22 Responses to “Edit Edit Edit”

1. severin
   September 14th, 2009 - 11:41 am

   that’s a pretty incredible portfolio there.

   i think you can still make a difference between portfolio and blogging… i don’t see the reason behind highlighting single images that are medicore either.. so i’m agreeing, but for documenting stories and life, it needs more than some single incredible shots.

   so i think for a portfolio i agree with you, for stories, blogging and documentation, it needs many pictures, many good ones of course but they can never keep up with the best 15 you shot in the last years.

2. pxmarco
   September 15th, 2009 - 11:05 am

   I agree with you about it, and i can say that at this moment i see a lot of movement in building projects instead of single photos, i consider this a step to a future (better) selection on shoots.
   I’m trying too, but is often difficult to cut off a photo that well describes the event but it’s not in-line with the “shape” of the project.

   For example, i made a repo. of horse’s races in Sardegna, but i had the chance to shoot with flash (nice shots i think) only with the weak lights of the down, when the races were neary over: moreover, i can’t return, because i live in mantova, near milan.
   I’m gonna edit it probably the next month, but i don’t feel the natural lights will marry flashed ones too easily.

3. Paul Treacy
   September 15th, 2009 - 11:23 am

   Matt’s a genius. An utter genius.

4. Gerry Walden
   September 15th, 2009 - 2:01 pm

   The biggest problem is making ‘photographers’ realise that there is a world of difference between ‘shooting on the street’ and ‘street photography’. Because a shot has been taken on the street, it doesn’t make it street photography.

5. Eric R. Bechtold
   September 15th, 2009 - 2:09 pm

   Nick,

   Good article. I think you may be making assumptions of what 99% of the street photographers are trying to accomplish with their work though.
   Not everyone is trying to be a top ranked street photographer and stand shoulder to shoulder with the the Levitts and Winogrands of the world. Most people are just out there having a lot of fun!
   In my case I do it for the exercise, fun, and adventure. Just yesterday I walked over 100 blocks in Manhattan, made over 400 images, and had a blast. I even managed to narrow down that 400 to only 12 that were actually posted online…
   I think street photography is taken way way too seriously. Too much emphasis is put on the photographer and the technique while we should just be looking at the photograph.

   In regards to Flickr… It’s a street photography black hole where every thing is done in greyscale for absolutely no reason. Little thought is put into the majority of the work there.
   It will suck all hope and life out of you to view image after image of homeless people and hot dog vendors… And then to read the comments… Don’t even get me started on that.

   Eric

6. Sebastian
   September 15th, 2009 - 4:15 pm

   Amen.

7. Nacho Santigosa
   September 15th, 2009 - 6:05 pm

   Hi, Nick

   Brilliant article. You are right.

   Regards

8. Waxy
   September 15th, 2009 - 10:09 pm

   Hey Nick,

   Stuart is great. I regularly visit his personal site. I’m sure that part of the reason I admire his photography is that Stuart is a harsh editor and I don’t have to wade through a mountains of bad photographs that would dilute the great ones. Some of us at HCSP were discussing this post today. Maybe you’ve seen it as it links here. After taking a closer read, I realized that we were looking at “Edit Edit Edit” from alternative perspective. Some of my thoughts….

   While I wholeheartedly agree with your post when it comes to editing a portfolio, one’s personal site or In-Public Galleries, I disagree with “Edit Edit Edit” when it comes to “products” in development. This is where a site like Flickr is useful tool. While editing remains crucial, experimentation and the sharing of ideas are vital to many photographers, if not every one of them. I’ve learned a great deal by sharing my successes, mistakes and even my successes that were first mistakes. As Bryan Formhals says: Flickr is sketchpad. While photographers still need to learn to the art of editing, Flickr remains one of the most useful tools for that, as long as one can find critical peers.

   I’ve seen the work of many HCSP regulars evolve from “collections of single unconnected images,” which is how you describe Street Photography based on Photochart (July 2009) to more project based work. These are longer sets and are characterized by the street aesthetic. They have a more narrative form than single and unconnected images. The idea of editing this kind of series takes a different approach than that of the portfolios discussed above. Sharing the editing process is exciting and can draw in more viewers with each “ping.”

