Home or Away? Travel and the Street Photographer

Were you born and brought up in a city? Let us assume you were. You know every neighbourhood, every shortcut, every bridge and underpass. So who could be better than you to take street photos in this wonderful metropolis?

You have one or two big advantages. You’re there. That’s a good start. You know your way around. You know the look and feel of various districts, which ones are safe and where you need to take extra care. You also know what these places look like in different weather conditions: Washington Square under snow; Place de la République in the rain. All these advantages give you a head start.

Breezing In
But what happens? A street photographer breezes in from abroad and sees your city with fresh eyes. He finds artistic possibilities in places you’ve overlooked because of their familiarity, their ordinariness.

To the foreigner, everything in your city is exotic. A commonplace object or an activity that’s taken for granted may, to the foreigner, assume a symbolic meaning that’s completely lost on you. Let me give you an example.

No Offence Meant
I was travelling across the island of Phuket with a well-known Thai artist. I think one of my comments may have offended him.

We were overtaking lots of people on scooters: one, two, or three people on each one, and occasionally a family of five! I said: “I think the scooter symbolises something about Thailand. I wonder if I could get a classic shot to express that idea?”

I was expecting the artist to make some sort of comment in reply, or at least ask: “What does it symbolise?” But he acted as though I’d said nothing at all. Maybe he was thinking of all the more elevated concepts one could use to symbolise his country: the monarchy, the palaces, the native flora and fauna.

But as I tried to explain (still without any response), to my foreign eye the scooter symbolises the plucky determination of the Thai people, their almost contradictory ability to accept limitations while finding a way to circumvent them. No one in Europe or America transports a family of five on a Lambretta, do they? Yet in a vibrant, developing country where everyone’s an entrepreneur, the scooter is a symbol of progress and energy. It’s optimistic! You have to be optimistic when you’re five-up on a bike without crash helmets.

family transport

Thinking back on this episode I can understand it from the artist’s point of view. He probably felt I was belittling his country when in fact the opposite was true. You can’t belittle a country by drawing attention to some of its most admirable qualities. I was looking at something which he overlooks because it’s so commonplace. Ubiquitous subjects like scooters in Thailand or salarymen in Tokyo can tell us much about a society, if only we can see them with fresh eyes.

A Reason to Travel
My example gives you an excellent reason for travelling. Go to foreign places. Look at them objectively and try to figure out what’s going on. You don’t need a deep understanding of a country to take great street photos, but I think you do need a feel for the place and its people. Every city has different moods, depending on where you go. In Bangkok I can always get happy pictures in Asiatique, sad ones on Charoen Krung, gritty ones just about everywhere. The impression you give to those who look at your images will be governed by what catches your eye and the thought you put behind it.

Please don’t ask me: “Where should I go?” Any country, any city is a potential source of great subjects. I’m aware that some countries are much more favourable than others towards street photographers. If you’re in Vienna and you want to take a photo that has one or more Austrians in it you’re supposed, by law, to get their permission. Yes, that’s an absurd law, as is any law which is totally unenforceable — and it may have an inhibiting effect on street photography.

The French have passed a similar law, making Paris — once the home of street photography — another place where photographing strangers in public is deemed to be an invasion of their privacy. Frankly, I just ignore it. I doubt if this lady in the florist shop (below) would object to my candid picture of her, tending the flowers.

florist

Different Mindsets
My one word of warning is not about the law, or even about the dangers of venturing naively into tough areas, it’s this: Don’t confuse travel photography with street photography.

These two activities demand different mindsets. In a sense, the travel photographer never really leaves home: he or she simply brings back memories of foreign places. But the street photographer is really there: up close and personal, getting under the skin of a place and inside the minds of its people.

To practice street photography successfully in foreign cities you really need to extend your stay until you’re no longer a traveller. Settle down for a month or two, if time permits. Get to know the city. When your eyes become jaded, go home.

You’ll bring back more than memories.

Sharing Someone Else’s Quiet Moment

The more street photography I do — as well as thinking and writing about it — the more I become convinced that it’s an exercise in finding contrasts.

Even when the content is minimal, when the image is largely abstract, there’s visual contrast in shapes and tones. Among styles that are more, shall we say “literary” — where people and places are represented realistically — there’s contrast within the content.

This blog post is about one example of contrast: when you find an individual who is having a quiet moment amid the noise and activity of the city.

Why It Works
I like this subject because it plays on the pre-existing tension that always exists between subject and setting in street photography. Although the modern urban environment caters to the needs of the individual by providing food and shelter, its primary master is commerce. There’s no free lunch. Sometimes you have to fight for lunch — and you’re lucky if it doesn’t poison you (as it did me earlier this week in a London café).

