Is this sharp enough for you?

[Crazy Dave]

The photo here was taken by one of my favourite photographers, John Claridge was born in the East End of London and as teenager and despite his humble background, got a job at advertising agency, McCann Erickson in preference to other candidates from Public Schools. Unlike the toffs touting connections, John brought along some of his images and was able to discuss in depth, the merits of different developing techniques. I was privileged to meet John few years ago, he is a true gentleman and kind enough to lend advice on a project I was working on for the RPS. I'm a big fan of his gritty and unsentimental images of a way of life that is fast slipping out of living memory

So, the question is, have modern photographers become obsessed with equipment and sharpness and whether or not that bird has a glint or astigmatism in the left eye?

Does it matter that we cannot see any catchlights in this gentleman's eye or it's not sharp? For me the answer is definitely no.

I've been thinking about this post for a few days and hesitated. Why this, why now?

We belong to this group because we share a preference for a particular make of camera, nothing wrong with that and there's help when needed and it's very civilised. But a quick glance at New Posts just now shows there's not much about photography and I think that's a pity.

I cannot remember the last time a book was recommended, a post about inspirational photographers or details of an exhibition that stirred the juices. I was blown away by the Helen Levitt exhibition at The Photographers Gallery, why oh why didn't I post?

For my two-pennyworth, I've just bought See/Saw by Geoff Dyer, his analysis of a photo taken by Fred Herzog is a valuable lesson in how to read a photo. And another of his not really related to photography - 'Working the Room'. At long last, I've acquired Camera Lucida by Roland Barthes, I'm struggling but persevering. Some of the photographers I've discovered in the last couple of years: Constantine Manos, William Klein, Agenda Brown, Steve Reeves, Daniel Meadows, Bieke Depoorter and Harold Feinstein.

Do you agree or are you happy with the current balance of content here?


David

[Ian]

I think the key is that cameras are both tools for recording images, for whatever purpose, as well as tools for creating art. There is a wide blurring of the space between the two.

I'd like to see more people photography here and I'm very grateful for your excellent contributions, Dave.

It's challenging to be brave enough to photograph strangers in public places, but it can be done. I need to do it more, myself.

But I also hugely enjoy the photography we see posted here every day - but I think you are right in that we need a better balance to the variety?

Ian

[MJ224]

I take photos that please or otherwise me. I enjoy the technology as well as my chosen subject preferences which do include nice composition and interesting things to see. And “images” made up from composites.

E-group provides help and appreciation. And we all submit what we like. The variety is good to see. We learn something new every day too👍👍👍

[wornish]

I don't live in a City/Town where I get a chance to take pictures of complete strangers.
That said I would be too scared to even try. Where I live everyone knows each other.

If someone took my picture and posted it without asking I would not be happy. Is that just me?

Street photography is not my forté

[MJ224]

If someone took my photo, I would fear for their camera...:-))

[Luv2shoot]

Street photography is my favorite genre to look at. If I was braver, I would actually try to do more of it. Every time I go to a museum, a fair, a park, etc., I have every intention of taking street shots. But when the time comes, I bring home either a bunch of photos of the BACKS of people or nothing at all.

Street photography tells a story unlike most other types of photography. One thing I do NOT want to do photograph is people that are poor, homeless, crippled, etc., and I am usually upset when I see photos like that.

[Ian]

It's difficult. Julia is noy keen on visiting places for a holiday where there is poverty. We visit relatives in the Philippines. The are fairly well-off there, but Julia did feel that after a while she become obliviousl to the surrounding poverty, which she was unfomfortable with, which I can understand. I wouldn't want to exploit those captured in images of poverty, but I think that with care and skill, images of the poor and vulnerable can be powerful in a positive sense.

[Crazy Dave]

Ooops. If my post has been seen as a plea for more street photography, people shots, that wasn’t my intention although I can see how it could be construed as such. It was about encouraging a broader dialogue,

Happy snapping.


David

[wanderer]

Interestingly, the picture you show looks much more grainy on my laptop screen than on my phone.
Sometimes modern cameras seem to go too far in producing technically sharp pictures when a bit more grain gives a more meaningful image.
Like many, I don't feel comfortable doing street/people photography. Also complicated when working that the office insisted on having a 'runner' with you to get sign off particularly with children at events. Lucky if you got 4 pictures an hour. The system was eventually changed to having a notice on tickets so that adults could say yes or no to photography of them or their children. Still didn't make it any easier.

[Crazy Dave]

Taking photos of kids is fraught so I never do that. One of the refreshing things about the Helen Levitt exhibition was the number of kids playing on the streets of New York. How's this for a classic?

David