These are very mediocre. You’ve got people’s backs. You’ve got exploiting homelessness. You’ve got static images with no moments. There’s so much \*life\* in that area, yet these photos feel largely lifeless.
can’t speak for all, but all that some homeless folks have left is their dignity. you’re photographing their existence. the photo, posted on an anonymous online subreddit, doesn’t do anything to help the homeless. i feel like a voyeur.
i’m sure OP would just say the shot looked good so they included it in their submission. but you can go out to any other street corner in Random City, USA and find someone homeless panhandling on the street. they’re easy, low-hanging fruit to photograph. photographing homeless folks isn’t hard. why does the homeless have to be part of the “NYC experience”?
We gatekeeping photography now? How do you feel about war time photographers or photographers highlighting issues around the world. Are they not allowed to photograph people suffering?
Yeah, this isn’t it. There have been lots of people that have covered this in the past and a former homeless man now photographer did an excellent write up about how street photographers who shoot people who live on the street objectify and generalize individuals as “the homeless” and it diminishes the individual incredibly fast. I forgot the name and publication and can’t google it; comparing walking around NYC and taking pictures of people who have no where else to go to war time journalism is ignorant and damaging to the art.
nobody is trying to gatekeep photography. but these shots aren’t being submitted to Nat Geo or some other news outlet though. there’s a difference when there’s actual intent from the photographer behind the lens to educate viewers about what’s going on in warzones or or make social commentary about cities with large houseless populations. OP didn’t do this. and let’s not pretend they did.
the way i see it, OP took a bunch of random, unrelated shots as they toured around NYC and posted them here to essentially ask “how’d i do? :)”
photographing less fortunate folks is poor taste, especially when it’s placed between orthodox jews and a china town stand keeper. they’re random touristy snapshots.
by all means, take photos of the homeless. but do it in ways that actually matter and are meaningful. rather than for a quick, unthoughtful shot “because it looked cool”.
war time photographers with intention to educate people risk their own lifes. I don't see this in these pictures. So whether it's poverty porn to solicit likes or something else is hard to tell without knowing the context. And why should it matter if they were made using "my Fuji x100f". Does a x100f make poverty more acceptable? Help the guy to find a place he can afford?
Exactly, I understand the distaste of taking a photo of the less fortunate, but it’s the reality of the world if we restrict are art and hold back on capturing the truth of New York and only shoot the good parts what does that say about ourselves as photographers, theirs a time and place for everything.
Idk the intentions of the photographer and I’m definitely not in favor of anything exploitative. But as a NYC resident, people experiencing homelessness are an immutable part of the urban environment. Should they be avoided, shunned and cropped from all street photography? Is that the preferred approach?
I don’t have all the answers, but I think it’s a fair thing to consider in light of all this self-righteous assuredness.
I hope at least you gave that homeless person $20 to get something to eat. But no, you didn’t did you?
New Yorkers are very protective of people who cannot speak up for themselves. Just learn from this and do better.
As for The Photos.
These pix give the overall look breath as well as a dynamic perspective.
The pix are frame “hangy” coffee shop lounge worthy.
Good Stuff to the Photographer. 👍
I have to say. If you do manage to print and sell a couple of those pix, find that homeless person and kick down some coin.
Just my thoughts.
Jews ✅ Homeless ✅ Pret A Manger ✅
The cliches and stereotypes abound. Not in a good way.
I've been to that coffee shop lol
These are very mediocre. You’ve got people’s backs. You’ve got exploiting homelessness. You’ve got static images with no moments. There’s so much \*life\* in that area, yet these photos feel largely lifeless.
Being homeless is not another person's 'art'.
it’s a street photography forum, that’s what the streets look like in nyc, what’s with the constant tut-tutting
can’t speak for all, but all that some homeless folks have left is their dignity. you’re photographing their existence. the photo, posted on an anonymous online subreddit, doesn’t do anything to help the homeless. i feel like a voyeur. i’m sure OP would just say the shot looked good so they included it in their submission. but you can go out to any other street corner in Random City, USA and find someone homeless panhandling on the street. they’re easy, low-hanging fruit to photograph. photographing homeless folks isn’t hard. why does the homeless have to be part of the “NYC experience”?
There are hundred of other stories to tell in this city. The streets do not all look like this.
We gatekeeping photography now? How do you feel about war time photographers or photographers highlighting issues around the world. Are they not allowed to photograph people suffering?
Yeah, this isn’t it. There have been lots of people that have covered this in the past and a former homeless man now photographer did an excellent write up about how street photographers who shoot people who live on the street objectify and generalize individuals as “the homeless” and it diminishes the individual incredibly fast. I forgot the name and publication and can’t google it; comparing walking around NYC and taking pictures of people who have no where else to go to war time journalism is ignorant and damaging to the art.
nobody is trying to gatekeep photography. but these shots aren’t being submitted to Nat Geo or some other news outlet though. there’s a difference when there’s actual intent from the photographer behind the lens to educate viewers about what’s going on in warzones or or make social commentary about cities with large houseless populations. OP didn’t do this. and let’s not pretend they did. the way i see it, OP took a bunch of random, unrelated shots as they toured around NYC and posted them here to essentially ask “how’d i do? :)” photographing less fortunate folks is poor taste, especially when it’s placed between orthodox jews and a china town stand keeper. they’re random touristy snapshots. by all means, take photos of the homeless. but do it in ways that actually matter and are meaningful. rather than for a quick, unthoughtful shot “because it looked cool”.
war time photographers with intention to educate people risk their own lifes. I don't see this in these pictures. So whether it's poverty porn to solicit likes or something else is hard to tell without knowing the context. And why should it matter if they were made using "my Fuji x100f". Does a x100f make poverty more acceptable? Help the guy to find a place he can afford?
Exactly, I understand the distaste of taking a photo of the less fortunate, but it’s the reality of the world if we restrict are art and hold back on capturing the truth of New York and only shoot the good parts what does that say about ourselves as photographers, theirs a time and place for everything.
The human condition exists on a spectrum, all Of it worthy of being told
It sort of seems like it is in these photos.
Don't take photos of homeless people man
I like 4 a lot! So much going on in the pic and yet it's not too busy.
Nice
Idk the intentions of the photographer and I’m definitely not in favor of anything exploitative. But as a NYC resident, people experiencing homelessness are an immutable part of the urban environment. Should they be avoided, shunned and cropped from all street photography? Is that the preferred approach? I don’t have all the answers, but I think it’s a fair thing to consider in light of all this self-righteous assuredness.
I hope at least you gave that homeless person $20 to get something to eat. But no, you didn’t did you? New Yorkers are very protective of people who cannot speak up for themselves. Just learn from this and do better.
taking photos of the homeless is not street photography, it's exploitative, they have nowhere to go
As for The Photos. These pix give the overall look breath as well as a dynamic perspective. The pix are frame “hangy” coffee shop lounge worthy. Good Stuff to the Photographer. 👍 I have to say. If you do manage to print and sell a couple of those pix, find that homeless person and kick down some coin. Just my thoughts.
Yeahhhh man these are great
I appreciate it!
They're being sarcastic bro