7.10.2025

A continuing discussion about sticking around a scene to work the changes. And practice becoming so boring that one becomes invisible. Even with a huge, medium format film camera. And a normal lens.


Two Italian Gentlemen discussing something in a public square in Rome.

I'm always astounded and bit incredulous when I see a video of Bruce Gilden rushing in to attack people with his camera and flash and then turn away after one frame with some smug sense of certainty that he had, in fact, captured a "decisive moment." The one frame. Captured while in motion. With the wide angle lens all stopped down to f11-16, compensated for with a blast of naked flash. I guess I could be like another blogger and just say, "to each their own." or some equivocal pablum, but I think the results of Gilden's work are two fold: To the viewer? Boring. To the subject? Threatening and disrespectful. 

Why insist on making a photograph such a desperate undertaking? Why make so many other people uncomfortable? Why not just make one's self invisible and keep taking photographs until you have something you like? Or something interesting? And why not use a lens you like instead of one that compensates for your lack of empathy or idea of collaboration? All questions, I guess, for another day. 

When I was scanning older, medium format, Hasselblad and Mamiya 6 negatives earlier in the week I came across this series that basically took up eight frames on my parsimonious twelve frame roll of film. I looked for a "hands down" winner but it turns out that I like each from for one reason or another. 

As you can tell from the perspective none of these frames were captured "voyeur style" with a long lens from behind a furtive fern or tree trunk. Nor were they anxiously "shot from the hip" which would imply giving up all control to chance. Nope. It's a standard lens. A 75 or 80mm lens on a big square format. Just like a 50mm on a 35mm sized frame. I'm probably standing about eight to ten feet from the two men I was interested in focusing. I was interesting in photographing them because they used their hands and big gestures as they spoke. Culturally different than people in my home town...

If I had any indication that I was making them uncomfortable I would have stopped and moved on because the thing I found visually interesting would have been lost. I think we are fearful sometimes that people will be confrontational if we photograph them without explicitly asking their permission. In a case like this I try to maintain a boring affect, take my time and calmly photograph with the idea that I'm taking in the whole scene and not just the people in the foreground. 

As you can see by the fall off in focus I am not depending on a small aperture to provide a big range of zone focusing. I am actually bringing the camera to my eye to compose and to make sure my focus is good. But I'm not doing it in any way that would indicate that I'm anxious to work quickly or that I fear discovery. Instead I'm photographing at a slow and measured pace and trying to represent that I'm just doing something very routine and normal. 

Had I stopped at the first frame I would have lost potentially six or seven following frames that are either different enough to be contenders or, in fact, better than the original action that drew me to photograph. I think this is a valid approach. To become part of the scene and not something that sticks out. But I could be totally misguided. ?







Seen and ......

Ignored.

The frame I was looking for all along. Patience can work in your favor. 

Best not to rush.

 

10 comments:

  1. Excellent set, Kirk. (Although I would have ditched the ninth image: the crop doesn’t work for me. However “to each their own, or some equivocal pablum.”)

    The essence of street photography is to capture people interacting with each other or with their environment—or both. To tell a story. Or at least to imply one: it’s not necessary that the story be explicit; if anything, a little ambiguity enhances the narrative. But the best thing about a series like this is that it requires the viewer to view the images once, then go back and take another look. I don’t think any photographer can expect much more than that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wonderful series, and I agree - that last one is the prize.

    Regarding Bruce Gilden and his style of photography - he is a (or even the) prime example of what I consider to be the worst of “street.” More power to him for making a career out of boorish photographic behavior, but I wouldn’t be surprised if his subjects occasionally take a swing at him.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Fabulous series. Hang around with a camera, especially some big old "obsolete" film unit, and the pedestrians soon get bored with you and ignore you. I have even done this with a 4×5" camera in Greece.

    ReplyDelete
  4. These are little slices of time, and taken together they provide a sense of the subjects’ personalities and do imply a story. You impose nothing on them and unlike the noxious example you cite—another photographer intruding on his subjects— you are not a part of their story. A witness to those moments in their world.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I love these, in the first picture I can imagine them discussing their sartorial differences; one complains about the discomfort of his cravat, the other the poor design of his jacket pocket, he can't get his hand in it easily. However the rest of the series show that the discussion is much more serious, probably pasta or football perhaps? G

    ReplyDelete
  6. You are SO right. Four things worth mentioning: 1) Italians always had and still have a bit of style in their dress. Makes us Americans look slovenly. Did you dress well to get these wonderful photos? 2) Today there are oppressive crowds around the Trevi Fountain where these two gentlemen were conversing. 3) My wife and I tend to go on small group tours to Europe (Road Scholar, primarily), at least for the first time in a country. I don't have the luxury of hanging around and waiting for a scene to develop. And 4) Today's small and capable cameras would reward the waiting practice you describe, if we had the time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Gary, When in France, Italy and other civilized countries my basic wardrobe is long pants, functional dress shirts with button down collars in muted colors, dark, unpatterned sport coats, leather shoes. Things I would not consider: short pants, t-shirts, shirts with logos, baseball caps, loudly patterned athletic shoes, sling camera bags, fanny packs, tattoos.
      The only time I've traveled in groups is when I was leading a workshop or paid as a camera tester for a major brand. Minimum time to spend in each major city is a week. Anything less is just a glancing touch. Patience comes from NOT having a schedule...

      Delete
  7. Wonderful work. I was reading to see if you were using a waist level finder, which is inherently less confrontational. But no, a big clunky camera in front of your face. Did you use waist level finders for any of your work?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hi Richard, on a previous trip to Italy I did use a waist level finder a lot. On a Hasselblad. That makes shooting quickly even tougher.

    ReplyDelete

Life is too short to make everyone happy all the time...