With all the hassle of living or working in an urban setting, even the most active individual needs a break. I try not to intrude on anyone’s relaxing moment, but I can’t resist taking a picture, unobserved, if I think the subject and setting have the necessary contrast.

My featured image (above) demonstrates what I have in mind. There are few places on Earth more frenetic than the busiest parts of Bangkok. Here, a street seller takes time out to sit down, close his eyes, rub his feet, and enter a private world of meditation. All around him, people come and go, children play, and life goes on at its natural pace.

I took the picture because the subject seemed blissfully isolated in a world of his own, yet he’s clearly an integral part of the city when he’s at work.

I often like to give the impression that more is happening outside the frame than what we see within it. Here, a man in a patterned shirt stands up and looks at something off-camera, reinforcing the idea of activity continuing beyond the frame. No one looks at the man in blue. He no longer counts as a potential subject of interest for the others because he’s doing nothing. He’s no longer part of the city.

Perhaps I can best express it like this. People opt out. My photos reinstate them. That’s really all there is to it.

They’ll Step Over You
Some years ago when I moved to New York, the American director of the company I worked for (a man from the mid-West) warned me that NYC could be a really tough gig. He said: “If you lie down in the middle of the sidewalk they’ll just step over you. They won’t walk around you or stop to find out what’s wrong.”

I think he was just trying to tell me to get with the pace and stay on my feet. New Yorkers are among the warmest people once you get to know them. Their hard exterior is just another defence mechanism against the perils of big city life.

Girl sitting by roadside

Even a small town in England can become oppressive. The girl in my image (above) has opted out temporarily and chosen to park herself on the kerbside, inches from the traffic. I’d never seen anyone do this before, so I took the picture and managed to include the legs of passing pedestrians. Again, the world moves on, but the individual — in sharp contrast — opts out for reasons that are entirely personal and unknown to the onlooker.

There’s Always Something Odd
Most of us find a park or a café where we can get away from traffic and pedestrians and enjoy a quiet moment. There’s usually something odd — or at least, something out of the ordinary — about those who take their breaks by the roadside.

However, at first glance, there’s nothing at all odd about the gentleman (below), sitting by what appears to be a quiet roadside, about to light his pipe on a hot summer’s day. But even in a street photo, appearances can be deceptive.

Man smoking pipe

As the photographer who lives nearby, I know this road is always very busy. At the moment I took the picture there just happened to be a brief break in the traffic. You, the onlooker, were not aware of this until now — but no matter! If you scrutinise the picture carefully you will see its oddity. The man appears to be casting his eyes down, but in fact he’s looking up at the oncoming traffic. And he’s wearing two pairs of glasses.

You see: he hasn’t opted out at all. He’s probably on his way to — or, at this time of day, returning from — a cricket match. Or maybe he’s simply enjoying a holiday, or an early retirement. Like every street photo, this one abounds with unknowns — but its misleading content gives it a dimension it would otherwise lack.

It just goes to show: you mustn’t accept every subject at face value. Street photos are fleeting images of people about whom we know nothing, except what their appearance, actions and expression can tell us.

If you want to know the whole story — how they came to be in this position at this point in time — you’d need a lifetime’s acquaintance with them. Yet, even then…even then…

 

Should The Viewer Be Unable to Detect Your Enhancements?

I recently watched a YouTube video by Thomas Leuthard entitled “23 Ninja Tips For Your Next Photo Walk,” no.23 of which was: “Don’t overcook your photos with too much editing. If you can tell what photoshopping tools were used, you’ve used too much.”

My inner ninja started wondering if this is true — and if it is, WHY is it true?

If it’s a valid rule it would certainly exclude a lot of creative work, including the composite images by Danny Santos in Singapore which show an accumulation of figures in the frame, derived from shots taken with a remotely controlled camera.

It would also exclude my own composite artworks which I make mostly from street photo rejects — but then, I don’t claim this activity to be “photography” as such, let alone “street photography.”

However, I don’t think Thomas Leuthard is referring to deliberately prepared composites or to such routines as “convert to black and white” (bearing in mind that his own work is chiefly in black and white). I’m sure he’s talking mainly about processing routines such as sharpening, levels and curves adjustments, and colour correction. Any of these can lead to hideous examples of bad taste unless you use them with the utmost discretion.

Acceptable Enhancements
1. What about cropping? Surely we have to accept the need to crop street photos from time to time? Some photographers are steadfastly opposed to it in the belief that capturing the perfect whole-frame shot is their primary objective. Others, myself included, deliberately use a high resolution camera to enable some cropping at the editing stage.

