Said it before, I cannot fail to repeat it. Street photography is like a child's dream: we start with some broken toys and then we fall asleep to arrive at the most complex of stories ever. Likewise, street photography starts with some accidental circumstances to then take form in a magic equilibrium and to tell a story in a fraction of a second.
Florina, a very capable sketcher, draws graceful curved lines (the horse's back, the clay stack), puts a vertical stabilising pole, and quickly assembles a wooden cube and roof to complete the puzzle.
Is anybody out there who would take some time to correct the lens flare and avoid the overexposure? If yes, you are waisting your time and talent. Don't think twice! Just shoot!
Link back to FB
The first surrealists (poets, painters, sculptors) were often going through flea markets and other vanguard markets to pick objects. Sometimes curious but usually ordinary objects. But then, when at home, they were combining them in aesthetic works. In other words, "the ragpicker footsteps".
Photographers are doing exactly the same but they "assemble" their work on the spot.
But they are also lucky because they also have in their disposal faces, glances, shadows, animals …
Orna is collecting these glances, without losing the taste for composition and peculiarity, strolling through the crowds.
After all, we are nothing without the others, even the indifferent or hostile ones. (BACKLINK)
You all know my "weakness" when it comes to state in a photograph the absence. "Why choose a picture without the main subject in it? Why with its absence? Because street photography is the photography of synergy among human beings and at the same time the total absence of them. It is the humanity and the phantom of it." So whenever a picture transmits me that ... I buy! (BACKLINK)
Photo by: Andres Cesar (BACKLINK)
Photo by: Haris Panagiotakopoulos (BACKLINK)
Never been there but I have this hunch … when in Cuba or India the photographs are waiting to be picked up. No pain and much gain. Many, multiple subjects, surrealist scenes, superb light.
No offence, but in those (and other) exotic places the photographer's role is marginalised. The ultimate action of the photographer is to cut the "meaningful" slice out of time but mostly out of space. To choose what gets in the tiny "4 angles" frame and what is left out. And usually, the less of context in the picture, the more the story is taking unimaginable routes.
The two images presented here are doing exactly this. They leave us with no contextual information and they undermine any fortuitous reading. Nothing is what it looks like. And all can be a familiar snapshot and nothing more. You would say: "Are you kidding us?" A kid's play on the sand, and a manifestant escaping (or in some countries pursuing) the police are ordinary images.
No they are not. Would you let your kid play there? The sea is menacing, the beach deserted and the sand castle haunting.
Or would you run through toxic fumes, whatever the reason? And in fact which is the reason?
So nothing ordinary here! They are both post-apocalyptic images. Raw, straight images cut out from a reality that we carefully put away as disturbing. Thanks to the authors for the reminder!
Entering the image form the top I get the impression of a prison wall and then the basket pole kind of confirms it. But no. It's an ordinary street shot coz of the passing-by scooter. Very atmospheric, nice play with real, shadows, graphic contours and a good timing to catch the ball in the air and the scooter in the foreground. Now my strictly personal feel is the one of familiarity and of a lost childhood! Chaqun son truc. Servez-vous! (BACKLINK)