A few days ago I’ve receive an email asking me to answer a simple question: What’s the difference between street and urban photography?
I would suggest they are two terms which pretty much describe the same thing; for the most part street photography is about photographing urban life or people in urban situations.
However, some photographers insist to make a distinction between the two genres;
Street photography often features people or some other human element, frequently to reveal a social comment, while urban photography tends to portray the urban landscape; buildings, structures, bridges and does not necessarily include the human component.
I’ve seen a few passionate arguments amongst street photographers about the definition of the genre and which pictures can be accepted into the street photography category.
Maybe there is a difference but maybe its just semantics, it doesn’t really matter because when you’re out there armed with a camera you probably photograph both people and the urban landscape and whatever else unfolds in front of you.
Nov
30
What’s the difference between street and urban photography?
5
comments
















In my mind, I know what a street photograph is, and in the end that is all that matters.
Ha! Interesting.
Never really thought about this ‘delicate’ difference.
Never really thought about it this way, but your last sentence sort of describes how I approach the matter. Thanks for making me think about it
In my opinion, street photography is more about social or individual behaviour, while urban photography is more about landscape.
Wonderful photo!
Ciao
I kind of agree, I use both terms interchangeably. Wonderful urban image, like the textured effect.