However, I think Thomas Leuthard’s rule (or guideline) still applies, because if the composition looks impossibly perfect the onlooker will immediately detect it’s a crop — and downgrade it accordingly.

2. Another acceptable enhancement has to be straightening. Fortunately people are never going to notice it. This a godsend to the street photographer because plenty of pictures are taken in haste and a high proportion of them need to be corrected. Luckily, you can’t overdo straightening; the image is either straight or crooked.

3. Along with straightening there’s the whole issue of perspective adjustment to consider: whether or not to correct for converging verticals. If you’ve tilted the camera up or down, vertical lines will converge towards the top or bottom of the frame. Sometimes they look right — especially if you want to emphasise the elevation of the camera — but they can also be a distraction. Is it OK to pull them into shape?

Again, it’s a question that requires an individual answer in each specific case. If you have a large, flat-topped skyscraper in the background it will be distracting to correct the verticals. People will notice the correction because they expect the top to look narrower than you’ve shown it. Rule 23 still applies!

Unacceptable Enhancements
1. Along with many other photographers I strongly disapprove of “high dynamic range” (HDR). When it first came along it seemed new and exciting, showing detail in deep shadow even though the highlights were still intact. It had a positive impact — getting close to what we see with our eyes — until people started to overuse it.

Once exaggeration crept in, HDR found itself on the “naughty step,” with photographers condemning its use entirely. That’s a pity because I’ve seen many pictures in which it seems natural, despite there being thousands more where it looks truly awful.

Would my featured image (above) be better in HDR, with detail in the shadow and highlights? I don’t think so.

2. Deliberate distortion of objects and figures in the photo can be noticeable if the onlooker compares the image to others of the same subject. For example, making people fatter or thinner is completely unacceptable in street photography, as is transposing faces, beautifying or uglifying your subject, or adding figures that were never in the original shot.

If you make any of the above distortions, transpositions or additions, it’s very likely someone will see the discrepancy and call you out. Rule 23 wins again!

3. The majority of software filters are useless and completely unacceptable for street photography. Anything which crudely stylizes, pixelates, solarizes, posterizes, or texturizes the image is not OK (and please note that I’ve drifted into American spelling because these words are too familiar to write in British English). I know their exclusion deprives Photoshop Elements users of half their software controls, but you can’t “sketchify” or introduce “craquelure” (a brick-like texture) and expect to be taken seriously as a street photographer.

In my view (although I don’t use them) certain carefully judged presets are OK. After all, if you accept the JPEG that comes out of the camera you’re accepting the manufacturer’s preset which produces it. Similarly, you may like the “look” you can get from a complex combination of adjustments and wish to apply it to all your photos. If you shoot in RAW and always retain the RAW file — as I advise — the process is reversible.

Man cooking fish in golden sunlight

Refining the Rule
Overcooking your photos is every bit as bad overcooking your vegetables. It makes photos indigestible to the visual system, bringing discomfort rather than satisfaction.

However, I think there’s a more general rule you can apply to street photography. It’s simply this: “Don’t exaggerate.”

The English poet Eliza Cook (1818-1889) wrote: “Exaggeration misleads the credulous and offends the perceptive.”

She was right, up to a point. I think it’s OK — and perhaps even necessary — to exaggerate when you’re postulating ideas, but it’s not OK when you publish your conclusions.

So apply adjustments sparingly. Keep processes like sharpening and shadow lightening to a minimum. Before you commit yourself to anything as permanent as printing, return to each picture and see whether you’ve overdone the adjustments you’ve made.

I didn’t overcook the colour in the shot above (the sun was setting), but I think the fish are nearly done.

Does Quantity Beat Quality in Candid Photography?

The biggest problem facing any photographer today is the sheer quantity of visual representation flooding the world, filling up every waking moment of our lives and quite a few of our dreams.

So, at the end of ten years taking street photographs would you rather have ten great shots that are ignored by the world at large or one thousand merely good shots which bring you a measure of fame and fortune?

It’s a worrying thought — almost as worrisome as running a competition for best-kept gardens. (See my featured image above — not a street photo, but all the winning gardens have to be visible from the street. Smiley Face).

As regards my question, I think most people would opt for fame and fortune, bearing in mind how difficult it is to sustain enthusiasm for an activity if you’re rewarded for it so infrequently.

No, Never
I disagree. In any artistic endeavour, quantity never beats quality. Imagine you are a museum director and someone brings you a shoe box with a one-of-a-kind artefact, the only surviving product of a craftsman from the past. It’s a masterpiece and you put it on display. Then another person walks in with a large box full of similar, but less well executed works. These lesser works lack invention, show little variety, and all of them have minor flaws when compared to the masterpiece on display.

