Images made with small, medium and large cameras.
Images made with manual focusing, manual exposure medium format cameras.
Images made with big DSLRs. And small rangefinders. Even half frame cameras.
Images shown here were made in Austin, Berlin, Rome, Paris, Lisbon, San Antonio and Siena.
We've got about 200,000 more just waiting to be scanned.
Not everything I do is commercial.
Images made in the streets, in restaurants, in cafes.
If it's not "street photography" then we're all delusional.
berlin wall.
Berlin Opera House.
rome train station.
the vatican.
place de la Concorde.
verona.
paris. 1978. Canonet QL17.
siena.
boston.
.jpg)
35 comments:
Why are other people's opinions important? (Especially people who more than likely don't even have 1\1000th the experience that you do?
And....Hi Gary! Very nice to see you here. Thanks.
Lots of great ones here. Especially like "Verona," which looks like a movie still.
WoW Kirk, what a "tour de force"!
Thanks John and Rich. A "fellow" blogger commented directly to me that I "was not a street photographer." I thought I'd try to prove that I could be. Am. Always was...
scr*w the naysayers love ALL of your photos especially the portraits and austin city ones!
I wonder if that particular blogger finds it easier to complain about his inability to "photograph strangers" in a blog post every so often than to take all the good advice commenters have suggested to him? I guess it gives him something to write about?
Whatever... I very much enjoyed looking at your photos - quite a few of which I had seen before over the years. And the young woman on the Spanish Steps with the expressive eyes remains one of my favorite portraits.
Just yesterday, I was at the Fremont festival parade in Seattle. I am pretty sure most of the hundreds of body-painted solstice cyclists and the many costumed paraders were not shy about being photographed (many smiled and posed for photos). And there were thousands of people cheering them on - many with a dedicated camera or a phone camera in hand. It was all good fun.
Ken
What a nice set of beautiful, interesting people. Not to mention beautiful photos 😉! Thanks for posting.
I enjoyed the collection. Especially the old black & whites--you got in close to your subjects, and of course there's the classic film look. Those images would stand up against any street photographer's.
Superb photographs, Kirk.
I am looking through them again... and again.
Sometimes, I have the impression that some of your subjects' eyes are following me.
Really a rather wonderful collection.
And 'curated' in a very cool eye.
And... did I already say... superb photos.
P.S. I keep coming back to the shot of the person standing in the rain, with the hood of their jacket partially covering their head, with some scooters parked just behind, looking somewhere... up at the rainclouds? At something just down the street? There's an inherent mystery in this image that keeps pulling me into it.
All 'genres' in photography is create division. Worse still when some decide there are only certain ways to do it, or certain subjects that qualify.Then you get elitism creeping in with those who follow 'the true path' thinking they're above the rest.
It's all about making pictures with cameras. It's all good to look at.
Life affirming and certainly street photography affirming. Mirrors of the photographer having fun, his enthusiasm, rapport building, and expertise. My kind of street.
great photos
Thank-you, Kirk, for a wonderfully curated selection. Your ability to observe and interact at an appropriate is a great lesson in how to frame, engage, and tell a story in a single picture. Thank-you.
Man, I really enjoyed looking at all these. I tried to pick out a favorite or two, but there were just too many that I liked. Thanks!
Nice way to start the day, looking at these photos. Doesn't matter to me what label anyone puts on them, they're great.
Dick
So nice to see some of my favourites here and some new ones. All I could think was what a rich life you have lived.
On street photography. It's just a label but... A brawl broke out in photo club over the definition of that label. Not very violent, of course. They were mostly as senior as we are and, after all, they were only, you know, photographers. The issue: one photo was more "architectural" than "street".
Just the fact that you posted 108 images should leave no doubt that you have "street cred" ! ;-)
It’s hard to imagine photography before the internet. How could you pigeon hole yourself properly?
Great photographs Kirk.
Sean
Kirk
I have been following your blog for a long time. Possibly going back to your time at the University of Texas. In the early days of the internet, there was a photo bulletin board originating from UT using the same name,
You are one the reasons I started to shoot “street” as a style. I’m looking forward to seeing the images waiting to be scanned.
PaulB
Point made.
A very nice set of photos; who cares "what" they are, as long as they are enjoyable to look at. Labels are, anyway, just conclusions and exclusions.
