Previous news story    Next news story

Art or intrusion? Photographer Johnny Tergo's 'drive-by' portraits

By dpreview staff on Apr 11, 2013 at 01:54 GMT

Street photography isn't everyone's cup of tea, and for every Cartier Bresson, watching from a distance, there's a Weegee, pushing a camera into the faces of their bemused subjects without asking permission. Los Angeles-based photographer Johnny Tergo has taken this approach to a new level, rigging up his truck with a camera and bright studio strobes in order to 'bring the studio lighting aspect to everyday real life on the streets'.

To take his curb-side portraits, LA-based photographer Johnny Tergo pulls up alongside his subjects and takes their photograph from his truck, using a remote-triggered Canon EOS-1D Mark IV rigged up to two studio lights.

In an interview published by wired.com Tergo explains that as a freelance photographer he spends a lot of time on the road, and wanted to 'exploit his time behind the wheel' for a series of candid portraits of people going about their everyday lives.

According to an interview published at wired.com, Tergo 'leads moving subjects by pulling forward slightly, waiting for them to enter the frame'.

To achieve the studio-like lighting, Tergo has rigged his Chevy Silverado with two high-powered strobes, powered by twin 4000W generators in the truckbed. Inside, a Canon EOS-1D Mark IV is connected to a laptop, and triggered by a Pocket Wizard. Tergo has a dashboard-mounted iPhone for reviewing his shots via onboard Wi-Fi. On a normal day, Tergo claims to take '40 to 50' shots. 

This is Johnny Tergo's Chevy Silverado truck, rigged up with two studio strobes and twin 4000W gas-powered generators which are nestled in the truckbed.
His EOS-1D Mark IV is triggered remotely using a Pocket Wizard, and his subjects are captured from the passenger window on a 16-35mm lens. 

It's no surprise that some of his subjects don't react well to being zapped with high-powered studio lights from the window of a passing truck, and in the interview Tergo claims that 'a lot of people think I’m up to something nefarious'. Despite occasional confrontations, Tergo plans to add a second truck, and more lights to his portable setup, claiming 'I don't want to stop with good enough, I want it to be awesome'.

Although we're impressed by some of Tergo's work, his approach won't be to everyone's taste, and raises troubling questions about privacy. What do you think? Let us know in the comments.

Comments

Total comments: 376
2345
dg90
By dg90 (Apr 11, 2013)

"Although we're impressed by some of Tergo's work,..."
In which way? I´m really puzzled. :D

'I don't want to stop with good enough, I want it to be awesome'.
Wonderful - I hope he means to work on his abilities to make better pictures. ;)

But its good sample - every single mediocre photographer has the chance to get his "15 minutes of fame".

1 upvote
Ken Johnes
By Ken Johnes (Apr 11, 2013)

well he uses the words `awsome ´and `amazing ´ often , i think he is in love with himself. a bit too much that he dosent know how embarassing it is ;-))

5 upvotes
Ken Johnes
By Ken Johnes (Apr 11, 2013)

"To achieve the studio-like lighting,"
- what studio like lighting?, this simply looks like on board flash in use.

" Tergo has rigged his Chevy Silverado"
- what about reg num , colour and year of manufacturing too ? ;-)

" with two high-powered strobes"
- wow!!!!! that´s a very valuable info, there .

" powered by twin 4000W generators in the truckbed."
- i thoiught his car was running on Gas :-)

" Inside, a Canon EOS-1D Mark IV is connected to a laptop, and triggered by a Pocket Wizard."

- well, it better be, otherwise he might get his Chevy in trouble.

" Tergo has a dashboard-mounted iPhone for reviewing his shots via onboard Wi-Fi. "
- you fotgot the provider and the iphone version and the wifi bandwidth !! ;-)

On a normal day, Tergo claims to take '40 to 50' shots.
- i thought he only shoots under the cover of dark, at NIGHT ;-))

pathetic DPR. pathetic !!.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
14 upvotes
dg90
By dg90 (Apr 11, 2013)

<irony>
You misunderstand Tergo ... he is more the "Ethan Hunt" of photography.
</irony>

Comment edited 41 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Greg in London
By Greg in London (Apr 11, 2013)

not enough great results for effort....is he staying in the car for protection ?

I think Ken Johnes is quite correct in his comments.

7 upvotes
micdair
By micdair (Apr 11, 2013)

Not my cup of tea. I'd understand this and found it interesting if done in streets of Baghdad or some other dangerous areas like interesting shots of mexican drug street wars etc...

I also somehow fail to find the "studio lighting" in most of these shots. Looks more like sort of lomo + flash to me.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
dg90
By dg90 (Apr 11, 2013)

Well, he made the shots in Los Angeles, right? So ... its more dangerous as Baghdad.

2 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Apr 11, 2013)

@DG90
NO, it's not. And if you are from America maybe you should visit Baghdad before commenting again. If you aren't you have no clue what you are talking about.

Sorry to be harsh but comments like this need clarification.

