advice: photographing people?

[xoxphoto]

My favorite subjects to photograph are people. But, whenever I'm in a public place, I feel very conspicuous pointing my camera at a complete stranger, focusing, and then snapping the shudder. This takes me a couple seconds because I'm new to photography... also, sometimes they catch me in the act and look at my lense and then the moment is ruined...

I've seen some wonderful candid shots of people in the forums. My question is, how do you all go about photographing total strangers?

[dovey]

I haven't done it yet, but I've seen some galleries where people explain their methods. From what I've seen, (and some of the most interesting candid people shots), the camera isn't raised for the shot. They leave it hanging around their neck, and just point the camera toward the targets hoping the picture comes out. The camera auto-focuses, and the subjects aren't aware they are being photographed, so they remain natural. (I would assume turning the flash off wouldn't need to be stated lol.) All they see is someone standing there with a camera hanging from their neck.

Sounds kinda cool to me, and lets you get some natural shots that would otherwise be blown by someone standing there pointing a camera at the scene.

Hope it helps.

If you try it, post the results.

[xoxphoto]

Ooo... that is a really good idea. Thank you for sharing! I'll def post the results when I try it out...

[s9810588]

I'm not a good street photog but I'm against shooting from chest/hip level. You don't get precise framing and focus by doing so. If you use autofocus, you don't know where the AF sensor is aimed at and the camera might focus on a building far away in the background.

[dovey]

I'm not a good street photog but I'm against shooting from chest/hip level. You don't get precise framing and focus by doing so. If you use autofocus, you don't know where the AF sensor is aimed at and the camera might focus on a building far away in the background.

True, couldn't agree more. But it remains a popular method... despite the inherent difficulties caused by AF. The height and fact that you don't get precise framing makes for interesting angles and framing (imo). I'm sure you'd get a lot of junk pics, but that's the beauty of digital cameras. Erase them and shoot some more!

Here's a couple of my favorite artists on pbase using this method. Note the angles and framing... and where the AF is capturing:

http://www.pbase.com/nksyoon/streetshoot (using a 300d and not using AF, and I really like the captions he used for his pics. In the comments, he also adds a link to a DOF calculator if you wanted to use that http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html )

http://www.pbase.com/hhf/hip (using a 10d)
They aren't my galleries, but I'll add the "vote if you like it" because it's the right thing to do.

[mpdequalsyfsm]

I use my Tamron 70-300mm a lot when doing public candid shots.
I feel less noticeable and have time to get a shot.

http://www.pbase.com/mpdequalsyfsm/image/33595529

http://www.pbase.com/mpdequalsyfsm/image/33596030

[s9810588]

All mechanical camera - 35mm lens. Cropping is around 90% of full frame. Use AF and I would get the sky in focus. I kneeled down to get the low angle rather than shooting from the hip.



No cropping, 75mm lens also with full mechanical camera. Impossible to focus properly and have this shallow DOF without looking through the viewfinder.

My advise is to practise till you know how to operate your camera really well and really fast so you don't need to fiddle with the buttons when shooting. When you see something interesting about to happen, pre-visualise how you want the photo to look, get into position then shoot quickly.

One thing you need to be aware of with digital cameras (except DSLRs): they have considerable shutter lag. You capture the photo something like 0.5 second after pressing the button.

Kris

[dovey]

My advise is to practise till you know how to operate your camera really well and really fast so you don't need to fiddle with the buttons when shooting. When you see something interesting about to happen, pre-visualise how you want the photo to look, get into position then shoot quickly.

Kris

That is good advice for anyone interested in photography. But I'm not sure why this is such a debate, the original question was about taking pics of complete strangers and not feeling comfortable with it. Shooting from the hip is just one way people address this issue, as well as adding another dimension to their photography. With a wide angle lens, I rarely have AF problems wether I'm looking thru the lens or not.

I tried a couple different "from the hip" shots this morning when we took the dogs to the park. Granted, they're not going to win any awards, but they were just test shots done because of the discussions in this thread.

