I have long been a staunch critic of the street photography genre. One of the biggest problems I've seen over the years, most notably as a judge in dozens of major contests, is derivative work. In this article, I will discuss six types of street photographs that we simply don't need any more of.
My criticism of street photography is well-established. In 2017, I published an article questioning the ultimate purpose of generating billions and billions of street photographs. The article, which initially went viral, was later updated and republished here. I was criticized for being too harsh in the article, and yet, I still hold to my opinion. At the same time, I have come to appreciate the historical value that some street photography can provide. With this idea in mind, I think street photographers should focus more on depicting their contemporary times in a unique way and less on producing derivative work.
Making photographs similar to those that we have seen receive great praise in the past is an attractive idea. But, just like the writers who ran out to write an "Oprah" book to reap the rewards of her attention, photographers who merely copy the work of others will never achieve any lasting notability of their own. Good photography must disrupt and enrapture, it must expose us to new ways of seeing. Yet, what I see in contests and on social platforms like Instagram most often is just more of the same old, same old. I see people copying each other over and over and over. Here are the six types of photographs I see copied most often.
- The Umbrella Photo. Please, photographers, stop making street photographs of people holding umbrellas. I understand that there is something visually appealing about photographing a person with an umbrella, but does the world really need any more of these images? This kind of photo has been made in every way possible. I guarantee you that you cannot show me an umbrella photo that I will think is unique in any way.
- The Gas Station Photo. The gas station remains a favorite among rural American street photographers. It is, apparently, especially appealing to photograph the gas station at night. Or, perhaps, during the day if it is a vintage-looking station or one with a big rotating sign etc. Stephen Shore is likely to blame here. His work is nice, although largely attractive because of its vintage. At any rate, Stephen has the gas station covered. You can take your own foot off the gas when it comes to making this type of photograph!
- The Billboard/Person Photo. You know the one I mean, a person walking by a billboard or advertisement and somehow their hair lines up with a line on the ad or their head with the head on the billboard. This has been a huge trend in street photography over the past few years, and the look is now overdone. Jonathan Higbee has done quite a lot of this kind of work, for example, and his work is excellent. The point is, however, we don't need any more of it. Copying Higbee won't make you a superstar. Move on.
- Person in the Subway Car Photo. Bruce Davidson and Richard Sandler have it covered. We really don't need any more street photographs from the New York City subway system. Let me tell you a true story. A young photographer recently got himself in front of one of the most famous photography dealers alive. This young photographer proceeded to show a portfolio of subway photos — people looking through the windows, stuck between doors, as well as train cars passing with motion blur, etc. Good photographs in some way, however, the dealer looked at the guy and asked him one question: "Have you ever heard of Bruce Davidson?" Consider the subway done.
- The Light/Shadow Photo. Think Alex Webb for this one. You know, those images where a person is in the shadows and there are a few rays of light beaming across the frame. Maybe the fedora is illuminated, but the rest of the man is in the shadows. There is a red ball nearby (precisely lit up), and a child swings on a bar over on the edge of the frame. We have all seen a gazillion of these images. Look up the word hackneyed in the dictionary, and you will find one of these photographs. Alex Webb owns this type of photograph. He is king, you are not.
- The Random Looking Startled Stranger Photo. This one belongs to Bruce Gilden. Bruce has given birth to a whole generation of dudes with cameras running after old ladies on the sidewalk. You know, the woman with the cane and the Goliath sunglasses photographed from 4.5 inches away with a handheld flash on the side. Not only is this the most aggressive and intrusive kind of street photography, but it is surely overdone. Even Gilden himself has given up on making this kind of image. You should too!
I write this article partly tongue in cheek. Yet, I am also serious in a way also. I've been judging contests, reviewing street photography books, and writing features on street photographers in major magazines for more than a decade. I've seen a lot of street photography. I can really assure you, in very real terms, that making these kinds of images may get you lots of likes on Instagram, but they will never get you properly noticed as an artist. The work is derivative and visually tiring. We've simply seen too much of it. So, if your goal is to chase Instagram and Facebook likes from the masses, then by all means, carry on. If, however, you seek to make your mark in photography, you will have to work harder to enrapture and disrupt our way of seeing.
I mean everyone else here felt they had a right to put their dumb opinions here why not the author too? Although like I said I think he's got a point in there somewhere. Truth often does hurt.
Thanks, Max ... I think!
So I suppose if Joel Sartore has already photographed a particular species for his Photo Ark, nobody else should bother to take a photograph of that species ever again?
Sorry, but it sounds to me like Michael is pretty full of himself. I wonder. Who put him in charge of deciding who should shoot what and for what reasons?
Making your mark in photography generally means that you shoot whatever gives you satisfaction, and with any luck at all, you will develop a style of your own. But that takes time and many, many thousands of photographs.
