Talk:Street photography/Archive 1

message: I have added an image to the Techniques section. While it is one of my own I feel it contributes to the article as it deals with the subject matter being discussed in the aforementioned section. Brings a bit of colour to the article, too. :) --^pirate 17:24, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good picture!  SchuminWeb (Talk) 21:21, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! :) --^pirate 21:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Added New Image

message: I have no knowledge of street photography, but since No Flash Corner says it is a "term in street photography" .. I thought the people who read this Talk page should know that there's an AfD on the No Flash Corner article. --EarthFurst 02:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  AfD on No Flash Corner 

message: "Street photography is a type of documentary photography — without explicit social agenda — that usually features people in candid situations in public places such as streets, parks, beaches, malls, political conventions, and other settings"
Without explicit social agenda?   Is this accurate?   In terms of the works of Hine, Frank, Winogrand, Arbus - to name a few - I think much of street photography has a social agenda.  
Jgaff 06:42, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition? 

message: I'm not sure that Alfred Eisenstaedt's photo of the V-J Day kiss is an appropriate main photo given that it was a posed situation using models.  Because it was a posed situation with models, I feel it doesn't it qualify as street photography.  You could certainly talk about the history of the photo though. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.91.119.254 (talk) 16:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  V-J Day kiss 

message: Genghis45 has repeatedly inserted a self-serving paragraph into this article.  I don't find this contribution to be necessary to the article and have reverted it several times.  To avoid running afoul of the 3 revert rule, I'd like to call this edit to the attention of other editors for your consideration.  TheMindsEye 02:26, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Duly noted, and I've reverted it a few times myself.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:11, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

text: And blocked for 3RR violation.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:49, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genghis45's addition 

message: I'm going to probably start cutting this article down soon to remove the how-to content, opinions, and original research.  Just FYI.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 00:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Completed.  The article is now a stub.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 15:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  I'm going to start cutting soon 

message: I think we should change the photograph that goes with this article, it is the most uncharacteristic photograph to demonstrate street photography that I can imagine without it being of some completely differing topic altogether. For example it doesn't depict some emotional moment between two people, it doesn't include some kind of gag; it is instead just a snapshot, something that street photography can resemble but isn't. Lopifalko (talk) 19:25, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In which case, find a good freely-licensed photo that shows what you're thinking about and be bold.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 19:55, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Lopifalko. The photo is a bad example of street photography. I'd be willing to give this photo or any other of my photos for this page for free. I can change the licensing to whatever is required if needed. --Jaredkse (talk) 16:23, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Jaredkse, what you proposed would be a good image for this purpose, I would encourage you to upload it to Wikipedia commons --rogerd (talk) 19:04, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Great. I've uploaded the image to Wikipedia commons with a creative commons license and will change it on the main street photography page.  --Jaredkse (talk) 21:33, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  In my opinion Jaredkse's image isn't a good example of street photography as the people are only a minor part of the scene and it doesn't particularly say anything, resulting in an ill thought out snapshot feel that doesn't have any gravitas. Lopifalko (talk) 15:16, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Photograph Inappropriate

