Garry Winogrand, Dealey Plaza, Dallas 1964

Personally I believe that the idea behind "Street Photography" is much older. Painters, created images from their studies long before photography was invented, so it's idle to discuss who was first. Some of Edward Hopper's paintings resemble Street photographs aesthetically. That is probably because he lived in the same time when Street photography reached it's peak in the 40's and 50's . Hopper's way to paint, is comparable to the work of the most eminent photographers of his time.

Edward Hopper, Nighthawks 1942

People nowadays shoot street from tying in with such masters, in a more classic way, to all sort of new interpretations. In the end, the core of what Street is about will stay the same.

A lot of people have the urge to take photos of what's going on in our society. With the vast growing number of photographers in the digital age, photography unfortunately has become much more sloppy. The difficulty I see is that a lot of people with cameras who take photos of anything outside their own four walls calls him/herself "Street Photographers" without having a developed eye for decisive moments* or composition. There is a big difference in taking photos and taking relevant ones. This has been a general development in photography of course.

This change led to a generalization of the term "Street Photography". In my eyes this denotation has lost some value these days. In the end I think everyone should focus on content and quality and not categorization.

For me it's artists who do it for the sake of sharing fragments of life. I don't sympathize with the idea of Street photography prodigies. High photographic quality standards are self-evident, but the motivation is not about demonstrating how skilled you're as a photographer. The motivation should be sharing views on life and not boosting photographic ego.

The exciting thing about photography in public is the unique perspective on daily life of each individual. That doesn't mean everyone is taking interesting photographs. The transition of vision into composed images needs to perform.

Imagine a photographer taking a bus ride. Photographer A just captured an old lady knitting a pullover, B saw a girl behind that lady, illuminated by sun beams and took a photo of her and C's got interested in taking photos of the newspaper laying in front of him/her. Just by giving these three examples we start having images in our mind. Pictures that we create because we can relate with our own memories or photos we have seen before.

Like any other art form, Street photography just helps us to see and understand the world from someone else's perspective.

In the end the photos we look at, are those people decided to capture and share. Simply from this bus ride a couple of different stories could have been told but which one it was, depended on who was in there to take the picture. Also you choose the story not only by capturing, but also by selecting images. Maybe Photographer A captured all these moments and decided only to share the knitting old lady because out of these three pictures, it was the most relevant to him/her.

The better you edit your work, the more you will define your own style of shooting.

Editing street is a bit different to editing a photo essay, because you don't have a story to tell in many pictures. Each shot is it's own little story.

Street shots don't necessarily have to work together. They're mostly single images, not series. Still, when you shoot a lot, you will see connections and similarities in some photos over time. That's an interesting discovery and shows you have a certain focus or thread going through your work. Of course you can always put photos in a series, like for instance Street shots from Central Park, New York.

As far as my definition of Street goes, it's not Street anymore when photos are depending on a context, like a documentary of a rally or demonstration for example. Of course there are exceptions like a situation independent from the main event. A popular example is Alfred Eisenstaedt's V-J Day kissing couple. A scene that works both as a documentary of the celebration of that day but also as a scene standing on it's own. No matter where he had captured that soldier kissing his girlfriend in such an intense way, would have made a brilliant capture.

Nevertheless, to me, Street shots are captures of unaffected daily life situations.

So when I'm asked to select some street shots that I like, then these photos will tell a story or show an impression without the need of further explanation. It can be complex or simple – as long as it works, it was captured right. A Street shot needs to get to the point right away. There is no sense in telling a story no one understands.

Severin Koller, Warsaw 2008

When I use the word story, I don't mean it always has to "tell" you something. Sometimes it's enough if a photo leaves an impression of a moment and takes you to the place where it was captured. Then the photographer was able to share his/her vision in an image. It simply needs to stimulate the mind so the viewer can build his/her own stories. A lot of attempts of Street shots I see are rather meaningless and dull. Images I forget the second I look at, not having an impact on me. A good photo burns itself in your mind. That should be the aim of a photographer – especially in times of millions of photos getting published everyday.

Severin Koller, New York 2009

Photos that stand out of the mass of snapshots make you explore and discover details or put things in a new context.

Martin Parr, Pisa

Street, as a photographer, is about sharing personal views on our society. As a viewer it's about diving into someone else's vision. I don't care how people do it as long as it communicates and tickles my brain. Everyone has the freedom to choose his or her photographic language – that's what makes it exciting.