Tongue in cheek or not, I hope no beginning photographers read this article. Shooting the same thing everyone else does is often the first step to developing the skills necessary to creating your own style.
Steven, you make some good points and you are entitled to state your opinion, as am I. We happen to disagree. I won't call you full of yourself for having your opinion, as I'd rather stick to attacking the issues and not insulting people personally.
Dear photographers, take any photos you please and don’t listen to this joker of a gatekeeper.
Fair enough - but being aware of ideas that have already been extensively employed is part of moving up the curve in any creative endeavor...
You're right and you're wrong. It's like saying if you go to Yosemite you should just leave your camera in the car because Ansel Adams already shot it. People should most definitely keep shooting these things if it fires their passion. They should not, however, probably submit these photos to contests or as commercial work. Better commercially available work probably already exists. Now, if you truly have a new take you've never seen before, fire away. But if you are attempting to submit this type of photo as commercial work you better have done your homework and studied every type of this photo genre you can find and try not to duplicate someone else's look. But, hey. Just because Monty Zucker and Clay Blackmore redefined portrait photography doesn't mean everyone else should stop. Often, people will ask for a look they've seen a 1,000 times before.
Thanks for the sober comment JW, much appreciated.
Another meaningless article. Is there anything that hasn't been photographed a zillion times? Maybe we should just stop taking photographs. I’ll tell you what, you stop taking photographs and writing articles telling people to stop taking photographs and leave the rest of us to enjoy what we do.
Hey, I don’t even do street photography and this condescending prat has pissed me off!
Done.
Another meaningless comment. We are both entitled to express our opinions, right? I expressed mine and you expressed yours.
My favourite street-shot of young American wearing his baseball cap in Waikiki squatting on the sidewalk observing all the tourists wearing those ridiculous Aloha shirts in 1973. The middle aged overweight American tourists mixing with young Japanese honeymoon couples. For him it was amusing to see all these people relaxing and cheerful as though the war he had just witnessed had never happened. For him that war was very real having just returned. He had served his nation in Vietnam and survived. Now Americans go to Vietnam on holiday.
So basically, Street Photography is one big "cliche" ...correct? Gas Stations, Umbrellas....let me add...people, unique looking people (long , weird hair, etc), homeless people, street lamps, street signs....neon "open" signs......don't forget bus stops, homeless camps, stop signs, old phone booths, street performers, art on sidewalks, birds on power lines, old concert posters tacked to poles, ...............There is nothing in photography that is NOT "Cliche". I suggest people stop entering contests and go out and enjoy taking pictures. if it moves you....who cares what others think.
"Please stop publishing these condescending clickbait opinion pieces on fstoppers."
Fixed it for you. :)
There are several writers on this site who write edgy opinion pieces like this because they know the community will react badly to being condescended to and to having their level of taste mocked by someone sat smugly on their high horse using a large platform like fstoppers to publish their elitist, gatekeeping, and condescending opinions. When the community responds in the expected way, the writers pretend they don't understand why people are offended and then spout off about their "right to share their opinions too", no matter how condescending they are about those opinions, and then make it very clear that they are actually enjoying the comments as a result of the backlash of publishing said condescending opinions as a full article.
"I can really assure you, in very real terms, that making these kinds of articles may get you lots of likes and comments on fstoppers, but they will never get you properly noticed as an artist. The work is derivative and frankly tiring. We've simply seen too much of it".
Well, here you are fulfilling our dreams with your comments, Dan! We enjoy writing and clearly, readers enjoy commenting. We all win it seems.
It seems more you you enjoy condescending to the readers of this site, and enjoy when we react to it. This is a tired trope on fstoppers, and we've simply seen too much of this sort of opinion piece here.
Interesting article.
Tongue-in-one's-cheek is sometimes seen as head-up-one's-arse. Don't forget that as people discover their own style, many emulate the greats to learn first how the greats did it, and subsequently to discover their own style and means of expression.
Oh please! We shoot what we want to. And you shoot what you want. Otherwise ...... zip it! Maybe you can show us something truly unique that no one has ever done. Then we'll copy you.
Having an opinion on which kinds of photos are being overdone is fine.
Writing an entire article about it on a prominent photography website, where you tell people to stop taking specific kinds of photos you think are overdone is pretentious.
Actually, it's criticism.... genuine criticism.....something the photography world is sorely lacking these days.
Criticism is when you give feedback to specific photos in order to help a photographer grow. It is not when you write a whiny article about subject matter or techniques you personally find uninteresting.
Take some art history and get back to me. Art criticism = feedback is the stupidest comment I've read on here.
But guys... seriously... he's right about the billboard photos. They have to stop.
"Show don't tell." Where are the pictures to illustrate this article? You want me to click on links because you can't show me examples? Poor article.
I didn't show photos, Bruce, because I would not use real work by real people in such a negative way. I illustrated my points and if you have ever seen any street work you know perfectly well what I am referencing. The point was to offer criticism of "types" of photos making the rounds and not to criticize any one photographer. I hope you can understand this approach. Would you have preferred that I call out specific people in an article?
