
It also misses out on the photo where in a split second of realisation the subject doesn't want the photo taken, these can be great shots too...

Of course good is all in the eye of the beholder or the person holding the camera, but I sometimes like a good, really strong reaction...

Covey

humberklog wrote: »

Hmmm....I'd say engage people for a better photo where you require the subject to be engaged in the photo. [/IMG][/URL]

Thats the whole point I was trying to make at the start. By engaging people you don't have to have subjects that appear that way in the photo at all. You can get the best of unposed and inter-related stuff that way.

humberklog

Covey wrote: »

Thats the whole point I was trying to make at the start. By engaging people you don't have to have subjects that appear that way in the photo at all. You can get the best of unposed and inter-related stuff that way.

Oh yeah I was fully with you too Covey and I am with that sentence, indeed engaged photos are (or can be) great. But it is only one avenue to take when approaching taking a photo of strangers. There are loads of roads that can be taken depending on what exactly you want or need to convey.
There are far more natural avenues of opportunities with strangers than with known subjects.

AnCatDubh

Covey wrote: »

By engaging people you don't have to have subjects that appear that way in the photo at all. You can get the best of unposed and inter-related stuff that way.

I've probably lost the flow of the thread but what way are you referring to ? In the humberklog post??? (sorry - brain may not be presently functioning )

Covey

Poor english alright

By engaging people you don't have to have subjects that appear that way (as presented above. or indeed engaged with the camera at all).

You can get the best of unposed and inter-related stuff that way (by engaging your subject)

humberklog

Covey wrote: »

Poor english alright

By engaging people you don't have to have subjects that appear that way (as presented above. or indeed engaged with the camera at all).

You can get the best of unposed and inter-related stuff that way (by engaging your subject)

Don't worry I knew what you meant:pac:.
Still and all though I'm not sold on the idea of wanting a certain natural photo and then engaging the subjects to achieve that. Whilst that could work for the look you require there is a moment (or opportunity) lost once familiarity is brought into the equation. It is possible but it is a replication of naturalness.

It reminds me of when in the army, you'd be milling about and brought into line and then the order "as you were" is called. Well although I'd carry on as best as before the moment I was before interruption that moment will not ever be regained while the person that calls the command is present.