What do you do? It’s obvious. You put the lesser works into storage for examination by scholars and you keep showing the masterpiece. Scholars trawl through masses of documents and images seeking the truth. To make the point, here’s a shot I took of a crumpled figure (I call him “The Scholar”) emerging from a secondhand bookstore, laden with books. His is an arduous task, perhaps even more labour-intensive than that of the artist.

Man carrying a lot of books in a black bag

Minimal Output, Maximum Fame
Many painters have acquired huge reputations despite having produced a minimal amount of work. The Venetian painter Giorgione who died at the age of 32 left just over a dozen works, only five of which survive. Yet his impact on the history of art was so profound it reverberates to this day because we can see his influence in the work of later artists.

It’s easier to be prolific as a photographer than as a painter, even if you’re using large format film cameras. With a smaller camera, the street photographer can take a thousand images in a day. In digital there’s minimal cost — and the more pictures you take the easier it is to justify your initial expenditure on equipment.

Yet getting fifty great shots in a lifetime is a huge achievement. David Bailey (who took fashion photography out of the studio and on to the street) once said: “Everyone will take one great picture. I’ve done better because I’ve taken two.” Tongue-in-cheek, no doubt, but you get the point.

Image Overload
Now we come back to the phenomenon of “image overload” with which I introduced this post. Great photographers like David Bailey have the judgement to be selective, but Instagram users click and post repeatedly without regard to their pictures having either longevity or intrinsic quality. Snapchat is even more casual. Click, post, automatic delete. It’s as though the world of images has become as ephemeral as — more ephemeral than – life itself.

The old adage: “Ars longa, vita brevis” (Art is long, life is short) no longer applies. At least, it doesn’t apply if you classify the billions of photos taken every day as a form of “art.”

But now there’s another problem. Among billions of photos there are bound to be one or two — or even a hundred or two — that could be rescued, enlarged, put on a wall and widely acclaimed as art.

In fact, in the distant future, a man will walk into a museum with a dozen Instagram images taken by the same person — and the museum director will be shocked into silence. “How were these missed at the time? This artist is a genius! Let’s praise him to the skies!”

Two for the Price of One

I love to photograph people in pairs. There’s something poignant about a pair, not only of two people, but also of two animals, two birds — even two objects. When these pairs display certain similarities they indicate the possibility of sharing, of mutual support, of banishing loneliness in a large and often hostile world.

As I say, there has to be some resemblance between the individuals who make up the pair, whether they’re directly related or not. Maybe they just work for the same company and share an identical uniform. Or perhaps they are man and wife who have become so accustomed to each other they dress in a similar style and finish each other’s sentences.

Family resemblance, as between brothers and sisters, is photogenic — especially when taken out of context in the street, away from the family group. It’s great to stumble across twins, although, to tell you the truth, I prefer the two people to have physical differences as well as similarities. Variations in their appearance add visual interest to the photograph.

Musical Harmony
My featured image (above) is of two musicians going to work at the Royal Opera House, Covent Garden. What I like most about the picture is the contrast between their similarities and differences. You see: once again it’s “contrast” that lies at the heart of the image — and sometimes we notice it only when it’s pointed out to us.

The two musicians are probably not related, just friends or colleagues. But they dress in a similar style: dark clothes, narrow jeans, comfortable black trainers with white trim. They both carry a black bag, with a prominent zipper.

Yet their similarities are limited to their clothes, accessories and physical characteristics. Once we address their higher, cerebral capabilities, the differences become obvious: signified by the fact that one wears a hat on her head while the other doesn’t; and by the stark difference in the instruments they carry.

Here’s the point: the instruments may differ, but they’re both stringed instruments and the musicians play them in the same orchestra. It’s possible for people to celebrate their unique individuality while coming together in harmony, not despite but because of these differences.

Incidentally, I’m grateful to the cellist for having a “fragile” sticker on her carry case. A glass of red wine is ideal for celebrating the idea I’m trying to express.

The Same But Different
Continuing the musical theme — and still on the topic of “same but different” — here’s a shot I took an hour after photographing the musicians.

Woman outside cafe, pointing out something to her companion

The two subjects are on the other side of a plate glass window. Superimposed on their dark leather coats you can see the reflection of a musician reading a score. The two people outside are clearly related and share a very similar taste in clothes. Their scarves are identical and their jackets the same deep shade of maroon. By contrast, the people in the background are dressed very differently.

