Does anyone do Street Photography with LF?

[Frank Petronio]

If you go over to the press photogs forums, or the sportshooter.com forum, you'll see that dozens of photojournalists have tried to copy Burnett's Aero Ektar on Speed Graphic approach -- and many are selling their experimental cameras. Burnett was hardly the first to use that camera and lens but he started a trend, and many have followed.

I did too I guess, but I feel kinda dirty for doing so ;-)

Seriously, the standard $250 Crown Graphic outfit with a 127 or 135 press lens is pretty darn good for making practical pictures... the best bang for the buck ever. You hardly need to deal with the expense and hassle of an Aero/Speed unless you really want the effect and are willing to blow more film.

[r.e.]

jananian,

The second photograph (Surman's) appears to have been taken at night. If that is correct, how did you freeze the motion to the degree that you appear to have done? It looks like a shutter speed of 1/30 second or thereabouts, which even with a fairly fast lens suggests a very large push in development.

I went to the Jeff Wall show at MOMA last week, and found it interesting to look at some of his images from the perspective of street photography, such as his "in front of a nightclub" (2006): http://time-blog.com/looking_around/...e_indispe.html Of course, that picture is not a street photograph, but a construction. Indeed, I doubt that it is technically feasible to make an image like that on the street (low light, frozen motion, lots of depth of field, not to mention the intricacy of the composition). Love him or hate him, Wall's work is remarkable - reproductions on the internet and in books do not come close to capturing the actual images.

Speaking of Wall, most of the photographs at MoMA are very large scale backlit transparencies. How is it done while maintaining resolution at acceptable levels? I know that "in front of a nightclub" is a composite of many photographs, but what about the rest?

[r.e.]

Seriously, the standard $250 Crown Graphic outfit with a 127 or 135 press lens is pretty darn good for making practical pictures...

I think that the vast majority of street photographers use 35mm cameras, and occasionally medium format, precisely because using a 4x5 camera imposes, in comparison, significant limitations in terms of bulk, focusing, focal length, lens speed and the ability to disappear into the woodwork. I'd love to be proven wrong, but when it comes to street photography (at least as I am using the term, which goes beyond events such as parades and demonstrations and political campaigns where cameras are not just expected, but encouraged, and where light is usually ample), it seems to me that a 4x5 camera imposes a lot of restrictions. Fine, of course, if one uses a 4x5 in circumstances where the limitations are acceptable.

If one goes to an exhibit of "street photography", such as the current Cartier-Bresson exhibit at the International Center of Photography, and asks the question for each photograph "Could this have been done with a 4x5 camera?", the answers, for me at least, are not encouraging.

[jnantz]

hi r.e. --

i shot that with a speed graphic and a barrel lens at around something like 1/30
(it was using the camera's focal plane shutter so who knows ?)
... it was taken an early spring morning in 1997 ... overcast, windy and rainy,
the lights stayed on late in the mornings when it wasn't bright enough for the
sensors and they didn't realize it was daytime ...

i didn't push development ... i probably used xtol developer 1:2, and processed
as recommend for tmy400 ...

john

jnanian,

The second photograph (Surman's) appears to have been taken at night. If that is correct, how did you freeze the motion to the degree that you appear to have done? It looks like a shutter speed of 1/30 second or thereabouts, which even with a fairly fast lens suggests a very large push in development.

I went to the Jeff Wall show at MOMA last week, and found it interesting to look at some of his images from the perspective of street photography, such as his "in front of a nightclub" (2006): http://time-blog.com/looking_around/...e_indispe.html Of course, that picture is not a street photograph, but a construction. Indeed, I doubt that it is technically feasible to make an image like that on the street (low light, frozen motion, lots of depth of field, not to mention the intricacy of the composition). Love him or hate him, Wall's work is remarkable - reproductions on the internet and in books do not come close to capturing the actual images.

Speaking of Wall, most of the photographs at MoMA are very large scale backlit transparencies. How is it done while maintaining resolution at acceptable levels? I know that "in front of a nightclub" is a composite of many photographs, but what about the rest?

[r.e.]

Thanks, now I get it. I wondered why the lights weren't blown out.

[r.e.]

There are some fun upsides to doing street photography with larger formats. Last weekend, I was out with a Mamiya 7 and 150mm lens (purchased from Ken Lee actually) when I was approached by four teenage boys, aged 15 or 16. One of them did the talking:

He: Sir, we were wondering if you could settle a bet for us. What kind of camera is that?

Me: it's a Mamiya rangefinder.

He: I mean, is it 35mm or what?

Me: Ahh, it's a medium format camera.

He: Thanks.

And then he said to his friends, as they were walking away, in that triumphant inflection peculiar to teenage boys:

Told ya so.

