The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

surreptitious shooting

nostatic

New member
so I'm getting mixed signals here. Some say that secretly snapping is wrong, others (especially Weeks) essentially say it is required. Btw, Weeks is just a *tad* dogmatic about the tools the approach...shocking that an artist would be so opinionated ;)

I'm just going to continue to feel my way through it I guess. In the end it only matters if I can look myself in the mirror (and at my shots). Now I have to walk a couple blocks to take a shot of a neon "brakes" sign. My son and I saw it last night walking home from dinner at the local Indian restaurant. This am on our usual walk to Peets I shot a pic framed from a manhole during daylight. Want to duplicate and night and see what happens. I guess all those years in the lab as a chemist weren't wasted after all...life is an experiment.
 
I have recently been using a method of taking discreet shots where I stand facing away from the subject with my GRD2 held at hip level pointing behind me. I'm getting quite good at framing this way now.
..
Honestly, I´m a bit wary about shooting small cameras "from the hip" in public places. Here´s an image (link to a Russian site, not mine) showing a type of behaviour that´s becoming a nuisance;



I´m emphatically not doing it; no one here is, either. I just don´t want any busybody standing around getting the wrong idea and starting a row....:cussing:
 

Lili

New member
Honestly, I´m a bit wary about shooting small cameras "from the hip" in public places. Here´s an image (link to a Russian site, not mine) showing a type of behaviour that´s becoming a nuisance;



I´m emphatically not doing it; no one here is, either. I just don´t want any busybody standing around getting the wrong idea and starting a row....:cussing:
Ahem
That guy needs a kick from a spike heel
Hard
grrrrrrrrr
 
Ahem
That guy needs a kick from a spike heel
Hard
grrrrrrrrr
Absolutely. If I saw somebody doing it, I´d have yelled out.

But just because that´s the gut reaction of most people, there´s a risk of someone misinterpreting any fiddling with a camera held low. I just won´t take that risk. I do sometime shoot without raising the camera, but never from below waist level.

Edit: Suddenly realizing that when linking to somebody else´s work, I shouldn´t just make an image link, but give the context as well. So here´s the page it comes from (it does contain lots of gems...):

http://legko.be/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6053&Itemid=3
 
Last edited:

Will

New member
I would like to say that there is a big difference between taking inappropriate images of someone unawares and what I'm trying to achieve, which is images of people unaffected by an awareness of being looked at or photographed.

To make sure people don't associate me with the kind of behavior on the Russian site I would like you to know that I showed the smoking man the image I had taken and asked if it was OK. He was fine about it and asked to have a look at some of the other images I had taken. He was interested because he was looking to buy a new camera!

I will be continuing to use the hip shooting method using the same moral judgements about what are appropriate images to take just as everyone one else does using whatever shooting method they choose. For example extreme telephoto can be abused just as easily as hip shooting, the morality is not in the method but in the image.
 
Last edited:
I would like to say that there is a big difference between taking inappropriate images of someone unawares and what I'm trying to achieve, which is images of people unaffected by an awareness of being looked at or photographed.

To make sure people don't associate me with the kind of behavior on the Russian site I would like you to know that I showed the smoking man the image I had taken and asked if it was OK. He was fine about it and asked to have a look at some of the other images I had taken. He was interested because he was looking to buy a new camera!
Will, I assure you that I had no intention whatsoever to imply that anyone here, either you or any other poster, would do anything like this.

My only point is that there´s a risk of someone misinterpreting it, and I personally don´t want to take that risk.

Again, my sincere apologies if you felt my post was aimed at you. It wasn´t.
 
M

Mitch Alland

Guest
...Some say that secretly snapping is wrong, others (especially Weeks) essentially say it is required. Btw, Weeks is just a *tad* dogmatic about the tools the approach...shocking that an artist would be so opinionated ;)...
Opinionated? That's an understatement! The whole piece is twaddle, written in one-line paragraphs by someone who seems functionally illiterate — as they say, writing reflects your capacity for thinking. There's not an original thought in the whole piece — and the photographs are all derivate as well, although a few of them are of some interest. A lot of them have grim, "bad bokeh" and would benefit having been taken with a small sensor camera with huge depth of field. The whole wretched piece is full of cliches from the 1950s — not really worth spending time writing about it more. I guess you can see that I'm not too fond of it. <grin>

—Mitch/Tsumeb, Namibia
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
 
Last edited:

cam

Active member
so I'm getting mixed signals here. Some say that secretly snapping is wrong, others (especially Weeks) essentially say it is required. Btw, Weeks is just a *tad* dogmatic about the tools the approach...shocking that an artist would be so opinionated ;)

I'm just going to continue to feel my way through it I guess. In the end it only matters if I can look myself in the mirror (and at my shots). ...life is an experiment.
feeling your way through IS the way to go -- only you will know if it is right... life is most definitely an experiment!

you'll also get to learn life lessons in the mix as i have. for instance, shooting a drunk, angry man surreptitiously in a small enclosed space with no outlet (like a metro) is not the wisest thing to do :bugeyes:
 
D

dickinsonjon

Guest
Well, I took some time yesterday and this morning to read the Chris Weeks thing. He's a bit, er, polarised in terms of opinions, but hey - everyone's got one as they say. I completely disagree with his attempting to strictly define something, but I often wonder what it would like to have such a hard concrete-formed opinion of anything in life. Variety is what makes us human. Some good photos in there, but then again, the writing is appalling. What's with the excessive swearing? Adds nothing, not even impact...
 

Will

New member
Per,

Many thanks for clarifying your post.

No offense taken.

I have been thinking about why I showed the man the picture I had taken, which I wouldn't always do. Was it because I was pleased with the image and wanted to show it off, or maybe I wanted to make sure no onlookers thought I was being underhand? Probably a bit of both.
 

