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!

Ricoh GX100

K

Kiri

Guest
Personally I think shooting from the hip is a really interesting form of photography that I often prefer over more conventional ones. Not only does it give a different perspective, but I find the shots to often be much more natural and in a way more 'authentic'. Traditional shooting methods are by their very nature highly constructed. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but I definitely think that shooting from the hip or other similar styles are very valid.

I guess it depends on your definition of photography or what photography means to you. Whether it is something that you construct as much as possible and aim for 'perfection' in achieving what you imagine the result to be in your head.
Or whether you try and capture a moment from the world around you just as it is and let that speak for itself.

I can see the value in both.
 

charlesphoto

New member
Just because some one looks through the finder means the subject is less authentic and natural? Give me a break. A camera is rendering the subject as something "other" no matter what. It's just that the camera can't think for the photographer. So I guess what you are referring to is taking the thinking out of photographing as being more authentic. That is still a flawed argument because you are still filtering the moment through a "dumb" camera no matter if you are looking through the viewfinder or not. The camera is a filter to authenticness no matter what - it is by it's very nature an unnatural object. Personally I prefer an operator in the seat. IMO it gives the photograph a more authentic vision - that of the photographers.
 
N

nei1

Guest
Kiri,what your describing is happening around you all the time,without selection there is no point in recording,without deliberate selection there is no art,just a fog of a lack of intent or interest.Possibly what your thinking can be linked to the "punk"philosophy of my youth,something that I was a strong supporter of,the idea that a lack of technical expertise shouldnt stop anyone producing anything they want to,be it music,a painting or a photograph.However the sexpistols did play their instruments in the end and I think a camera should be looked through at some time in the process,all the best,Neil.
 

pollobarca

New member
Shooting from the hip is still pointing the camera ,therefore roughly composing, at someone you think interesting but who may not be there if they see you taking the picture.
My favourite is to stand and fiddle with the camera but actually to
compose the shot then wait for someone to come in and make it interesting (for me anyway). People normally dont realise you are waiting for them , so they carry on doing what they are doing. I also have the habit of holding my camera at waist or chest height , my old Oly with the flip out screen got me doing this.

Sneak shots of people as the subject I'm not so keen on . But thats my taste.
I do like people in my pictures as they make the scene work, for me.
BTW the japanese schoolgirl (the pretty one) seems to have seen the photographer anyway.

Heres a sneak shot I got of a colleague during lunch break at the bar. I fiddled with the camera ,on the table, and got this without her realising until she found it on Flickr. She was quite pleased with it.


A good idea is also to turn off focus assist light- a dead giveaway if it lights up. This happened to me at the Blue Note Milan -the drummer gave me a very dirty look...

b rgds

paul
 
N

nei1

Guest
I know of people who if they thought a stranger was trying to sneak a photograph of them would smash the camera over the "artists"head,Id tend to agree with the sentiment if not the action.Better to be a little braver I think and face the consequences face on. Ive had the cheek to add a photo to the gallery that maybe illustrates what you think is wrong with photography and what I think is right.
May all of us go from strength to strength.
 

TRSmith

Subscriber Member
Great discussion. If we were sitting together in a room having this talk, it would be easier to get a sense for people's thought process, and maybe a little easier to put forth a thought that wasn't completely developed. Like the one I'm about to stick out here now.

The distinctions being made between from-the-hip and from-the-eye forced me to consider how feel about the two styles. I instantly flashed back to a recent visit to San Francisco and an afternoon at the MOMA, where I enjoyed the Lee Friedlander exhibit.

Making those halfways-sideways steps between images on the wall, I would still be chewing (mentally) on the last image while I placed myself in front of the next. Those first few moments of re-focussing my attention on the new image would sort of pass in silence. Then the kernel, or nucleaus, or gist, or pun, or truth (whatever you want to call it) would suddenly bloom in my mind. Ahhhh, now I see!

The frame edges would melt away and I was, for however long I stood there, absorbed in that clean moment of understanding. A moment masterfully seen and almost invisibly presented. If you were to analyze the composition and tones, etc. you could break it down into lots of things. But in reality, the moment was just as fleeting for Mr. Friedlander as it would have been for me. Except that he processed it all and managed to capture it intuitively. Frikkin' brilliant!

Those images, and ones like them from so many other great photographers, have a very real impact on me.

Which is not to say something akin to that can't happen with the shoot-from-the-hip style. Just that it's a great deal more rare. Those SFTH shots are everywhere and they're fun to look at because they often present interesting angles, and tones, and happy juxtapostions. And as a photographer, they can sometimes lead to an insight or line of creative thinking you might not have had otherwise. But rarely, rarely an Ahhhhh! moment.
 