What you see in this image is essentially three or four layers of London life: the musician, the visitor, the passers-by, and the typically English architecture across the street. Yet it’s the pair who dominate the picture space. Are they trying to figure out the right way to get to Leicester Square? I think they look too confident to be lost. Maybe they’re evaluating the building opposite before putting in an offer for it.

The Joy of Pairs in Candid Photography
I hope you can see why I like candid photography from the two examples I’ve given. I can imagine that the people I’ve depicted have their own collections of posed photos, but I suspect they have few which show them going about their normal lives. With luck, an enterprising street photographer will take my own photo when I’m working. I won’t mind at all.

I guess I was “on a roll” that day — or else I was noticing every pair I came across. Certainly the light was particularly good and I was anxious to take full advantage of it.

My final image, therefore, is of the ultimate pair: the married couple (below).

Couple in London's theatre district

I’m not sure what story I can spin for this image, but my guess is that the lady in red — a visitor from abroad — has just scored a couple of West End tickets to a musical production. (This is all sheer conjecture!) Her husband would rather be doing something else, but patiently he goes along with her wishes.

The woman turns to speak; the man makes a tentative gesture with his right hand. You can identify them as a pair from their body language. These people are aware both consciously and subconsciously of each other’s thoughts and movements. Every emanation demands — and gets — a response.

After all, being part of a successful pair is all about give and take. Isn’t it?

Most Photographers Don’t Take Photos, They Rearrange Reality

It’s taken me a while to make up my mind about this topic, but I think we need to be realistic about reality. We have to acknowledge an important fact about it. It’s there.

Most professional photography consists in rearranging really to suit the purposes of the photographer. Whether its portraiture, fashion, wedding, friends-and-family, advertising or corporate — the subject in front of the camera is primped, prettified, fussed over, and generally rearranged to look good in the eyes of the world.

Only landscape, travel, and truly candid photographs are (mostly) free of such deliberate distortion. Not incidentally, they are also more likely than the others to be free from the demands of commerce, taken by people for love rather than money.

No Objections
I have no objections in principle to rearranging reality for the purposes of art, but I don’t think it has any place in street photography. Any interference with the scene — such as attracting the attention of a person within it, or moving an object to suit the composition — destroys the illusion of the invisible camera. Without this illusion street photography has no magic and no identity. It is nothing at all.

Oddly enough, the artist who inspires me the most was one who acquired a reputation for obsessively altering the reality in front of the camera.

In the Movies
I have always admired the films of Michelangelo Antonioni, especially his later ones which were made in full colour with cinematography by Carlo Di Palma. It was Antonioni’s film “Il Deserto Rosso” (The Red Desert) which, several years ago, set me on a path to accepting the reality of the modern world.

In the movie, Giuliana (played by Monica Vitti) is the beautiful protagonist whose neurosis is brought about by having to cope with the hostile world of industrial Italy. She seems to be alone in responding negatively to the factories and shipyards where her husband’s work has taken her. She is a stranger in a strange land.

Only towards the end of the film is there a kind of resolution for her, when she reassures her young son, Valerio, that the birds in the area survive by learning to avoid the poisonous yellow smoke emitted from the chimneys.

Antonioni Speaks
The message of acceptance was underlined later by Antonioni when he said: “The line and curves of factories and their chimneys can be more beautiful than the outline of trees, which we are already too accustomed to seeing.” To get this feeling across, he used every possible photographic technique, including the use of telephoto lenses to foreshorten the distance between the central character and her environment.

The technique of melding subject and environment lies at the heart of street photography. That’s right. The film director who most exemplifies the aesthetic (as opposed to the candid spirit) of street photography was also one who liked to manipulate reality for photographic effect.

For this, his first colour film, Antonioni wanted to compose the colour relationships, so he gave us white steam, red pipes, blue railings, and painted the trees and grass white and grey to suppress any lingering colours of nature in this largely man-made world.

Undramatising, Rearranging
Antonioni’s films positively invite us to see reality in photographic terms. He embraces photography at the expense of theatre by undramatising his scenes, making them appear to be slices of life, although, of course, everything is meticulously orchestrated.

If you’re wondering how Antonioni himself saw reality, here’s another quote: “Every time I enter a strange office, public place or private home, I get the urge to rearrange the scene. I go out to meet someone and the conversation puts me ill at ease. Because I feel that neither of us is properly placed in the room.”

He adds: “Is this professional distortion or the instinctive urge to feel myself in physical harmony with my surroundings? I believe more in the second hypothesis. In fact, I cannot shoot a scene without first being alone in the room, or the set, in order to understand it and sense the various possible camera angles.” (Esquire, August 1970).

