When it comes to street photography, what counts, how would you define it, and why? Here's a video that poses some potentially tough questions and attempts to define more abstract ideas that may have a fair amount of gray area regarding that very question.
The video comes from travel photographer Jim Nix and features an exploration of the concept of what street photography is. He asks some interesting questions as he explores the concepts of travel photography, street photography, and urban photography among other things. I found this to be a pretty interesting video and then found myself thinking about where a person might draw the line (if it even needs to be drawn at all), where there is potential overlap among various disciplines, and even if it matters at all as to how we would define the concept.
What's the very first thing that pops into your head when you hear the words street photography? Does it have to be in an urban setting? What about people? Do you think that it's important to have some element or connection to people in the imagery? What about cityscapes? How would you differentiate between street photography, cityscapes, and travel photography?
Personally, I think that if the lines exist at all, they are fluid or gray rather than black and white lines separating these ideas. I think that the content definitely plays a role, but I think it's more about what story the photographer wants to tell and in turn, how the viewer receives the image. For example, I don't necessarily always associate heavy urban settings with street photography, and I certainly don't feel like more rural settings must be excluded from the category. We all may have a different idea of a street photography in our heads and by our own right, we may all be correct. So, I ask again, what's the first image that pops into your head when you think street photography?