K

Kiri

Guest
Just because some one looks through the finder means the subject is less authentic and natural?
No.
Although if you set up a shot and have your subject pose for the photo, (and even if you tell them to "just act naturally", I think a lot of people will still pose to some degree), then I don't know if you could say that they are being totally natural could you?

You are taking "shooting from the hip" to simply mean changing the point where you shoot from, minus the feedback from the viewfinder. But the point I was making about naturalness is more to do with how people react when you make it clear that you are taking a photo by raising the camera to your eye and setting up the shot.

Whether you look through the viewfinder or not is not really the issue.
Yes, looking though the viewfinder will give you more accurate feedback on what you are shooting, and generally this is what you want.
But, if you shoot from the hip or from any other unorthodox position, you are still selecting what you shoot, and you can still exercise control over all of the camera settings and where you point it can't you?

I'm not talking about just walking around taking photos aimlessly without any thought as to what you are shooting.

@nei1: I never suggested that there should be no selection or intent or technical expertise involved in the process. Rather, I would suggest that all these elements are still present.


Please understand that I am not trying to imply that shooting from the hip is by any means a replacement for traditional shooting methods, nor am I saying that it is better, or that we should all stop looking through the viewfinder. I am simply trying to argue that it CAN be a valid form of photography, and CAN offer a different perspective and the possibility to capture something that you may not have been able to with a conventional approach.

I do find myself agreeing with what TRSmith said in the previous post.

Getting the results you want will certainly be rarer when shooting from the hip, but if it brings a different thought process, perspective and even a degree of unpredictability to the art, isn't there some value in that?
 
W

wbrandsma

Guest
An interesting discussion. Holding a camera in front of you and aiming it at your subject might not always be the best way. I personally think that Bruce Gilden's method is very offending. See it here.
Joel Meyerowitz and Jeff Mermelstein have less offending methods, but they both still hold the camera in front of their eyes. There work looks more natural to me. But I also admire our member Chris for his photographs mostly shot from the hips.
For me in person it is still something you have to feel comfortable with.

On a different photography note, but all GX100 stuff.


Ricoh GX100, f4.6, 1/350 sec, ISO 100, -0.7 EV


Ricoh GX100, f7, 1/1050 sec, ISO 80, -0.7 EV
 
P

praktinafan

Guest
For me: best method is to "frame" what I see. See first picture.


If you have the camera between your eyes and the object there is more distance to the object. You hide behind that black box. See picture 2


To frame by looking down to a tilted screen or a good LCD with greater viewing angle you have the ability to frame the object and NOT to look at it. The chance to take a shot without being recognized as a photographer at work is quite big.


Shooting from hip or any other place near your body where you can not see what you are framing is for me: coincidence, maybegood, have luck, hope. In the worst case I get the feeling that not it is not me who has taken the photos but anyone else. Unpersonal...
 
C

Chris

Guest
I can see the point some of you make, that shooting from the hips depends on coincidence or intuition (to put it in a nicer way). But I also think that if you shoot like this regularly, you can get some kind of feeling for it (especially if you use a fixed lens or always the same focal length). Of course, a perfect frame is still dificult. But on the other hand, the chance of not "destroying" a moment is bigger and the low point of view is hard to get from looking through the viewfinder or at the display...
I agree with Kiri that you can still select in some way if you shoot from the hips. Nevertheless, if I don't want to get that low and I don't think I will "destroy the moment", I prefer to look at the display.

The discussion about the definition of art is a very hard one as well. I think there are always different grades of control... some musicians who jam sometimes also play what they play without being perfectly conscious before... This does not mean that they play without any intentions or without knowing how to play an instrument.
And to go even further: should a musician not use a hookline he found by accident (if he wants to play something else but makes a mistakes and finds a new melody)? And I think shooting from the hip can be far away from taking a picture by accident even though we don't have the same grade of control as we would have by looking through the VF or at the display...


PS: I could finally read your excellent article about b/w conversion, Wouter! Thank you very much! I am really looking foreward to trying this.








_______________________________________________
best regards,
Chris
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21306283@N05/
 
Last edited:
N

nei1

Guest
It might help me understand the point of the hip shot if you could explain youre reasons for using this method to obtain the two photos youve chosen to illustrate this style.At first glance they appear to be of a group of children playing in the street and an elderly gentleman on his pushbike.What was there in these situations that brought you to the conclusion that it was best to secretly take the photo without anyone knowing what you were doing?
 