   Flickr is not a portfolio for me. In fact, it has completely other uses. I use my space as blog, a way to share family pics, connect to like-minded photographers, and organize local street photography meet-ups, and more. Last week, I connected approximately 10 photographers via my Vancouver Streetside group on Flickr. We visited Vancouver’s Fair just as Fred Herzog visited these grounds 50 years ago. It was fun. And, who knows? It could inspire a whole new breed of Street Photographers, or maybe just one. While Flickr has loads of downsides (don’t get me started!), nobody can deny that it is ripe as a useful means of learning and finding out about photography, and even a means to create fans. Wired Magazine, I believe, had an article about this a few years ago that is worth a peek.

   Another reason to share a wider gamut of images, rather than just the best, is that portfolios are cold. They don’t connect the viewer to the photographer – only the viewer to the subject. In a time when the Internet is becoming increasingly powerful, showing how our projects evolve (including our mistakes) might be beneficial. Sites like sevensevennice, and Flickr, give a photographer a personality.

   While I can understand how sharing bad photos can weaken a photographer’s standing, I can just as easily see them making the person, and the portfolio, stronger. Maybe “Edit Edit” would suffice.

   Best,
   John

   P.S. I continually edit my photostream. Hopefully it gradually improves but there will always be poor shots.

9. John Smith
   September 15th, 2009 - 11:23 pm

   Sorry for this comment being long. But you need to wake up.

   Here I have been thinking that Nick Turpin is a great photographer with good ideas and a healthy view on photography. But with this post you turn out to be just a simple elitist. A sorry soul of a photographer that is bitter that people do not edit their portfolios in the way he likes.

   I will give you some advice. A story. Running. The real runners are not the ones who finish among the top ten. Maybe not even among the top hundred. The real runners are those who despite 9-5 jobs, chores and families run several days a week. Maybe every day. Just so they can run a marathon maybe under 3 or 4 hours. And of course feel healthy. But they will never win anything, they will never earn any amount for this feat. They just love running. They are the real heroes.

   This applies of course also to photographers. To those whose photos will never mean anything. Those who don’t have one of the largest cities in the world to milk street photos from but try anyway to make do with what they got. Those who try to find that little bit of time to come out, go around the city just to take pictures. Because they love it. In this day and age we should really embrace this and encourage more people to take pictures.

   You are SO fortunate that you have a job that will take you to 15!! cities on a photobonanza that you’ll get paid for. And a phone company sends you around the world to take pictures with their phone. Wake up! DO NEVER TAKE THIS FOR GRANTED. Think instead of all the people wanting desperately to be in your shoes.

   And really, honestly. Even Friedlander, Bresson and Winogrand, the greatest of all street photographers and way beyond you, me or any other now living street photographer took and published some really lousy pictures.

   And a last thing about planning. Are you really saying that Matts photo of a pigeon strutting in the foreground and legs of black suits in the background is NOT planned. Matts must have thought about the angle then got the camera down to ground level and taken the shoot. He maybe took several shoots. If thats not planning then I don’t know what is. And your picture with a can and a fountain in the background. Surely you must have seen this angle and then got the camera in-line with the can and fountain before you shoot it. Planning. Or the picture where you have followed the suits around for 30 minutes before the two men in helmets appears out of nowhere. Planned! This is totally the opposite of how Winogrand worked. He was constantly shooting. Not caring for anything ‘special’ happening but just shooting. And he took some really great shoots.

   Please teach and encourage instead of banning us for not editing our portfolios.

10. K. Praslowicz
    September 15th, 2009 - 11:28 pm

    I completely agree. Knowing how to edit should be considered as important of a skill to a photographer as knowing how to use a camera.

11. admin
    September 16th, 2009 - 8:37 am

    Thanks for the thoughtful responses…

    @Gerry Walden…”The biggest problem is making ‘photographers’ realise that there is a world of difference between ’shooting on the street’ and ’street photography’.”…..Gerry, that’s great, I’m using that

    @Waxy I never intended to criticise flickr, and you make a very valid point about having a peer group with whom to share images and get valid feedback which helps with the growth and development of your work. The in-public photographers do this via a private forum that only the 18 members have access to which means feedback is received before the image is in the public domain…I think this has proven to be a good model.

    I have found some remarkable images on flickr and am, indeed, publishing several in PUBLICATION. The presence of so many street photographers on flickr was really the stimulus for me to try and produce a printed periodical in the first place, I feel like we are all street photographers now in a sense.