Woman looking anxious in front of graffiti scrawls

A Shared Neurosis
I must say, I’ve always shared the same neurosis: of wanting to feel in physical harmony with my surroundings and being uncomfortable with the “wrong” position.

Watching “Il Deserto Rosso” made me give up art history and go to film school, but I’ve since found that I don’t want to change the reality in front of the camera — I just want to change my viewpoint. In fact, working in environments where I feel out of place is of real benefit in compelling me to look for accidental or hard-to-find arrangements of forms, colours, and contrasts that make me feel better.

Street photography depends on our personal feelings about our relationship to reality. Do we love it? Hate it? Admire it? Do we feel dwarfed by it? Or do we feel superior to it? In awe of it? Amused by it? Puzzled by it?

There are endless questions we can ask, but we probably shouldn’t verbalise them. The extent to which we humanise the camera by controlling where and how we point it is a measure of how well we answer those questions without ever posing them overtly.

Why Did the Street Photographer Cross the Road?

The answer is: to escape! Having just taken a picture of people about to cross the road, I don’t really want to hang around for objections, so I cross the road in the opposite direction and make a safe retreat.

The technique works best when you’re sporting a medium telephoto, such as a 50mm on a crop-frame camera (my old Fuji S5Pro) giving the full frame equivalence of 75mm. This is what I used for taking my featured image (above).

The seven people in the shot had been waiting patiently for a gap in the traffic and were not going to miss their opportunity. They all set off with speed and determination — and I was fortunate to record them at the precise moment when this happened.

More Tech
I don’t often give all the technical details in a blog post, but I think they’re worth mentioning this time. I’d stopped down the lens from f/1.4 to f/4, ISO 400, 1/900th second. Because of the dark background I’d also set an exposure bias of -0.7 step (two thirds of a stop). This is the key to the success of the image because I’ve not had to tinker with the exposure in post-processing, which always results in a loss of tonality.

The Fuji colours really sing in this shot, helped by the pink car and other coloured objects in the background. By contrast the women and girls are dressed more soberly: five of them with white shirts or tee-shirts and one in brown.

I think the two central figures saw me raise my camera and they responded with a split-second “deer caught in the headlamps” reaction. It’s a good thing they did. The girl at the back has her eyes closed (someone in a large group often blinks, which is why group photographers take more than one shot). The contrast between “wide awake” and “a bit dozy” echoes that between the hesitation of the girl on the left and the full commitment of the girl with the black backpack, worn jauntily the wrong way round.

I took the picture because I liked the individual looks of the people — and they rewarded me by revealing their personalities in gesture and expression.

Same Idea, Different Everything
My second picture in this post is very different, although it’s the same subject: a group of people crossing the road. I took this one mainly because of the old tree in the background. Hong Kong has quite a few trees like this, sometimes, against all the odds, clinging to life on the side of an exposed rock face.

 

Somebody always sees you

Yes, everything is different: my camera (Canon 5DIII), the country, the light, the climate, and the style and culture of the people in the shot. This time only my lens has a slight similarity — in its angle of view (85mm on full frame). These people are at an official crossing. They have a green light, so they can all walk without fear of being run over. One of them — the tourist holding hands with her partner — can even do a bit of sight-seeing on the way across.

Again, I think the central figure has spotted me (quite an achievement as I’d popped out from behind some street furniture at the last moment. The settings (FYI) were: f/1.8 lens stopped down to F/5, ISO 800, 1/800th second (not too dissimilar from those of the Bangkok photo).

I hesitate to show these two images together because the photographic styles simply don’t match, despite the subject being the same. Yet I think it’s been worthwhile. Comparing them has given me the idea of “Same Subject, Different Cultures” — a possible project for the future. If I had the wanderlust of, say, travel photographer Forrest Walker (fd walker), I could photograph people crossing the road in every country on Earth.

Or maybe I’ll just stick with these.

Moments of Puzzlement

If you’re building collections of street photographs based on themes, you can group them by emotion — joy, sadness, anger, and so on — or by reaction, such as surprise or puzzlement.

Moments of puzzlement are inherently ambiguous and mysterious if you can’t see what has prompted them. And as I’ve mentioned before in these articles, ambiguity and mystery are two of the most useful ingredients in street photography. I’d be lost without them.

If a subject looks puzzled, the onlooker viewing the image will also be puzzled. What’s going on? Why is this person questioning reality? Isn’t everything obvious once you’ve taken a photograph of it?