This one I just walked up to a bush and pushed the button while trying to remain as still as possible. Eh, doesn't seem like AF problems at 42mm. I could hear the AF "beep" when shutter was pressed half way... so I clicked and this is what came out.

For this one, I had to pan slightly as Biscuit was passing me. Camera pressed against my chest, this is how it came out. Crappy pic, but I like the motion in it and the pic is a good representation of what he reminds me of whenever he is offleash at the park.

It's not the method I would recommend for general picture taking. But to address the topic of the thread concerning street photography for a person not comfortable with pointing a camera at strangers, this is a viable method that may yield some decent pics (as it has with others on pbase). And who knows, it may help overcome that uncomfortable feeling. It's just a different technique, not a tutorial on how to be a good photographer.

[alekhine]

You just need a good tele lens...
take a look here

http://www.pbase.com/alekhine/portraits

taken with a canon 70-200 2.8
enjoy

[stanmore]

There's no escaping the fact that you'll sometimes get your candid subjects noticing what you're doing. There's nothing wrong with that is there? Sometimes the eye contact 'makes' the image...



Also try to use a range of focal lengths for your street photography. Just using tele's renders a narrow perspective and shallow DOF look that whilst attractive and appropriate for some shots, will become dull and staid if that's all your collection has. I used a 50mm (on 35mm) for this...



..and a 28-70mm (often at the WA end) for all of the shots in this gallery... http://www.pbase.com/stanmore/stop_the_war_rally
Taking candids is really no different from taking any other photograph at the end of the day. There's really no need to do things any differently
--
Simon
http://www.pbase.com/stanmore

[s9810588]

Simon, that first photo of yours is great! I love it.

Dovey, I suggested xoxphoto to practise because she said in her original post that it took her a couple of seconds to snap a candid. I think you should take only a fraction of a second or the moment is lost, just like xoxphoto also said. As being uncomfortable about raising a camera to your eyes in front of strangers, I know that feeling. Just do it. After a while, you won't feel that uncomfortable anymore. Still, use common sense and stay out of trouble by taking photos of seemingly hostile people.

And as Simon said, sometimes eye contact does make the image. I've got one example too, here, although nowhere near as good as Simon's

Alekhine also has good samples of using telephoto in his gallery. No doubt a good telephoto lens will be very useful on some situations.




But as I said before, I'm not a good street photog. In fact, I'm pretty much a cr@pshooter.

Kris

[clickaway]

Most of my candids are taken with a 100-300 zoom lens, yet I'm rarely noticed. How do I achieve this? Well, much of this is down to WHERE I shoot my candids. I live 20 miles from London and go for locations where a camera is not out of place - you just blend into the background. And sometimes you may be able to work out if the environment will actually help you get a 'fun' candid. Look at this one below - her reaction was provoked by a street entertainer who made a point of surprising certain passers by.

Also take advantage of interesting buildings etc. - use them as a foil to confuse your candid subjects - momentarily swing the camera around from the 18th century building and on to them!
Remember, people are often distracted by something else - they may be in deep conversation, watching a street musician, on the phone, reading or having a passionate embrace!

But don't despair if you don't live anywhere near places like this. Have you tried grabbing candids at an event, even a small town event? People will still be distracted, and if enjoying themselves their guard may be let down.

For most of us, winter is approaching and candids are not as easy and plentiful as in the summer, but to me it seems an ideal time to practice ready for next year when all those outdoor events and increased tourist traffic will give us so many opportunities.

I've a couple of candid galleries if you are interested
http://www.pbase.com/clickaway/candids
http://www.pbase.com/clickaway/caught

Ray

[dovey]

Look at this one below - her reaction was provoked by a street entertainer who made a point of surprising certain passers by.


I've a couple of candid galleries if you are interested
http://www.pbase.com/clickaway/candids
http://www.pbase.com/clickaway/caught

Ray

I have already seen the "caught" gallery, but not the other one... except for one photo which I voted for a while back. It's my all-time favorite candid I think... excellent shot: http://www.pbase.com/clickaway/image/31501676

I like the idea about going to situations where a camera isn't out of place to get candid shots... actually it hadn't really occured to me. I suppose when I'm in crowded places and there are probably tons of opportunity to get a candid shot without being noticed, I'm usually upset that all these people are in my way lol.