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
SKPhoto12
By SKPhoto12 (Apr 11, 2013)

cgarrard, what is this supposed to mean? Do Americans have a monopoly on making comments on Bagdad? And why does his comment need clarification? Is it anti-american maybe? Maybe we should stick to photography on this site?

1 upvote
Petka
By Petka (Apr 11, 2013)

The average life expectancy for a westerner in Iraq, outside US army enclaves, was 20 minutes. Camera or no camera.

Yes, I was there.

1 upvote
Matt1645f4
By Matt1645f4 (Apr 11, 2013)

@ Petka, Respect

0 upvotes
WT21
By WT21 (Apr 11, 2013)

Coward.

1 upvote
WT21
By WT21 (Apr 11, 2013)

posted in wrong section. removed.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
WT21
By WT21 (Apr 11, 2013)

Spent some time on his site: http://johnnytergo.com/ I think DPR might have in this article the worst of the lot.

I do wonder, though, if these kinds of "in your face" photogs will lead to legislative action against street shooters.

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
jm67
By jm67 (Apr 11, 2013)

"I do wonder, though, if these kinds of "in your face" photogs will lead to legislative action against street shooters."
I'm probably in the minority here but I hope so. There's a lack of privacy in public and that goes with the territory but on the other hand, I don't need to be assaulted and you'd think that people would get some sort of say on their image generating revenue for someone else. Really. Just because I was on the street?

2 upvotes
Robert Daniels
By Robert Daniels (Apr 11, 2013)

Meh... I mean if you like portraits with your feet cut off then this is for you. I like the concept but i guess with some tweaking he may nail it.

0 upvotes
Ken Johnes
By Ken Johnes (Apr 11, 2013)

hey Smarty, try riggin up 2 flash on your bicycle and do it again. and please do let us know how much more fun it was.;-))

2 upvotes
B1ackhat
By B1ackhat (Apr 11, 2013)

You do what you need to do, but I personally find it very intrusive and would beat the living pi** out of you if you did it to me. I am completely unimpressed by the photos by the way.

Comment edited 27 seconds after posting
7 upvotes
jm67
By jm67 (Apr 11, 2013)

You'd have to get in your car and chase him down but I'd have to agree with you on this one. It's going a little too far in my opinion, probably not far enough in some people's.

1 upvote
JJack
By JJack (Apr 11, 2013)

Oh my, things people do to get their five seconds of fame, even if it gets them prosecuted in the end...

In any case, lighting is awful, flares and flash reflections all over the frame, composition non-existent and expressions startled and unnatural (well, duh).
Sooo, it must be art... Right?

No.
What are these crappy shots doing on dpreview then? Just because they make "a story"?

Hey, I know a story about another guy who used to flash people - in both meanings of the word. Carried a camera with a flashgun (and nothing else) under his trenchcoat and flashed it at unsuspecting passers by (mostly young girls), shooting their shocked expressions.

Perhaps that's a story dpreview should dig into as well...

Anyway, I don't see this Tergo character much different from that flasher guy. Perhaps somewhat sneakier, since he hides in his car and probably runs away before the hapless victim reacts.

7 upvotes
LAstreetPhoto
By LAstreetPhoto (Apr 11, 2013)

I don't get why he thinks he needs the strobes any decent DSLR can take beautiful photographs in low light and the cities existing street lighting is far more interesting than his "studio lighting". The photographs are interesting but the lighting ultimately lets them down.

5 upvotes
Steve Balcombe
By Steve Balcombe (Apr 11, 2013)

I subscribe to Wired, it contains some fascinating stuff and people who have succeeded despite (or by) flouting convention are a favourite topic. But this is just tosh. "Studio lighting"?? Is he kidding?

These are some of the most poorly executed and pointless street photographs I have ever seen.

7 upvotes
SKPhoto12
By SKPhoto12 (Apr 11, 2013)

This gets curiouser and curiouser! Can someoneexplain to me where the art enters the picture (no pun intended) and where the Hollywood Bling leaves? I cannot understand how this gets space at DPR, but, it is true, I find that more and more material totally lacks interest on this site, which is why I watch it less and less. Please get back to what brought you here; good reviews of new material, good comparisons of existing material, material meaning quality photographic equipment like cameras, lenses, accessories, lighting, etc. But not this junk!

7 upvotes
Cy Cheze
By Cy Cheze (Apr 11, 2013)

Objective study of web browsing data probably says otherwise: people follow the sensational. This certainly whetted your attention. Don't blush.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Apr 11, 2013)

communication is part of photography and
being rude is a kind of communication.

0 upvotes
Matt1645f4
By Matt1645f4 (Apr 11, 2013)

unfortunately so is getting your head quicked in if you get in some elses face and are rude to them

1 upvote
Airless
By Airless (Apr 11, 2013)

You can't own the light that composes an image of your body, just as you can't own the sound waves created by your voice. This guy is pure awesome and anyone who whines about him is a hater. I'd love for him to photograph me in a public place and do with the image as he sees fit.

