A question from The Street Photography Club…. OK, I will flip this a little… To me, ‘street’ photography is NOT about the image but what was going on inside the photographer when they created it. If that process of creation provokes a sense of risk or danger (although that could be mild and very personal), then it is ‘street’. If I am taking no risk, avoiding any danger, then it is something else. It could be landscape, minimalist, portrait, architectural, surrealist, whatever – but it is only ‘street’ if I am putting myself in a space that feels to me to be risky.
Another way of expressing the same idea would be to say that the environment within which I was working needs to be ‘edgy’ for a ‘street’ image to be created.
I was able to visit the “Visa pour l’image”, the 36th International Festival of Photojournalism in Perpignan, France a couple of weeks ago. One of the first exhibits that I visited was the work of Gaël Turine (https://www.gaelturine.com/) on the Ravages of Tranq Dope in Philadelphia. Many of his images are unposed, ‘candid’, up-close, and deeply personal. In his presentation he explained that he visited the dope neighbourhood with a social worker initially. But when he viewed the images he felt something was missing. He returned that night, alone, but with a taxi for protection/quick escape if need be.
I am afraid that a lot of the images that we all take are not, in my terms, ‘street’. There isn’t any risk involved in taking pictures through rain-soaked windows, of people who are already ‘putting themselves out there’.