    @John Smith I am extraordinarily lucky to make my living as a photographer and to have the opportunities I have had to travel and be paid to shoot in the street, I think I am partly in this position because I edit my work fairly carefully. I think you are wrong, it doesn’t matter if you are a professional photographer or someone who makes pictures in their lunch hour, the importance of editing your own work applies to both…Gus Powell shot his project ‘Lunch Pictures’ during his breaks from working as a photo editor at The New Yorker. At whatever level you are working, editing your own work is a relevant part of the process.

    Regarding your comments on planning, I know Matt didn’t leave the house to photograph pigeons legs that day, he looked back while walking down some steps and saw the potential of shooting from pavement level…there is a big difference between planning a shot and making a shot work once you have found something interesting on your travels….my seeing two men in suits and deciding to follow them because they look interesting is not what most people would call planning in advance.

12. David Gibson
    September 16th, 2009 - 11:14 am

    You are absolutely right Nick. I remember wandering around one of final shows of Henri Cartier-Bresson at the Hayward Gallery in London a few years ago. There were around 300 pictures there. I remember too Chris Steele Perkins his Magnum colleague giving a guided tour and saying that ‘there are one or two turkeys here’. I was quite startled but reasurred by that. A handful of the images were indeed a little weak.

    But arguably should a meanness – a ruthless editing always prevail – because surely one of the joys of photography is in it’s sharing. Sometimes the lesser pictures have merit. Flickr is full of the joy of photography despite the crap.

    What would we give to see all of Cartier-Bressons contact sheets? Surely there are hidden gems there…some not fully formed but nonetheless fascinating, informative and still inspiring. His body of work is very carefully guarded though.

    There is no easy answer. Some photographers are just very careful editors of their work. They are aware of their legacy even before they’ve finished it.

13. Richard Bram
    September 16th, 2009 - 11:33 am

    I wholeheartedly agree with Nick. Editing is what makes a great photographer stand out from a good one. Having handled the in-public submissions for about a year, the vast majority that came in were an utter mish-mash, mostly, as Gerry put it, ‘pictures taken in the street,’ not ‘Street Photos.’ The most common characteristic was a complete inability to self-criticize and edit out the pictures that had a ‘this could have been better if…’ attached.

    @John Smith: There is nothing wrong with anyone having fun making photographs – it is one of the joys of modern life, and I don’t think Nick meant to imply anything different. My late father loved Photography – he loved playing with his cameras and taking pictures, proudly showing me how sharp they were. But sadly Photography didn’t love him – he had no real photographers eye and he knew it: We’d laugh about it together. But he got great pleasure from all of it and that is the best thing of all. There is nothing wrong with getting joy from one’s hobbies – there is little enough joy in life as it is.

    Elitist is good. Just because someone has made a picture and is very pleased with it themselves does not make it stand out from the sea of images in which we all swim. Thank God some people set the highest standards for themselves and are trying to improve their work constantly. Sure – all the greats have taken lousy photos, no matter who they are, but as Erwitt said about contact sheets, they generally don’t show them to other people. Have we seen ‘B’ images from all these people? Yes. But damn few ‘C’ images. If you think that one can never approach those whom you name you have taken futility to a new level. If one thinks that one is able to approach this, are deeply dedicated to photography to the utter exclusion of all else, as well as have the gifts of both luck and talent and the blessing of the deities of Photography, it can be done. Is it easy? No. Is it possible? Yes.

    Great Street Photography is a heartbreak – So many frames, so few photographs. The hit ratio is shockingly low. Harsh, cold, and unsentimental editing is the key: one that sucks the life-blood from you as you look through contact sheets or stare at a computer screen. But without that cold eye, one will never approach that higher level.

14. Ulrich
    September 19th, 2009 - 9:32 am

    Depending on the type of publication of ones photographs it is essential to edit (edit, edit) no doubt about it. A question comes to mind about whether someone turns into an excellent street photographer when he is a good editor only.

    I think someone is or is not (or gets or does not get to be) an excellent street photographer regardless of his posting/publication habits.

    Certainly, the probability to be recognised as such is improved when only the super best of such work is ever exposed. In this respect I wonder what this post and the discussion is all about except than to state the obvious fact that only a very short amount of photographs gets published anyway.

    The quality of that small amount is in the eye of the beholder.

15. Michael Sebastian
    September 19th, 2009 - 4:21 pm

    @JohnSmith, I think you’ve missed the point; and frankly, your post comes across as whiny, petulant, and entitled. Forgive me if that was not your intent, but I feel your points cannot go unremarked upon.

