Take It To the Streets?

I've been reading a discussion on Photocritic.com about the future of street photography. One poster asked if there were markets for that kind of photograph, and if there were ways to make a living from it. The responses were largely negative -- several people said that kind of work was of interest as a hobby or with limited local exposure, such as in a coffee house or craft fair, but that nobody really buys it. Others observed that street pix are problematic because of the issue of model releases -- fear of legal repercussions tends to stifle the kind of candid street shot that made people like Cartier-Bresson famous. The other question raised had to do with the genre itself -- is "street photography" as it's been traditionally understood actually dead?

I've been asked many times what kind of photography I do, and it was difficult to describe it until terms like "urban dereliction," "urban decay" and "urban landscape"  came into currency.  Photographers like me are interested in what happens on the street itself, when there are no people around, and what we find there. One dereliction photographer pointed out that what is fascinating to us is the traces left behind by people -- buildings, found art, abandoned items and so forth - which creates the urban landscape. This ornate trash can on Tucson's bohemian Fourth Avenue is one example.

Street photography, on the other hand, is something different, focusing on the candid capture of street life and the movement of people.  And in our litigation happy society, when people are finding inconvenient images of themselves all over the Internet, the person with the camera becomes a threat and the  shot is something to be feared.  Stifles creativity just a tad, I'd say.  So maybe street photography as it's been traditionally known really is dead, or at least moribund, and street photographs have lost the impact that they once had.  Related types of photography like the photoessay or photojournalistic work do seem to be flourishing though.  Maybe it has to do with that blending of narrative and image.

Anyway, although I've always counted the great street photographers to be my main inspiration, I'll stick with photographing that gutted couch I saw in the alley the other day.  I don't think it's too concerned about signing a release.

Tripods and the Cityscape

A recent post on MalekTips  offers reasons "Why You Should Avoid Using Tripods in the City."  When I was a photography student, my teachers were pretty firm about the reasons for using a tripod. Ken Milburn, my Sessions mentor,  once said that if you dislike tripods, too bad.  Better pictures trump everything.   But this posting raised some valid reasons for leaving the three-legged friend behind when photographing in the city.

According to MalekTips, using a tripod for cityscape photography can attract unwanted attention and even lead to problems with the law.

The posting points out that amateur photographers using hand-held equipment rarely have problems with security or police on city streets.  Set up a tripod, though, and your status may change from tourist to professional in the eyes of post-9/11 law enforcement, opening the doors for anything from general hassling to arrest.  In some areas there are restrictions on photographing certain landmarks, government buildings and transit stations. In others, a permit for professional photography is required.  So since it's important to be able  to photograph the urban landscape unobtrusively,  the MalekTips piece concludes with advice on avoiding camera shake with your handheld equipment.

The question of using a tripod or not actually speaks to some bigger issues about what urban photography (cityscape, street photography, dereliction or whatever you care to call it) really is, and what we who practice it really do. I think that the element of surprise, of finding the art in everyday reality, is key to this kind of photography. In a way we're practicing stealth photography -- capturing images unposed, unstaged, without the artifice of stage direction or deliberate composition.     And if that's true, then using a tripod might well interfere with that spirit of spontaneity and photographie verite that characterizes the best of urban landscape photography.

Comments, anyone? Have you run into problems (legal or otherwise) photographing city streets? What's your take on the tripod debate?

Photographing the Ruins

I have the opportunity to photograph a burned Harley!  And I'm going to the railroad yard to explore the graffiti covered cars.  Rust, decaying wood,  the skeletal remains of a collapsed building -- these are the subjects of my heart, the targets of my trusty Rebel with its Sigma telephoto lens.

A student asked the other day why I was so excited about my shoot at the abandoned warehouses in the barrio. Why didn't I want to photograph babies, she asked, or sunsets, or puppies?  Well ... there's beauty in everything. And what can I say?  A collapsing shed just draws my eye.  

I was pleased to see the recent (September 09)  "Dereliction Special" issue of Practical Photography, which showcased photographs of rusting cars, abandoned houses and decaying barns -- just my style!  Photography like this goes under various labels: urban decay, urban dereliction, urban landscape, industrial, grunge.  What it all has in common is a fascination with the remnants and traces of human creation and a love of the strange beauty left behind when things are abandoned, trashed or left to decay.

Search the web for galleries; browse the stock sites using any of the keywords I just mentioned. You'll find some stunning images, offering glimpses of  a world so many never notice. Over the next few weeks in this blog I'll be talking more about dereliction photography, how it's done, and where it can be seen.  I'll include links to galleries and photographers and discuss images of my own.  There's an old quote: "Rust never sleeps."  And sometimes -- it creates art.