Street photography in Kent

I

IamMarcoPolo

Messages
32
Name
Stephen
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello all,

Currently a student living in Kent (3 more weeks before I am back in London for university - cant wait to get back to my street photography there) - but where in Kent?

Canterbury in my opinion is not great for street photography (been to many times, and came back empty handed), no one stands out, there are not many scenes that really tell a story or have any character or jump out at looking different.

My question is, anywhere else in Kent, preferably within driving distance, where there is a lot going on for street photography (currently living near Canterbury).

I need places that are going to keep me going for another couple of weeks until I am back in London (where the action is!).


Steve.
 
Frankly, if you can't find anything with character in Canterbury, the rest of Kent is going to be a complete washout for you.
 
You should try living in the New Forest.

Not much help I know but thought I would join you :)
 
Thanks for your reply.

I have found Kent to be very disappointing for street photography. This makes me happy i study in London.

Lost for ideas in Kent, glad I only have two weeks left.
 
I know this might not be your strict understanding of street but I have been working in Margate for the last 6months...

Margate is certainly a town which is in a 'change' and there are interesting subjects...

If you'd like to see the people I'm talking about my project can be seen here:

http://www.jasonpay.co.uk/project-240.html


16 by jpay01, on Flickr
 
I have the same problem here. Dublin is the closest place to me for good street photography, the town I live in is muck. But I've gone there a few times and came away disappointed. It's not always going to just happen for you on the day, it can take numerous trips out to grab some nice street scenarios. Keep looking ;) Hit the areas where the buskers hang out, it's easy pick off people in the crowds there. Try different approaches. Try some end of street shots, of the main crowd, sometimes you won't even notice the interesting until you examine your images. Chimp as you go, zoom in on your images and pick out interesting folk, then home in on them by foot. Don't go thinking you'll get fantastic shots, go with an open mind and you either get the goods, or try another day. Have fun with it.
 
First of all, what counts as street photography? If you are trying to just walk around taking shots of people/landmarks which exude character, then go to places where people are in their natural habitat. Kent has a coastline and there are fishing fleets - Dover, Deal, Folkestone, Dungeness, Ramsgate, Whitstable. Find out when the various towns are having themed days, Faversham is particularly good at this, with the hop festival (a couple of weeks ago unfortunately), Rochester has the Dickens and Sweep's festivals.
 
I know him through a non-photo forum, but one of my Flickr contacts, Paul Russell, does wonderfully wry street photography in the unlikely location of south Dorset, much of it round Bournemouth (and often with a compact camera, to boot)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/paulrussell/

If you can shoot street successfully in Bridport or Frome, I think you can do it just about anywhere.
 
Canterbury is a city with a wonderful history. To suggest it is lacking for street photography is in my opinion wrong. Unusual architecture in abundance, a big student population thus providing myriad opportunities to find that quirky street scene, and multiple little side streets with quaint character. I would suggest Canterbury is well up there with other towns and cities that provide an opportunity to be creative behind the lens.
 
Not quite sure what you are looking for in "street"... if you mean grizzled policemen standing in New York city canyons between sky scrapers or tramps in decaying Detroit, then no, you won't find that in Canterbury.

I think what you are looking for is nasty urban life, which doesn't really happen in a place as nice as Canterbury...

I've never really understood "street" as a genre anyway, so I could be wrong in my assumptions
 
Street, urban shooting, is capturing a slice of contemporary life. People do get confused and think it should be all gritty, hobbos and graffiti backdrops. That's all cliche. Street can be musicians, street performers, random people going about their business. It can be anything going on that may or may not catch your eye, but it only happens in that one moment. Black and white works well, as it makes the image timeless, or gives the feel of.
 
What about Rochester, the high street as a lot of buildings that date from the 14th to 18th century and can get quite bust particularly at weekends.
 
You could try hanging around the catherdral entrance, as that's where most of the 'interesting' visitors go.