Hank
Bloggers who make pronouncements about what is and what isn't street photography should back up their words with their own examples. Just sayin'
I certainly don't know of a good definition for "street photography", but I tend to feel that your images are more like "environmental portraits." Keep it up, and don't pay attention to others. That is only necessary for paying customers.
Excellent photos. Street photo should include people who you as a viewer feel you interact with. All your photos posted does that.
Of the images I especially liked the color ones that began with the gentleman on the phone and ended with the pink roses.
Kirk your problem with being a famous certified street photographer is you are showing too many developed photos! You are supposed to leave Ben thousands of rolls of undeveloped film and sd cards that are maxed out in some hidden spot in the house that he will process and share with the world. Ben gets the proceeds obviously!
:)
Great photography Kirk. Thanks for sharing. Don't let the a-holes get your goat. You have nothing to prove. To anyone.
Eric
I’m late to this but that’s because it has me puzzled. I don’t know the context in which “the blogger” said you are not a “street photographer” but it seems to me that it could be a fair comment. I fancy that if someone wrote “Kirk Tuck, the Austin Street Photographer” you might be equally offended and produce a whole slew of product/restaurant/studio portrait/etcetera photographs in rebuttal.
Categories are not very useful unless a photographer only does “street” or only “fashion” and so on.
If I were forced to categorise you I would say “portrait photographer” but as many of your photos I like best (and which you’ve included in this post, so you like them too) are made in streets perhaps they are not portraits in the usual sense but they seem to me to have a lot in common with your studio portraits.
Oh, and by the way, I propose a vote of thanks from the commentariat to the anonymous blogger for stirring you to post such a great gallery.
Who on Earth would say these images are not street photography?
Man, when you get a burr in your saddle, hold on!
Thanks, Kirk - a gallery I had to look at twice, so many interesting photographs!
Keep on working at your pace and style and just shake of the nattering...
Thank you so much for posting these. In a sense, the comment from the other blogger is a problem for street photography: more than any other genre, it seems to be full of self-appointed gatekeepers. As others have said here, the best thing is just to ignore such comments, but I'm glad it has provoked this response from you. I particularly love your pictures from Italy - they resonate strongly with me. And you've dropped in another characteristically Tuck portrait I've not seen before (#19) that is superb.
I think you're getting the hang of this. :)
I find opinionated discussions regarding street photography odd. Some photographers are good at taking photos of strangers and other are not. Some people enjoy having their photos taken by strangers and others do not. Some enjoy looking at street photographs and others do not.
In viewing the posted photos again–well worth another look–I find myself especially drawn to the square format shots which, being shot from below eye level, are very pleasing. Thanks for posting these.
Hmm. Looks like sidewalk and open field photography to me. :-)
I am coming late to this discussion, I hope not too late. I have been trying to figure out, What is 'street photography'? I have even bought and have been reading the book Kirk said he was reading about Daido Moriyama's "snapshot photography," as Moriyama calls it. And, I think it is the correct term for the photos in that book. That is not necessarily the same for all street photographers, I think, and clearly for HCB's well-composed street photos. As I travel or just wander the streets, whether near or far, my shutter clicks on whatever I find visually interesting and think others might too. These photos are views of places and times that I enjoy being reminded of again flipping through my photo catalog. But are those taken along the streets of my wanders "street photography"? Or, "travel photography?" Or, "documentation photograph?" I read in some internet posts that "street photography MUST have people in them. And, often I see in what is called "street photography" do have people in them, but not always. That is true of Kirt's long post of his street photos. The same is true of the photos in the Moriyama book. Now, I am thinking that no hard dividing line exists for street, travel, and whatever photography. It's a blur. During my life working in science, there is a common debate identifying some to be splitters and others to be lumpers, particularly in biological taxonomy. "Is that critter a new species or subspecies or...?" I think that is happening here in what is "street photography." So, if I am in the street when the shutter clicks, to me now, it can be called street or travel or documentation or wander-about photography or today's photos, whatever feels good. But if I am on a dirt road when the shutter clicks on a distant mountain, for me, this stays "landscape photograph," not "road photograph." Some macro-terminology splitting is worth keeping. Also, I think I have been overthinking this and I think maybe others have too. Kirt, thanks for the long photo post, which did lead to my overthinking.
Post a Comment