Surprise
Up until recently, most of my photography has been of places that had few or no people at all. Of late, as you know, I’ve become quite interested in people and photographing them. Thinking back, I believe this to have always been the case, but I had to get over, or perhaps manage is the better word, a number of insecurities, of which I have many. I refer, often, to Craig Tanner’s The Next Step creativity workshop. I think that it was the jumping off point for me to begin to explore my photography.
Photographing landscapes vs. people is quite different. I’ve always been an early riser, so getting out, enjoying the sunrise, the quiet, and the bug-free environment was pretty easy to do. Also, the thing that I liked best was that there was no one around. I had the place all to myself, unspoiled, untouched. Getting out and photographing people is just the opposite. Unless you want to photograph joggers, you needn’t get up so early. You need to go where the people are … when they are awake! I think that I’ve always enjoyed people watching, now people photographing.
As I’m out with my camera, shooting film, I have no chance to chimp. This is a huge advantage, I’ve found. Well, chimping, I think, leads to missed shots when you have your head down looking at what you’ve done, things are changing there right in front of you and you are missing it. Also, there is the most pleasant surprise of getting out the negatives and seeing something that you didn’t remember photographing or getting something that has so much detail that adds to the story that it’s rather breathtaking. I’ve been pleasantly surprised a number of times. I’d be concentrating on a theme, say the vibrancy and diversity of the Harlem sidewalks and just happen to take the photograph at the right time to say something else. Serendipity, to be sure.
Reaction
Though I have very little experience at photographing on the street, I do follow the ‘ways’ of the street photographer: f/8 and be there. On the street, there is very little time to focus, auto or manual. You see something, you frame it quickly, snap, snap, snap (maybe), and that’s it. You either got it or you didn’t. Contrast this to the methodical way of landscape shooting: arrive early, pick a location, set up, wait for the light to get right, shoot. Of course, this is probably an over simplification, but you get the idea. From a compositional standpoint, street photography probably doesn’t follow the ‘rules’, or guidelines. The object is to get the shot.
Tools
I’ve been rather pleased with both cameras, the Leica M6, and the Olympus 35 LC. Both are good rangefinders; both deliver the goods easily. I like the Leica a little be better because the location of the controls makes more sense and it is easier to keep them set where you want. I find that it is very easy move the aperture on the Oly and that I have to always make sure that it is set right when I take it out of the bag. I believe that you would be hard-pressed to tell the difference between which images came from the Leica and which from the Oly. I cannot. I only know because I use different film in each.
I can certainly understand why a rangefinder is the right tool for the job on the street. It’s inconspicuous, quiet (though not really necessary in NYC!), and the nice clear viewfinder with the frame lines makes it really easy to frame things up, and fast to use. Add to that, you can see elements that are about to enter your field of view and perhaps avoid, or include them at your discretion. With an SLR, you only see a maximum 100%. With the RF, you get maybe 120% – 200%, perhaps more, depending on what lens you have on.
Anyway, it’s just allowed me to express myself in a different way. Who knows what’s next? I certainly don’t!
Recent Comments