Also, Botany Bay near you is a great place for sunrise beach shots!!! (Used to live there)
 
Cagey75 said:
Street, urban shooting, is capturing a slice of contemporary life. People do get confused and think it should be all gritty, hobbos and graffiti backdrops. That's all cliche. Street can be musicians, street performers, random people going about their business. It can be anything going on that may or may not catch your eye, but it only happens in that one moment. Black and white works well, as it makes the image timeless, or gives the feel of.
Click to expand...

Agree, although I would count street performers as cliche too.

Black and white works for street because it removes the various distracting colours from the advertising, shop fronts and other stuff.
 
Ok, so while we are talking of "street" does the "value" (I don't mean $$$$) of your images only become more than nothing when time has lapsed since the photo was taken?

I mean, a man in a suit hurrying to a meeting in the city is a common site, if the photo is of the same scene but from the 1950's it becomes a study of historical social trends.

Are people taking B&W images simply because they percieve that "valuable" street images are B&W (because they show social history from days gone by)

See what I'm getting at?
 
Ruth and Jonathan, please remember that our equipment is expensive, so there is absolutely no need to visit the Kent equivalents of Helmand.;)
 
desantnik said:
Ok, so while we are talking of "street" does the "value" (I don't mean $$$$) of your images only become more than nothing when time has lapsed since the photo was taken?

I mean, a man in a suit hurrying to a meeting in the city is a common site, if the photo is of the same scene but from the 1950's it becomes a study of historical social trends.

Are people taking B&W images simply because they percieve that "valuable" street images are B&W (because they show social history from days gone by)

See what I'm getting at?
Click to expand...

No, because in another 50 years that business man from today will also be a historical document of social trend. Whether colour or not it makes no odds. Removing the colour from both makes them more interesting. You know the world was in colour in the 50's right? And there are recoloured photos of those times? And as we saw more recently, there's colour photos from 100 years back. Thy probably thought they were being all futuristic :D
 
Ramsgate has potential and you could move between here and Margate really quickly. Failing that Whitstable is full of Londoners at the weekends
 
You need to take advantage of all times of day. At the start of the day you've got milkmen, bin men, postmen, people going to work. Then at lunchtime you've got people meeting up for a chat, coffee etc. At night you've got people going out to dinner, delivery drivers, taxi cab drivers. There literally is hundreds of street subjects once you realise what is out there.
 
Jayst84 said:
You've got a city with World Heritage sites dating back to Roman times, contrasts with stereotypically English scenes, like the river with the grassy banks, over 40,000 people, more tourists visiting than almost anywhere else, you should be able to find something to shoot. (y)
Click to expand...

Cagey75 said:
Street, urban shooting, is capturing a slice of contemporary life. People do get confused and think it should be all gritty, hobbos and graffiti backdrops. That's all cliche. Street can be musicians, street performers, random people going about their business. It can be anything going on that may or may not catch your eye, but it only happens in that one moment. Black and white works well, as it makes the image timeless, or gives the feel of.
Click to expand...

Nikonite said:
You need to take advantage of all times of day. At the start of the day you've got milkmen, bin men, postmen, people going to work. Then at lunchtime you've got people meeting up for a chat, coffee etc. At night you've got people going out to dinner, delivery drivers, taxi cab drivers. There literally is hundreds of street subjects once you realise what is out there.
Click to expand...


All of the above. (y)

Ian. In fact street doesnt even have to be taken in the street, just connected to the ideas of what street photography is for you is sufficient. Take this shot taken from Nils Jorgensen blog - Forkk. Which I cant get to show but its the cow and sign about ten down im showing as an example.
formkk.jpg
(odd, why wont this show?)
Street photography is whatever you decide works for you, but Id suggest it must be about the subject, any subject, not particularly the location. (y)
 
Last edited:
Clearly whatever advice we had has gone ignored.... oh well.

I assume what he wanted was example photos he could copy or links to google streetview?
 
Jayst84 said:
A bad photo is a bad photo. Converting it to black and white (or shooting it on black and white film) won't change that unfortunately.
Click to expand...

Lol, quite. But I wasn't referring to the quality of the exposure. I'm sure you'll agree that "bland" photos can look a million times better in block and white.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top