Lili

New member
As regards Week's...manifesto.
Hmmm...there were a few useful points in it.
He is entitled certainly to his views on equipment and usage thereof; what works for him is what it is; his opinion
But on the whole I take anyone or anything that's defined by what it is NOT to be suspect.
One item there rather alarmed me, on the level of the up-skirt-shooting-creature in Per's post. Weeks says he spent 40 minutes following an individual, on the street, at night.
I think that goes well beyond Street-Shooting and far, far, far into Stalkerazzi territory.
 
Last edited:

mwalker

Subscriber Member
I might be simplistic in my view, but if I saw this guy do this, I'd kick his ass. It clearly crosses the line.
 

Robert Campbell

Well-known member
As regards Week's Manifesto One item there rather alarmed me, Weeks says he spent 40 minutes following an individual, on the street, at night.
I think that goes well beyond Street-Shooting and far, far, far into Stalkerazzi territory.
Quite so; how would any of us feel if we were being followed like this by a stranger? Indeed, how would we feel generally about being the subject of the photograph - on the wrong side of the lens, as it were? Intrustion of your personal space? Something like the idea that the camera steals part of your spirit? Worse from close up, or being spied upon from across the street with a tele lens?

I don't think I have ever been the subject; but I would feel uncomfortable about it, and I would feel even less comfortable than Jono actually doing it.
 

thomasl.se

New member
Quite so; how would any of us feel if we were being followed like this by a stranger? Indeed, how would we feel generally about being the subject of the photograph - on the wrong side of the lens, as it were? Intrustion of your personal space? Something like the idea that the camera steals part of your spirit? Worse from close up, or being spied upon from across the street with a tele lens?

I don't think I have ever been the subject; but I would feel uncomfortable about it, and I would feel even less comfortable than Jono actually doing it.
Personally, it's very much on a case by case basis. Some people I'd be fine with shooting me at a lot of times nad places, whereas other people I would feel more or less offended. For instance a relative of mine ticks me off just about each time with his completely insensitive lock on target splat bang flash in your face approach. Not amused, and I'm sure he's got one where my expressions clearly reads as such: delete or get a shin kicked.

And a sincere question on that very note: for what good reason would anyone post a picture of a person wearing that expression on his/her face? Public place, public face; fair and square, but then be sensible enough about what to save and what to delete. Posting it on the web is in my opinion an excercise in line crossing; soul killing if you will.
 

Lili

New member
Weeks has one blurry shot of a buxom bartender/waitress.
Bars are private property that allow the public in.
As such they can and often do restrict camera use.
She appears to be in a Gentlemens Club.
In such places they tend to be even more sensitive to the privacy of their customers.
Weeks is very lucky not to have had his a** handed to him.
One of his statements summarizes his view on this saying don't shoot where it is not allowed, "at least not openly".
More Stalker-talk
I have been the target of an up-skirt-shooter.
I looked down while at a Bar (not a GC) and saw his face and camera right below me, not quite so close as Per's example ( he was lying on his back between my legs having dropped his keys a pretext)
He got a Top-Shelf Magarita bath; oops I spilled it. I missed his camera.
He was then 'removed' from the bar.
 
B

bartlebooth

Guest
One other point I'd like to add to this discussion is that street photography is more than just random snaps of strangers living their lives in an urban environment. Just because someone happens to look 'interesting' doesn't necessarily mean a quick snap of them makes an interesting photo. I admire good street photographers (espec. Joel Meyerowitz and of course HCB) but go back and look at their work and you'll see what I mean. There is a 'punctum' in all their shots, they are not just random potshots or 'atmosphere'. I think the ease, economy and instant feedback of digital has led to an explosion of shots 'in the style of street photography' but without the wit and intelligence that made this style so enjoyable in the first place.
 

TRSmith

Subscriber Member
One other point I'd like to add to this discussion is that street photography is more than just random snaps of strangers living their lives in an urban environment. Just because someone happens to look 'interesting' doesn't necessarily mean a quick snap of them makes an interesting photo. I admire good street photographers (espec. Joel Meyerowitz and of course HCB) but go back and look at their work and you'll see what I mean. There is a 'punctum' in all their shots, they are not just random potshots or 'atmosphere'. I think the ease, economy and instant feedback of digital has led to an explosion of shots 'in the style of street photography' but without the wit and intelligence that made this style so enjoyable in the first place.

Thank you bartlebooth for articulating my sentiments exactly.

I'm beginning to wonder if there isn't a book deal waiting for someone who manages to strap one of those infrared-triggered-capture-the-deer-in-the-woods-at-night boxes to a lamp post and collect hundreds of photos of the humans that walk past it. <sarcasm>If you use this idea, please remember to mention me in the Acknowledgements of your book</sarcasm>
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Ahem
That guy needs a kick from a spike heel
Hard
grrrrrrrrr
Stuff like this should never happen period. This is a respect for your fellow human being, Period. It has nothing to do with photography but being a pervert.


I agree i would have seriously kicked his ass on the spot and would gladly be arrested for doing it. Sorry i have a lot of respect for women and no one needs to be treated like this. Chivalry should never die.
 

Maggie O

Active member
I'm beginning to wonder if there isn't a book deal waiting for someone who manages to strap one of those infrared-triggered-capture-the-deer-in-the-woods-at-night boxes to a lamp post and collect hundreds of photos of the humans that walk past it. <sarcasm>If you use this idea, please remember to mention me in the Acknowledgements of your book</sarcasm>
I think you just described any street corner in the UK. It'd have to be a book of CCTV stills, but they'd have plenty to choose from, that's for sure.
 
Top