Last edited:
C

Chris

Guest
It might help me understand the point of the hip shot if you could explain youre reasons for using this method to obtain the two photos youve chosen to illustrate this style.At first glance they appear to be of a group of children playing in the street and an elderly gentleman on his pushbike.What was there in these situations that brought you to the conclusion that it was best to sneakily take the photo without anyone knowing what you were doing?
Well, I did not especially choose these pictures to illustrate this style (I just posted them as I post some pictures from time to time)... Anyway, they make the point as well: I would have had to go down (almost on my knees) and I am sure the boys would have changed their expressions (and would have looked at me) and I probably would have interrupted the conversation the man on the bike had with the man with the newspaper and so, they probably would have looked at me as well.
I don't mind if they notice that I take pictures and if they asked, I would explain them what I am doing. But I prefer that they notice afterwards because if they notice before, I get a different picture (which can be a great one, but not one of the kind I usually search...).
In the picture of the playing kids, the man behind the boy on the left (the dad of one of the kids) noticed me taking the picture and smiled at me. Many times they notice just in the moment of the picture and I don't mind at all.

I also try to respect people and not to take pictures of people in a compromising situation.

_________________________________________________
best regards,
Chris
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21306283@N05/
 
Last edited:

charlesphoto

New member
Nice pics Chris. Too me they don't look at all "from the hip" but very conciously shot.

It's not the actuality of not looking through the viewfinder that I find bothersome. I just finished a book on breakdancing shot with medium format (Hasselblad SWC and Mamiya 6/7) and I often didn't look through the viewfinder while shooting as I wanted shots from floor level or the action is just too crazy. But I figured out how to frame without the viewfinder, guessing at focus. Not always successfully but after thousands of tries one does get a few!

What I often see is really lazy pics taken with the excuse that they didn't want their subjects to know. But just by catching the subject unawares doesn't automatically make it a good photograph. To me it's knowing how to compose with (or without) the viewfinder and of course the ability to edit after the fact.
Ever try and take pics out of a speeding car? Rarely does it render anything useable and I am seeing this sort of attitude happening with the small sensor wide angle crowd. Slow down a bit, compose, stay in one place and let people know what you are doing and they will soon forget about you.
 
N

nei1

Guest
Thanks for the reply Chris,Im trying to put my finger on what it is that worries me about this way of taking pictures.I think its that it opens the door to the acceptance of almost anything,for me personel involvement is everything,the hip style is more detached,less personel but Im glad you enjoy it,all the best,Neil.
 
S

SimonL

Guest
I think one of the main reasons for the 'hip shot' is the totally different perspective it gives you. I'm 6'2" and I'm sure that, if I allowed it to, the same boring perspective would do me no favours at all.

Even when I don't strictly need to, I use the right angle finder on my 30D to give a little variety from my normal point of view.
 
N

nei1

Guest
I dont like photos that look down on people either simon and often end up with anaching back from staying too long on the eyeline of the subject(Im about your height)The angle finder seems like a good idea.
 
K

Kiri

Guest
Nice pics Chris. Too me they don't look at all "from the hip" but very conciously shot.

It's not the actuality of not looking through the viewfinder that I find bothersome. I just finished a book on breakdancing shot with medium format (Hasselblad SWC and Mamiya 6/7) and I often didn't look through the viewfinder while shooting as I wanted shots from floor level or the action is just too crazy. But I figured out how to frame without the viewfinder, guessing at focus. Not always successfully but after thousands of tries one does get a few!

What I often see is really lazy pics taken with the excuse that they didn't want their subjects to know. But just by catching the subject unawares doesn't automatically make it a good photograph. To me it's knowing how to compose with (or without) the viewfinder and of course the ability to edit after the fact.
Ever try and take pics out of a speeding car? Rarely does it render anything useable and I am seeing this sort of attitude happening with the small sensor wide angle crowd. Slow down a bit, compose, stay in one place and let people know what you are doing and they will soon forget about you.


I completely agree, so I'm not really sure what we were arguing about. :)


Great images on your site by the way. I especially like the cypher ones. You really captured the action and mood of the break scene.
 

kevin

New member
Hi all,

I've been lurking on the small sensor forum for awhile enjoying the images. I pulled the trigger on a nice used GX-100 a couple of weeks ago and I'm enjoying it all out of proportion to it's price and size. :D

Here's an image from the 2nd day of ownership, shot in the skunk cabbage swamp in the woods behind our house. JPEG, converted via PS channel mixer.

 

kevin

New member
...a couple of more:





The violets and birches were shot using a .6x wide-angle accessory lens from a Canon Super-8 camera (310 xl, fwiw) that happens to have 43mm threads, and that accounts for the soft corners in those pics.
 
Top