A False Assumption
The idea that photography reveals everything is one of the myths of the modern age. We look at scenes that are confusing in reality and we photograph them for later inspection. People do the same in art galleries. A great painting is far too elaborate and potentially meaningful to be absorbed in a few moments, so people photograph it “for later.”

It’s a comforting thought, isn’t it? It’s rather like having some kind of convenience snack-food, like a chocolate bar. “I can eat it later.” You’ll never suffer mental starvation if you have a camera. You can take a picture and tell yourself “I’ll understand it later.”

Outward Signs
To show puzzlement in a photograph you really need the subjects to display some evidence of it. After all, it’s possible to be quietly puzzled and give no external indication of it apart from a Roger Moore-stye raised eyebrow that would go completely unnoticed in a street photo.

The most noticeable outward sign of puzzlement is a combination of frowning and head-scratching. When you see this, take a picture! You won’t be disappointed. The subject can be looking to one side, as in my featured image (above), or looking directly at the camera, as in the image below. It doesn’t matter. Something has puzzled the subject and the image prompts us to wonder what it is.

save rock and roll tee-shirt

More Ambiguity, More Mystery
Such images as those I’ve described (and offered) have further layers of ambiguity and mystery. For a start, they may be completely misleading.

For example, perhaps the subject only appears to be puzzled and is simply scratching his or her head because it itches — and the frown is nothing more than an expression of annoyance at the itch.

You must admit, that’s a possibility. Does it matter? Not really, because photographs are documents of appearances. They can’t contain full explanations of everything that seems to be happening in them. In fact, their charm is actually based on their inscrutability, on their steadfast refusal to disentangle ambiguity or shine a light on every mystery.

The featured image at the top is a good illustration of the point I’ve just made. The woman who is scratching her head also displays a bandaged wrist. We’ll never know how she injured it. The wrist is just “there” — an appearance without an explanation. Maybe she’s only pretending to have a bad wrist. I know that’s unlikely, but it’s within the realm of many possibilities.

So as you can see, the subject’s puzzlement is also our puzzlement — and we have our own reasons to be puzzled quite apart from worrying about whatever’s bugging the subject.

My second image (above), which I’ve called “Save Rock and Roll,” is not so mysterious as the first. It’s just a group of young men who are probably returning from a class (to judge by the notebook) and thinking about the evening ahead. Will they go out drinking — or share a meal? Certainly they all seem to share a similar taste in clothes.

Very obligingly, one of them touches his head in a gesture that seems to echo the pose of the model in the poster. At the time of taking the shot, I wondered whether he was doing it deliberately. Perhaps he’d seen the poster and had decided to give me one of those “correspondences” which always look interesting in a street photo.

Ah, now you see I’ve started digging up mysteries and ambiguities where probably none exist. I’m looking at these photos, scratching my head and frowning.

It’s all very puzzling.

Placing the Subject Off-Centre

If your first instinct is always to place the subject in the middle of the photo, think again. It’s often better in street photography to tuck the subject off to the left or the right, allowing the rest of the picture to counterbalance the composition.

I’m not talking about those impromptu street portraits which may very well have the subject somewhere near the middle of the frame. Rather, I’m talking about photos in which “the subject” is not just a single person or even a small group of people. It’s when the real subject is the whole scene: people in the context of their environment.

The Fortune Teller
For my featured image (above) I placed the three women in one quarter of the frame, letting the unusual background occupy most of the available space. I’m very glad I did. The small group is sufficiently engaging to hold our attention, yet the rest of the scene has its own charms which make us explore the image to see what’s there.

We can read the stickers, most of which are in English: “Whistle While You Work,” etc. We can check out the garden, which appears to be very well tended, complete with bird-feeders and neat pathways. Yet the eye constantly comes back to the group of three people, because each of them is caught mid-action while performing a particular activity.

Despite all the English stickers, unless you read Thai it’s hard to figure out exactly what’s happening in the photo. The two girls are deep in thought while enjoying their drinks because they’re having their fortune told for the very reasonable price of 39 baht. The sign on the left says they’ll learn all about what’s happening to them as regards work, money, luck, love, everyday life, enemies, partners, and the future. No wonder they look serious!

The image is another of those in which the real subject is “time.” This time it’s all about the future and what will happen in the future. By preserving the present moment, photography itself always has the concept of time embedded into it. Here, the present moment is full of life and movement, yet everyone is concerned about the future. Meanwhile, the past lingers in the stickers and in the can of discarded Nescafé in front of the fire hydrant.

Fifty Percent Off
The next image (below) has no messages about the passing of time, unless you count the limited time offer of a fifty percent discount.