You know, J.D., even these don't do much for me. I think the umbrella has just been pushed in my face one too many times. I don't care to see one ever again!! LOL
that's how i feel about feet hanging off a cliff / building pics.
I've been a photographer for 15 years. Pretty much every genre, every cliche, everything and everybody has been photographed 100x over. There is pretty much no reason to take photos anymore.
I sold my gear this year and pretty much gave up. But, at the same time I don't go around saying "stop taking "this" type of photo" because there really hasn't been one style that has been overdone more than the other. They all have.
People can photograph what they want, and I don't judge.
Really this applies to basically 100% of all street photos. They all look the same. It's not like you are going to develop some innovative idea a thousand other street shooters aren't already doing.
This is pretty much how it is for all genres.
This article might be offensive to some (as I see in the comments) but likely because it hit a nerve for being true. Truth hurts. Way too many people are making dumb repetitive street photos. Rather than work harder to actually make unique photographs they rather bitch out this author and defend their right to make stupid umbrella photos. It's all so dumb. Street photography needs to just die. It's not really a thing anyone is going to care about anymore given that now everyone has a phone and everyone makes street photography. Dudes just carry cameras to make them seem cool and hipster. 95% of the photography being made today and pushed all over the internet is just pointless. It's just jocks trying to be all cool and nifty for making shi&t photos.
I didn't read this article as " you shouldn't do this, you shouldn't do that"- this whole article is about photographers noticing the success of a particular style of photography and copying it because it has gotten good results. The article is basically saying think outside the box of normality and create your own lane with photography. Some photographers mastered this in such a way that you can look at a photo and say "this was taken by so-and so."
They've created their own style and perhaps it was through influence of another genre of photography, but I doubt it was by copying another genre of photography.
The article did seem rather blunt and harsh, but whatever. I believe I got the message.
Other more important types of street photography to stop:
Hipsters
Hipsters on 35 mm
Hipsters on Holgas
Hipsters at concerts
Hipster restaurants
Hipster women doing crafty nonsense
Graffiti
Hipsters at parties
Old Asian people
Abandoned buildings in Detroit
Maybe because Manhattan only has five gas stations ow, but I never see that trend non photography. Interesting.
As a judge, you are supposed to be impartial and view the images as such. I doubt you have the skill of impartiality. Do you need a judge credential to be a judge of photographs? I have not seen a class on judging street photos.
Negative comments about the abundance of a particular type of photo are poor qualities for a judge. I could use your logic on many visual images. Personally, I believe any photographer should be able to take any street photo he/she wants to capture as long as the photo is legal.
Why should you care as a judge if a street photo meets your notion of what is good. That is not being impartial. In summary, I find your article poor in quality and substance.
Ps I did enjoy viewing the links.
One critical element we look for in judging is originality. Photos themes that are overdone are, well, overdone and will rate lower than something more original. Thanks for chiming in, Dale Keith!
The purpose for photographers should be to shoot what excites them. If they are learning their vision by emulating what they have seen before that is the path that every artist has followed at the beginning, and some continue with it forever. Not everyone can be a great artist, lawyer, business man, or whatever. If emulating others helps you enjoy this medium of art by all means do it! I take pictures to escape, to relax and to free my mind. To tell someone to stop taking certain photos because you are tired of judging them and they won’t win a contest is ridiculous. So they should shoot what they think a judge would like and not what moves them? That is not the purpose of art. The same criticisms here could be made for landscapes, nudes, portraits etc. This articles does nothing to advance photography and it comes across, to me, as someone who might be burned out on judging contest and should go regain their passion for shooting what they like and not telling others what they shouldn’t be shooting. I wonder, would he shoot something for the judges or for himself?
I live in Seattle. I decided to get more photos of people with umbrellas. I couldn't believe how hard this project was. Most of the locals just don't care enough to carry one for numerous reasons like the compact ones break in the first gust of wind. The wind-resistant ones are like carrying a circus tent around with you. They are hard to hold in the wind. We forget to bring one because it's warm and sunny in the morning, then dark, cold and wet in the late afternoon. After buying at least a dozen of them, we are just so done with them. Most of us just use a hat, hoodie, or grin and bear it. I'm waiting for the tourists to come back as they are the ones who like to buy umbrellas. I might be lucky to get one photo per day of someone holding an umbrella where I need them to be for my shot. I could do like other photographers do, and hire a model. I know how hard it is to get a good photo of someone holding a good-looking umbrella. I've yet to get bored looking at photos with umbrellas in them as I know what had to happen to get that rare shot in rainy day Seattle.
When in Seattle I wear a waxed cotton jacket and cap and stay dry. Umbrellas are a PITA, but why get soaked in a cotton hoodie that takes 3 days to dry?