[Gordon Moat]

A few things to consider. I believe it might have been an interview with Joel Meyerwitz about him using a large format camera for some of his New York City street images. Whether him, or someone else equally famous, one thing that stood out is that people largely ignored him and what he was doing. It reminds me a bit of how some people complain about strangers always getting in front of your camera while you are trying to take a photo. Turn that around and use it to your advantage, then you can get people and street life shots off your tripod mounted 4x5.

Note on the backlit large images, you can get DuraTrans or similar prints made at some pro labs. These are often used in the food service industry for signage. I think there is a display life for these before the backlighting creates noticeable fading, though that is something you can ask about. There are a few other names for similar types of prints.

One thing I have considered is the bean bag approach. Basically take one of those photo beanbag things, and use that as a steady rest for a 4x5; this would avoid needing a tripod. Anyone try something like this?

Some well known images termed street photography were set-up shots. Viewers of your images do not need to know whether you happened upon a scene, or created a scene. As long as the result looks spontaneous, it could be convincing. I have always made people aware I was taking photos. Anyone who scowled at me was not photographed; when you are obvious, it can be easier to get shots you might want. Sometimes old looking or vintage gear attracts a different sort of attention, and people might want to be photographed by you . . . this seems almost like performance art.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio

[Mark Sawyer]

A few things to consider. I believe it might have been an interview with Joel Meyerwitz about him using a large format camera for some of his New York City street images. Whether him, or someone else equally famous, one thing that stood out is that people largely ignored him and what he was doing...

What? Commuters ignoring a famous photographer working with a large format camera in their midst?

Why, that's almost as bad as commuters ignoring a famous violinist performing on an heirloom instrument in their midst!

But that could never happen...

[r.e.]

Whether him, or someone else equally famous, one thing that stood out is that people largely ignored him and what he was doing.

Some well known images termed street photography were set-up shots.A G Studio

Yes, if one is using a large format camera on a busy street corner or intersection in a major city, people will ultimately ignore what one is doing. That may be urban landscape photography, with a few people around in the background, but is it really street photography?

Surely it is obvious that photographs that have been set up are not street photographs. To take an obvious example, discussed above, nobody in his right mind would describe Jeff Wall's "in front of a nightclub" as a street photograph.

Here's a suggestion. Go into a pub at night with a press camera and start taking photographs of people, in available light, for which the criterion is that the photograph is unposed. Then let us know how you did it, technically (and hey, if you are running around local pubs at night using a press camera and flash without permission, and getting away with it, I'd love to hear about it). And let us know what happened next, especially if you persisted after the first two or three photographs. I'll tell you one thing, from experience with a Leica and a Mamiya Rangefinder, you run a very high risk of being told to stop using your camera and/or to leave. The subject may not know that he or she is being photographed, but a whole lot of other people see what you are doing, and they are quite liable to both notice and complain. Lesson: take five photographs, and you are going to have a problem; so have a lot of patience, and wait for the one right photograph.

Doing this kind of photography is complicated, ethically and practically, and the problems are, or should be, obvious to anyone who has done it for about a week. Which makes me wonder why everybody in this thread seems to think that it is a walk in the park. Because it isn't, which becomes apparent the first time that somebody goes up one side of you and down the other for what you are doing, especially if they start talking about seizing your camera and/or your film. And yes, that happens to anyone who is doing street photography, and as far as I can figure out, it happens regularly. One of the first things that you learn is how to handle things when you get challenged.

Here's a suggestion for someone who wants to try this. It comes from personal experience, a few days ago. Forget the 4x5 press camera. Go into a gay bar with a Leica and a fast lens and some Iflord 3200 and start taking pictures of people. When you are finished, assuming that you last more than a few minutes without being thrown out, I'd love to hear how it went, including from a straight technical perspective. If your conclusion is that you can do the same thing with a 4x5 press camera, believe me, I'd love to hear about it.

And of course the big questions are, what are the ethics of doing this, and does it in fact have an artistic justification.

[Gordon Moat]

I have done nightclub photography. I would never try to sneak photos, which is what I thnk you might be describing. I find it very easy to let people know what you are doing, and avoid problems. Anyone trying to sneak photos quite likely could piss off someone. Does it have to be sneaky to call it street photography? If that is true, then I have no interest in being sneaky; though hopefully that is false.

There are technical issues working with a 4x5 in a nightclub, pub, or bar. I have only done low light and available light with 35mm in such places. Blasting a flash looses some of the effect of the location, though I suppose one could run around like Weegee and do that. E200 pushed 4 2/3 stops was my main choice in the past, though Kodak do not make that in 4x5.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio