Friday, April 25, 2008

Why?

x ("Riddle Road" acrylic on 15x30 canvas by bONGO)


As street photographers we rarely know the motive, the "why" of the actions we capture.
We have at least a physical description of the "who", and we know the "where", "when" and "how",... but the "why we can only surmise. Maybe that mystery is part of the charm, part of what makes street photography work...







4 comments:

Dennis McGuire said...

Interesting question. Sometimes it's the desire to be surprised and to create an image that can only be made with a camera, as the first one of the girl walking into mysterious shadow, as her hand continues the line of the street-stripe...a very interesting image with lovely light that makes me think of paintings by Hopper. Not sure if I'm clear here...up early and heading out the door. But thanks for the image and the question.

bONGO said...

Thanks Dennis.. What I meant by "why" was NOT "why we take photographs", rather "why the people in our photographs do the things they do". As street photographers we often don't know the motives behind actions.

The photo you commented on was taken early in the morning and the girl's short staccato steps got my head turned. After I took the snap I tried to figure out "why" she was running from the people in the background, it seemed like she was trying to escape from something... but it turned out she had a set of keys in her hand and was actually running to a car which she then drove around to pick up the people in the background...

So knowing the "why of the action" in this case, and arguably in most cases actually deflates the photo.. but sometimes, just for your own head, your own curiosity, it's nice to know what was going on.

Anonymous said...

Garry Winogrand, once said, “The photograph isn’t what was photographed. It’s something else. It’s a new fact.”

bONGO said...

Anon - Now here in the 21st century I'm cautious about calling anything a fact. There is of coarse the fact of a photo's existence, and in that since it is a "new fact", but what it represents - the image - might more acurately be called a "new fiction".

I'm parsing words not disagreeing with the sentiment of what Winogrand said - in any event the photo is something new, a different take on what is represented.