I am practicing what I call my “Walker Evans Technique” more often as I walk around the city. Keeping my camera at my waist and taking photos without looking into the viewfinder at all, hoping that my subject doesn’t notice me. Sometimes I’m even looking in the other direction. Most times it doesn’t work out.
This time it did.
It’s worth having to waste eight or ten shots that way when you get one like this one. And the great thing about shooting digital is that it doesn’t cost anything but time.
Really like this; it has kind of a Garry Winogrand feel to it for me.
You’ve said it perfectly. You have nothing to lose by taking pictures in this manner. I realize I should probably do it more often and not rely on luck (ie., one shot) to get better at it.
I’ve found it takes a lot of practice … I used to use this technique years ago but I went back to just firing away and let the chips fall where they may……..
I still am not that practiced, but I’m certainly encouraged.
I have been shooting a lot of frames in this manner. For me I find that the biggest challenge is finding days where there is enough light that I can set the shutter and f-stop high enough that my photos are sharp. Thou I still like many of the blurry ons.
I have to remember to slow down, almost stop walking in order to get these shots. I don’t mind the blurry, in fact I think we’ve been so accustomed to seeing crisp, clear shots that we forget how wonderful a blurry shot can be.
Heh – great shot. Waist level gives a really good perspective I think that you wouldn’t get with the camera up at head level.
I agree. You can get away with a lot more, too.
I like doing this sometimes but really like it when I photograph someone and they don’t like it and give me that angry look I love.Now I live in a small town and we Canadians are a polite people so no one has got in my face yet as a result but that technique might not work to well in San Fransisco. It probably helps also that I’m a mean looking son of a bitch myself at the best of times. Nice shot Julie.I’ve only been in your city once for a very short time back in the 60’s.I’m enjoying the work I see on this site.
Ha ha, CJ, you should share a link to one of those photos. It would be interesting to see what kind of expressions you are getting from your subjects. So glad you found us and enjoying the site!
I put one of my “grouchers” on for you at the top of the page.This chap was not happy with me at all.If you go back a bit in my archives you’ll come across a few others.I think from my life so far it has been harder to find grouchy in the small place I live now than when I lived in Vancouver.
I’ve been shooting all of my street photography this way (from waist-level without aiming with the viewfinder) for a few years. I started it doing it that way because I’m taller than most of the people I see in the street. When i was aiming through the viewfinder, I ended up with a lot of photographs of the tops of people’s heads.
Once I got a handle on how to aim a camera without looking, I realized that the angle of the images reminded me of the first time I went to the “big city” (London) when i was five years old and I was looking up at all of the people.
Andy
Ha, Andy. I have the opposite problem. I’m often shorter than the subjects I’m looking at and then my waist high photos end up being focused on people’s legs.
I do think you’re right that there’s an implied innocence to these kinds of photos, both by the “looking up” aspect and because there is absolutely nothing staged about them.
I shot this way a lot when I was in Paris and London; it’s not that hard to get the hang of, and I’ve gotten great results!
I hope to be able to do the same thing in Paris and London. *sigh*
I really love the story here.
Thanks, Lee. Isn’t it a thrill when sometimes there does end up being some sort of story?