Quoted By:
Okay listen. I get it, I really do. Street photography as a whole is predatory. The idea of sneaking up on someone who is unaware to capture in nature is perverse and invasive. But does that make it wrong? Well, it depends, really. I think ultimately it should come down to the intent of the photo and a history of what the photographer has captured before. I honestly feel that this person has being overly sensitive. This could be caused by past trauma, or poor experiences with men, but I don't think that those poor experiences should be automatically applied to everyone who takes your photo.
Street photography has been in institution of photography from the early days. Even since Edward Steichen set up his camera in the snow and captured the first street scene. Since then it has been used to display empathy, anguish, the human condition, and almost every facet of life. Street photography is much more than candid photography, it's a photojournalist look at life today, and as far as I'm concerned life deserves to be captured.
Maybe the best approach is the change how we carry ourselves, be less combative about our beliefs with Street, and more emphatic in our explanation. Because, afterall, Street is a genre of empathy.
I don't think it will be banned, it is tied too closely with freedom of the press. But I think the ongoing change of public opinion when it comes to the genre needs to be addressed. The onus falls on us, the Street Photographers, to change the public opinion. So, carry yourself well, don't be combative, and be ready to show off your best photos when anyone questions you so that they understand you are not being a creep, but instead you are capturing a record of life right now, a catalogue of being, so that when we reflect we understand what life on the street was like.