Hopefully, I (like xoxphoto) won't feel so uncomfortable about photographing strangers. I'd love to get shots like Simon and s9810588 (making eye contact). Out of curiosity... do you usually say something to the subjects when you walk right up and surprise them with a pic? Do they say anything to you etc?

[framewerkz]

Petteri wrote a fantastic article about candids, and why telephoto is for cowards.

Click for it here.

With that in mind, here's mine. Right up close and personal...



There's a risk that telephoto candid capture ends up seriously creepy. Just check out Minoltaman's gallery of unsuspecting girls. Brrr. I imagine this guy just sneaking around the town he lives taking long range photos of girls, and having some sick shrine in his psycho serial killer lair.

Click here for extreme creepiness. As well as here and here. Note too that there are no galleries of guys...

[dovey]

Petteri wrote a fantastic article about candids, and why telephoto is for cowards.

Click for it here.

With that in mind, here's mine. Right up close and personal...



There's a risk that telephoto candid capture ends up seriously creepy. Just check out Minoltaman's gallery of unsuspecting girls. Brrr. I imagine this guy just sneaking around the town he lives taking long range photos of girls, and having some sick shrine in his psycho serial killer lair.

Click here for extreme creepiness. As well as here and here. Note too that there are no galleries of guys...

It was a good article, but I'm not sure I'm ready to call everyone who uses a telephoto lens for candids a coward. "Creepy" might be more appropriate for a particular theme the telephoto is used for (like a whole gallery of candid bikini shots etc), but not just for a broad branding of so many people who use a telephoto.

Petteri's "candids" are good... no debate here. But in his description of how he got them, he said he would sit there and take photo after photo of the subject... until they forgot he was there. Now, that might be fine for getting a candid shot of someone who knows you're there to get a picture of them, but I can't imagine him walking up to a stranger on the street and doing the same. It would probably freak the person out.

I thought the "candid" part of doing this on the street requires the scene to be captured as it is happening, and not as the photographer influences it. I do like the pics where eye contact is made, but I don't necessarily see the others as "the phony "candids" by the creepy people in trenchcoats wielding long lenses" (Petteri's words in article). If the person is aware of your presence, and know they are getting their picture taken, isn't it then more of a portrait?

The important difference is that younger children and pets, unlike older kids and adults, will not understand the idea that you want a photo with a natural pose. Wildlife, on the other hand, will simply run or fly away if you get too close.

Using your maximum zoom is also the best way to get candid shots of adults and older children. In all these cases, the trick is to know the approximate range of your particular zoom lens. To capture candid moments of adults, you may also want to find your range and focus on something other than your subject that is about the same distance away and then turn to take your photo so you do not lose the element of surprise.

Source: http://www.apogeephoto.com/june2004/kbutler6_2004.shtml

It's called candid photography-taking photographs of people doing something. And while it's not as simple as standing someone against a wall and firing, it's well within the scope of most amateur shooters. To take candid portraits, a photographer needs three things-a telephoto lens, fast film, and patience. The rest comes courtesy of the subject, himself. And if you're worried about invasion of privacy, don't be. As a general rule of thumb, people can be photographed anywhere they appear in public, although most professionals shy away from shooting subjects engaged in religious services or in compromising positions ... for obvious reasons.

In the "tips" it states:

Be devious. That's especially important when you come up against a subject who suspects he's being photographed. Pros like Meyer use tricks such a pretending to shoot something between the intended subject and the camera while actually focusing on the subject in the distance.

Source: http://www.photography.com/betterpics/part8.html

Both styles serve a purpose I think, and yield different results. Petteri thinks telephoto users are cowards... obviously others don't. If the end justifies the means, what difference does it make how the pic was taken? Petteri isn't the only photographer in the world with an opinion and a webpage, but I did like the article.... definately worth reading. Just my .02