    @RichardBram says it well, better than I. You seem to think that Nick’s “good fortune” in being able to make a living as a photographer is something that fell at his feet one day while he was out “praying and spraying” with his shiny new digital camera; that the gods chose to bestow this blessing upon him at random from among the hordes of equally gifted but unlucky photographers who’d love to be in his position.

    Sorry, but he’s subjected his work to the discerning eye of the marketplace for images, and people who KNOW (those elitists) what good photography IS, have bought it, and bought it repeatedly. That’s why HE makes his living at this, and I don’t. Should I feel jealous or slighted? Hell no. I want to keep improving to the limit of my natural ability, and go as far as I can. Meanwhile, I want to celebrate excellence as I find it among the practitioners of this art form I love so much.

    You seem to think that it’s only Nick’s presence in a great city that enables him to make great images people want to buy, as if he’s some fisherman with a net who happened to pick the right pond to troll. A talented photographer can make great images in his/her own backyard; in a garbage dump; on a suburban street where nothing is seemingly happening, but which is alive with possibility for the shooter with a discerning eye. That not everyone has this eye is one of life’s many unfairnesses. Reminds me of Salieri and Mozart—the latter the genius to whom it all seemed to come effortlessly, the former the lover of music who’d always be a step or more behind. Should Mozart have withheld his genius from the world to avoid bruising Salieri’s feelings?

    Your running analogy—irrelevant as it is—proves my point, unintentionally I’d guess. Lovely that someone runs well, and runs for health and fitness, and fits this activity in around life’s other obligations; but that alone does not entitle him/her to claim elite status, aside from the actual result. The timer is an unforgiving judge. Both the elite runner and the hobbyist are “real” runners. That isn’t the point.

    Likewise, shooting because one enjoys it is just fine; a lot of people do it. But to say that the quality and quantity of effort one expends is alone enough to exalt the results smacks of the all-too-prevalent attitude that excellence is elitist; and that we are all really equally excellent at everything. That way is the race towards mediocrity, and I want no part of it.

16. rich
    September 26th, 2009 - 1:17 am

    Thinking too much about photography scunners me.

    But I like Matt’s photos.

17. John Smith
    September 26th, 2009 - 11:31 pm

    It seems that my comment has stirred up some feelings and touched a few nerves.
    Maybe I overreacted and perhaps misinterpreted your post Nick. I apologise.

    I will try to explain.

    I love street photography. I’ve studied photography at university level and practiced photography for almost 5 years. I like Nicks pictures. I have read all his posts, read all the documents he has linked to, seen all his film clips of how he works, seen every picture of all photographers on “In Public” and almost all other street photo related sites that I could find (insig.ht, San Francisco daily photography, Matt, 2point8, Blake, markus hartel, Nils Jorgensen, Peter Funch, Magnum etc etc). Seen all films I could find on the masters Winogrand, Klein, Mermelstein, Gilden etc. Have bought and read over 30 photo books related to street photography or street photographers. Winogrand, R.Frank, H.Levitt, Friedlander, Koudelka, Cartier-Bresson, W.Klein, Gilden, Meyerowitch etc.

    And if there is one thread linking these photographers is that it is seems so simple, so straight and open. And there is a whole difference between Nicks or Matts pictures compared for example with Cartier-Bresson, Koudelka or Winogrand. Especially I would say with Winogrands pictures. He shoots without conscience. Like a flow. He doesn’t wait for anything to happen. For a street photo to work it doesn’t need to be anything going on. You don’t need a fountain aligned with the top of a coke. You don’t need a Leica M9. A Samsung phone will work just fine.

    Of course you should edit your pictures. No doubt about that. But somewhere behind the lines in Nicks post I sensed that he was saying that he was better than you and I to interpret yours or my street photos. Thats why I reacted. Maybe he was not saying that. And I misinterpreted. But photography is very much like painting or other cultural expressions. Its subjective. Its ALL about the eye of the beholder. That means that a picture Nicks feels for is maybe not the picture that you or I like. But should that keep Nick from publishing it? NO! Even if all his members at In Public or you and I, are telling him that the picture is rubbish. If Nick likes it he should of course go ahead and publish it in spite what you or I think. He can of course take our or his colleagues comments in consideration. But at the end only he can determine if his pictures is worth publishing or not. I believe in going your own way.