Shoes Fifty Percent

Again, the subject is off to one side, leaving the large advert to dominate the image. Normally this would be an odd composition, but I think it works because of the unusual elevation of the camera. No, I wasn’t lying flat on the pavement to take the shot. Between me and the subject there was a steep flight of steps, enabling the style of shot you see.

Looking up at the subjects made the verticals converge, as you can see on the right. However, I’ve made the verticals truly upright on the left, so that the two figures can approach the entrance while seeming to be propelled towards it by the leaning verticals on the right. Meanwhile a mysterious, shadowy figure appears be reflected in the window at bottom right, helping to stop the image from tipping over completely.

Inside the Store
Having created such a lot of anticipation about entering the store, I guess we should go inside. You can tell this is Robinson’s Department Store from the above image, as the name appears in the large advert — and the reflected road sign says: “Charoen Krung Road.”

Star Product

This store always makes me think of green and turquoise blue because these always seem to be the dominant colours whenever I visit. In the pharmaceutical area especially, there’s a clinical feel of newly squeezed toothpaste, with very few warm shades to enliven the scene.

I was fortunate to find contrast in the figures on the right: flesh and blood human beings in the midst of an otherwise sterile environment. They can be at the side of the image because what matters is the contrast between them and the rest of the shop.

Placing the subject off-centre is a way of avoiding what’s obvious in favour of creating a more complete image. You still have to balance the composition, but there’s often something you can use. In the picture above I’ve chosen the glaring white of the displayed products to counterbalance the figures standing in shade. The distant figure in the background links the two halves of the picture.

Tea Lounge or Coffee Shop?

One of the supposed clichés of candid photography is the coffee shop interior, usually somewhere in Paris, with a woman sitting beneath a mirror, looking wistfully at the street outside.

I try to avoid cliché, so my solution is to add tea lounges to the repertoire. You could scarcely have a subject that’s more different.

Greater formality surrounds the drinking of tea, probably because it was the preferred drink of the English upper classes at the end of the eighteenth century when formality was at its height. However, let’s not forget the traditions of tea drinking in Japan where the ritual of making and drinking tea became a rarified art form.

Invitation to a Ritual
Why does tea invite ritual? I have no idea. It must be something to do with the subtlety of its flavour. To obtain the correct flavour you have to follow a certain ritual: warming the pot, letting it stand, and so on. One thing leads to another — and eventually an entire pattern of behaviour emerges, not only in the preparation of tea but also in the drinking of it.

Today, typical up-market tea lounges don’t specify how customers should behave. They simply impose control through the formality of their design. For example, there’s no question of chairs and tables being scattered, higgledy-piggledy (a word I’ve never written before!) around the room. They’re laid out in regular fashion, where customers can sit comfortably but not slumped.

Coffee shops are quite the opposite. They’re relaxed places where casual behaviour is positively encouraged. If you want to do homework or office work in a branch of Starbucks, like the young people in my photo below — that’s fine. You don’t even have to drink coffee: a milk shake will do.

Collaboration

Traditional
It’s hard to find a really traditional tea lounge, especially one where you can take photographs without people objecting. I took my featured image (at the top) in the Foreign Correspondents Club in Hong Kong. It’s not a tea lounge, as such, but a combined tea/bar/café where journalists sit, talk and write. I think photography was forbidden, but I couldn’t resist. I told myself I was working undercover.

The image is entirely candid. I was taking it to remind myself of the English club-like atmosphere when a waitress showed up with a tray. It’s the nearest I could get to recreating the past at five o’clock in the afternoon.

We are now, of course, a world away from the dirt and dust of the street — because clubs and tea lounges keep themselves apart. They rarely have outdoor tables like the coffee shop. To drink tea and enjoy hushed conversation you need the peace and quiet of being enclosed, preferably on all four sides.

Modern
Genuinely old interiors in the Far East are rapidly disappearing, but there are plenty of new, purpose-built tea lounges in malls and hotels. They tend to be “design-intensive,” using a plethora of decorative items to signal their function.

The photo below shows an “1823 Tea Lounge” belonging to the Ronnefeldt group, a company that has adopted the epithet: “Serving the world’s finest tea since 1823.” As you can deduce, even a modern tea lounge needs traditional credentials to attract customers, despite having over fifty teapots arranged in rows along the walls and counter.

Tea Lounge

I took the above shot from public space — the mall equivalent of “the street” — without entering the lounge itself. You can see right through the room to further public space beyond.

The image demonstrates all kinds of contradictions, as confirmed by the deceptive reflection of the woman in the centre. It almost looks as though she’s sitting alone, like the man behind her, but she’s actually photographing her partner’s tea. They didn’t do that in…1823.