message: Can I ask why you mention Adams? Very odd.
Why does it mention political conventions, in its place it should read 'Public Events'. Can we assume the Author is American. Street photography is an international occupation, you need to keep it so otherwise it falls into a western definition.
Malls are private property so I dont know why they are included, they are a miserable venue for SP anyway..
The places you suggest reinforce the western definition, again I'll stress its an international occupation.
The reference to straight photography is vague and incorrect as street include photographers that engage in all the corners of art. History also supports these photographers (eg, Callahan and many current photographers).
"the aim of creating images at a decisive or poignant moment." Thats just one aspect and it neglects too much to be representative.
The defining period did not end in the 70's, it continues. The world hasn't stopped just yet.
The Leica is not the most famous, its for the Leica wiki to suggest such a history but this page is for street photography and its not a hardware page. I'll remind you too that hcb often used friends in images and that history in hindsight is not an accurate depiction of the truth.
"John Thomson, a Scotsman, began photographing the street prior to Atget" a syntax error and it also follows the Atget reference.
"and had more of a subject aware style in comparison to Atget." and again, How could this suggestion be made when Atget did not use human subjects.
"Henri Cartier-Bresson, who has a reputation comparable to Atget" what does this mean ????
There is no connection between street photography and Jazz. The suggestion arose somewhere in literature and it is absurd and has no foundation in fact.
Zone focusing is an alternative to manual focusing not AF.
History shows that candid is in degrees and includes non-candid, these definitions are so selective and ignore the fact of history borne out by the images.
A very sad wiki, has been in this state for many years, choice of photographs has also been its sore point. I'm pleased those last images were removed but the replacements are only marginally better --3hoursmissing (talk) 13:26, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The way it was added previously, it looked promotional, and we've had issues about that on this article in the past.  The Flickr pages are removed again, though, since those kinds of sites are generally unsuitable for Wikipedia.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:42, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for replying SchuminWeb. If you look at the older street photographers I linked to I think all have 'street photographer' in their opening paragraphs; and the contemporary ones I added, I'm trying to add those that are well known. I can understand to some degree why the Flickr groups aren't so suitable, so I'm willing to go with you with regard to the Garry Winogrand group, but the HCSP group is extremely well known group, having featured in many media reports about street photography, so it takes the reader to a place that is one of the most vibrant locations of street photography on the web, which to me seems a worthwhile external site to link to. Lopifalko (talk) 08:43, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Reverts

message: I've just removed the following from "External links":
* Why We Shoot And How: Street Photography For The Purist - various authors mainly from DeviantArt
* Street Photography Information: A tutorial from photo.net
* In-Public.
* Burn My Eye.
* Seconds2Real: Street photography collective from Austria & Germany.
* Invisible Ph t grapher Asia: Street photography and visual jurnalism in Asia.
* Sidewalkers.asia: Street photography in Indonesia (Indonesian language).
"Street photography for the purist" combines pretty good photography with interminable text.
In short paragraphs.
Like this.
It gets tiring.
After a time.
The "tutorial" is not a tutorial. Of the five other websites, at least two are excellent, but no particular reason is given for them to be listed here. (Indeed, recent edits have removed (mis?) information about the sites.)
Among my own favorite tutorials is one by John Brownlow that's mostly, but not exclusively, about overcoming shyness. It has long vanished from pinkheadedbug.com (taken over by a domain name squatter) and from the "pink headed bug" area within the later johnbrownlow.com (abandoned). But Wayback has it: here (white text on white!), the following page (same color scheme), and the following page (light gray on white). Using Firefox, I can read it by pressing Ctrl-A ("select all"): merely selecting the text makes it legible. However, there may be more eligible web pages.
One or two of the links I've removed should perhaps be readded. Well, let's see arguments for this. -- Hoary (talk) 03:22, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Link farm

message: This is worth reading to help understand what is, or more likely what isn't, this idea of the New York School of photography: 'What was the “New York School” of photography?' -Lopifalko (talk) 05:12, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  New York School of photography 

message: I find the statement "similar to social documentary photographers; photojournalists work in public places, capturing newsworthy events, which may include people and property visible from public places; services like Google Street View also record public space at a massive scale." confusing. Street photography rarely records 'newsworthy events' and most street photographers are working from curiosity and/or for artistic purposes, and they are in many cases (Winograd, Ray-Jones etc.) unattached to mass media (the exception being the 'humanist photographers' including Cartier-Bresson). I'm going to shift this sentence out of the intro to improve its clarity, since it deals with what street photography is not. JamesMcArdle 07:56, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There are some valuable points in that paragraph, comparing other genres of photography to street photography; and raising the topic of people who work in public places, that will be returned to later in the legality section. But as it stands, it is muddled, and I expect best dealt with by tidying it up and moving it into a paragraph below, also in the lead section. -Lopifalko (talk) 08:10, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: yes there are good points here and they do point to the rest of the article. I'll have a go in a while...time for dinner! JamesMcArdle 09:26, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shift intro's comparison with photojournalism and documentary photography?