    And really, would we like to live in a society where we always published what the community liked? No room for character or self fulfillment? I don’t want that. And I think Nick don’t want that. No, you should always strive to go your own way. And if that means shooting blurry photos of people in Paris, rushing at people with a flash on the streets of NYC like Bruce Gilden or be a 10-good-pictures-per-year-kind-a-guy like Matt, so be it. Only you can decide.

    If you like street photography. The most important thing is to take pictures. Alot of them. Don’t be afraid to go out on the street and shoot. Even if your aspirations is to be a professional photographer or an amateur its the same. Use the wonderful digital technology and take photos. Edit and photoshop them if you like but let your own mind decide what to publish or not. Study photography. Read all Nicks posts and the documents and books he advices but decide for your own if you want to use it. And use the technology of today. I think HCB et.al would do the same if they grew up in our time.

18. Tref
    September 27th, 2009 - 12:01 pm

    I have to agree largely with you nick on this, cos i think you’re right. But something I’d like to mention that you did not, is how frustrating it can be having these expectations though, and i think it’d be nice to know that we can all emphatize with that.

    I for one have grown to set a very high level for myself only to face a great deal of disappointment, as a year of shooting during whatever time i can find in my relatively small city only brings me a handful of decent images which even then I’m often not fully satisfied with.

    I think for all of us who set ourselve these high standards though, that it will help motivate us and push us to learn and to keep our eyes wide open to see many wonderful images that pass us by our everyday lives.

19. Ulf Fågelhammar
    September 29th, 2009 - 9:33 am

    Have a look. The discussion continues…
    http://www.591photography.com/2009/09/discussions-about-street-photography.html

20. Why You Should Only Show Your Best Photos — Eric Kim Street Photography - Los Angeles
    January 5th, 2011 - 6:18 am

    [...] a great article by Nick Turpin titled, “Edit Edit Edit” he mirrors my sentiment and states, “Instead of editing a days shooting and posting [...]

21. JOhan
    January 13th, 2011 - 7:12 pm

    Shure if you want to be a professional photographer I can understand your concern. What is a good picture for you is not a good picture for me. Public your work is a way to get feedback, learn and evolve. If you are only you own editor you will never get started. This is to typical statement from “pro” that are good on what they do. They forget how it was to be a beginner. Start with you first photographs? Photo is more and more in the public. Your more you public you more you will learn. I don’t agree at all. With you way of thinking we will have no new photos, ppl that thinks I new ways. Just the boring pros that tells whats I good photograp. Its just art

22. AJT
    February 15th, 2012 - 12:51 pm

    This sounds like any other group of people aiming to define themselves as a profession and hence differentiating themselves / recognising eachother as being part of the same profession. It also has a hint of the old debate is photography art if its so easy to do? Or how can a picture be worth so much if it takes a millisecond to take it?

    If you want to become a professional street photographer i.e. earn money from it. You listen to the professionals: edit, edit and edit again. It ensures that the images you publish are the ones that you are proud of and your reputation rests on. If you have a signature approach (or several) e.g. strong visual gag, hard core rough streets, young v old, white figures bleached by sun etc… then you will have a body of work that is out there for you to trade on; to sell to people / companies who like your approach. It may (or may not) take 99.98% rejects, 10,000-20,000 hours street walking and 50,000 hours of studying the history of street photography. If your signature approach/es are commercial, you can tell your story of dedication and sell your images. Clearly worth a fortune because of the effort that you invested (not the millisecond click!). It’s the images that sells, but the back story of your dedication that’s helping to drive the price.

    However, if you want to give street photography a go, you may enjoy it and if very lucky catch a few pictures you love. There is one thing for certain unless you try … you can never become a professional.

    The only real question is what to do with your images… If you want to be a professional only publish what you want your reputation to rest on. Getting critical feedback only on the shots your really believe in. If however, you are happy being out there and sharing all on flikr… do it!

    What is the standard and who sets it? If you want to sell your work then you have to study what sells or what will attract people to hire / sponsor you. You decide a variant that you like and decide where to take it. Aiming to be the professional ultimately means that the market for your work (or your skills) sets the standard.

    If you want to be judged as worthy by the self aclaimed professionals (earning or not), you will have to play by their rules. Visual gags may need to be important to you!

    If however, you are not aiming to be a professional, or in the clique, do what you like and set your own standards. Others may judge them high or low… do you care?

Leave a Reply