The critique is never just a technical one. If i look at photos that are categorized, as Street and they don't talk to me, then it's because someone's vision or way of photographing is not clear enough no matter how good his/her photographic skills are.

Everybody has an unique biography and the sum of all experiences and opinions will flow into the photographs you create. How your mind sees and filters moments in the public is responsible for your photos, beside the photographic skill of course. Also your current life situation and mood will influence what you see.

There are days my mind is so full of thoughts that I'm not able to see images and all of a sudden there is a day I'm shooting three rolls full of Street shots and love life. I take better pictures when I'm either happy or fascinated by the world around me. Just like a little boy discovering the city and that's what Street is for me: Exploration and fascination.

Severin Koller, Dusseldorf Airport 2009

Sure, I will also take photos when I'm depressed, just much less frequent and different ones. I believe that photos that are connected to your person are always a mirror of you're current state of mind. Many Street shots happen spontaneously so each day you will see and filter differently, depending on what you're sensitized on that day.

One of the most exciting things about Street photography is that you never know what is going to happen. It's not like taking photos at events where you have certain anticipation. The stage is everywhere at any time and it's up to you what to capture. That's why you need a camera around your neck ready to expose anytime and not collecting dust in your bag. Also don't even think of lens caps.

When I'm traveling I take much more photos in a short time. My eyes see fresh impressions and all of a sudden it seems like there is much more to capture. For Street shots you don't necessarily need to know people and the place to capture moments, because how could these scenes be less real just because you're a foreigner? Also Street does not claim to be journalism.

On the other hand you should never pretend to know strangers. One of the most important rules is to respect people you're photographing. I'm sure it will show in your work if you don't.

Never shoot in an assuming way. Don't abuse humans for your photos. Try never to harm anyone by taking their picture. Of course there are tricky situations, where people are obviously in an uncomfortable situation where I often ponder if I should take a photo. You must decide why you're still taking that photo and then in what context you want to publish it, which is another step. I don't like the idea of making photos for the craving for sensation. I guess we all have our own limits of moral and ethics and they're also changing by time. I have changed my mind about this topic over the years.

Here is an example of my own work.

Severin Koller, Vienna 2009

A man who just vomited from an (assumed) alcoholic intoxication. I didn't take this photo because I thought it was awful or funny. I saw this scene from far away from behind and started wondering. So when I went closer, I saw a man leaning forward with a newspaper and a bottle of red wine next to him. I still didn't see that he had vomited. The first picture I took was from the back. I found the combination of a man in a suit, an empty bottle of wine and a newspaper just spot on. It was taken in times where recessions and crisis was written all over, in any journal. It was the symbolism of this scene that got my interest. So it's the message of this picture and not who is sitting here. If the man showed his face, I'd have captured it differently, to keep him incognito.

For me Street photography is not necessarily focusing on a person, it's about people in a situations that represent fragments of daily life. When I go outside to take photos I'm not trying to portray someone but I'm looking for a picturesque scenes. It doesn't really matter who it is, as long as the composition, light and moment work together. That's why I don't agree with the idea of automatically violating someone's privacy. It's not that I'm judging anyone and I doubt that people who look at my photos judge either. Photographers who violate someone's privacy are called, paparazzi.

Street photos will only turn out if you're not afraid of taking photos of strangers. In the end, if you don't want to harm anyone and show respect to people, there is nothing wrong with that.

Also there is a difference in trying to hide yourself and not trying to influence a moment. Always shoot with a good purpose and reason, then you can also stand behind what you're doing. Street isn't about violating privacy. Thinking of all the surveillance nowadays, privacy in public space has become an oxymoron anyway. I'd rather have a nice Street shot of me taken than a couple of cameras following me from anywhere to my doormat.

Although you can have the most beautiful or special way of seeing things, taking pictures is another step. You need to know your camera like no other so that it doesn't hinder you at work. That's why i think that the choice of camera/system that suits you is very important.

So to take meaningful Street photographs, it takes a well developed eye for moments and composition, interest in the human condition, a healthy amount of self esteem, an honest approach, respect for your subjects and of course photographic skill and routine.

*In 1952, Cartier-Bresson published his book Images à la sauvette, whose English edition was titled The Decisive Moment.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Cartier-Bresson

© Severin Koller

Born 1986 in Vienna, Austria. Severin started working as a freelance photographer in 2005. Studied at the Academy of Fine Arts from 2005 to 2008. Living and working in Vienna at the moment.

To find out more about Severin and his work visit his website at www.severinkoller.com or at his blog http://severinkoller.at/blog/

More work by Severin Koller