1 upvote
agentul
By agentul (Apr 11, 2013)

the colors look like 15 year old decaying film, or those "instagram filters" that hipsters use. knowing that these are not 15 year old film photos makes them crappy hipster photos instead.

i think that exposing people to that kind of light without their consent could be considered physical assault. please let us know when he gets sued.

as a side note, i find the "video monitoring in progress, for your safety" sign hilarious. if he would only take these shots near signs like that it would make this whole endeavor a lot more interesting and hilarious.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
11 upvotes
SeeRoy
By SeeRoy (Apr 11, 2013)

Perhaps he should do a series featuring Traffic Wardens by way of revenge against speed cameras.

1 upvote
monkeybrain
By monkeybrain (Apr 11, 2013)

The people all look like startled animals caught in the headlights of a car moments before they are run over.

8 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Apr 11, 2013)

talibans lighted by muzzle flash
seen through the scope or a thermal camera

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
agentul
By agentul (Apr 11, 2013)

no more Call of Duty for you, young man!

3 upvotes
dg90
By dg90 (Apr 11, 2013)

monkeybrain, You´re right ... its more a safari as street photography. :D

1933, South Afrika:
"I made a picture of a dangerous elephant attacking me!" - "Oh my god, Herbert - what you are doing?!" - "I´m a adventurer, my dear!"

2013, Los Angeles:
"I made a picture of a jesus-lookalike!" - "Oh my god, Tergo - what you are doing?!" - "I´m a innovator, sugar babe!"

Comment edited 24 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Edmond Leung
By Edmond Leung (Apr 11, 2013)

Shame!

2 upvotes
Ken Johnes
By Ken Johnes (Apr 11, 2013)

how do this kind of JUNK get to DPR?.

look at all the equipment he uses and look at the photos, they look like it came from someones mobilephone.

" rigged up with two studio strobes and twin 4000W gas-powered generators " my A*s*s . 2 speedlights on TTL mode might have atleast given him better exposure.and spared us some useless background info .

no wonder he explains that rigging up is the most fun part,with these kind of results that should be true ;-))
what´s next Smarty? 2x M16s to make those poor subjects look more scared?

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
18 upvotes
gsum
By gsum (Apr 11, 2013)

DPR is drowning in junk these days which is a shame when so many great things are going on in photography.
These photos are some of the worst I've seen on here. The photographer hasn't even set his equipment up correctly to get his subject's feet in the frame - amateurish, or is this 'art'.

15 upvotes
Matt1645f4
By Matt1645f4 (Apr 11, 2013)

Totally agree DPR has been slidding for a while now, this is just reporting as theres nothing else to report. How about some more reviews please DPR ?

5 upvotes
keith james taylor
By keith james taylor (Apr 11, 2013)

I heard Digital Photography Review had changed it name to reflect it content to Digital PReview as as previews are quicker

2 upvotes
GradyPhilpott
By GradyPhilpott (Apr 11, 2013)

There's not a lot of creative thought here.

9 upvotes
Ken Johnes
By Ken Johnes (Apr 11, 2013)

oh yes, there is, biut it all went to the `Rigging up his equipment ´part ;-)

7 upvotes
SRT3lkt
By SRT3lkt (Apr 11, 2013)

I thought this was the article about "Google Street Photo" .

3 upvotes
Nishi Drew
By Nishi Drew (Apr 11, 2013)

He's able to take the shot and drive off before anyone hurts him, if he tried something remotely similar handheld/as a portable rig and getting up close and personal...

I like shooting from the hip with a 35mm, walk right up and try to capture an expression, some sort of candid moment or everyday scene rather than "look here BRIGHT LIGHTS ok bye, you look like a dear startled by headlights haha"

Also the car mirror ruins the photos anyways

10 upvotes
njkdo
By njkdo (Apr 11, 2013)

Nothing new, nothing special, nothing that I can appreciate, shooting in the pile and after see what you have, people are not quails.

5 upvotes
Vibrio
By Vibrio (Apr 11, 2013)

so if you take rubbish photos you'll get space on DPreview so long as you take them in strange way.

I use a helmet with a mirrorless camera & two flash guns attached to it to do my street photography. Can I get a feature on the news section?

16 upvotes
Matt1645f4
By Matt1645f4 (Apr 11, 2013)

May be we should see who can come up with the strangests weirdest way to take photos and the weirdest subject ?

0 upvotes
Infared
By Infared (Apr 11, 2013)

Abusing strangers for your own self-centered needs...it's so L.A.!

7 upvotes
truthsforme
By truthsforme (Apr 11, 2013)

Would've thrown a rock at his window, then ran after him and thrown another rock at his camera, in hopes of crushing his lens.

7 upvotes
Leichhardt
By Leichhardt (Apr 11, 2013)

You're a violent idiot.

7 upvotes
JJack
By JJack (Apr 11, 2013)

And so is this guy wossname ... Tergo.
What he does is a sort of violence.

And only in America...
If he tried pulling this off in this country (Slo, EU), he'd soon wind up in court. Not in a private lawsuit but being prosecuted by a public prosecutor, for violating a whole bunch of laws about privacy.

3 upvotes
desidown
By desidown (Apr 11, 2013)

You probably would do no such thing (if you were a normal person). Why would you risk going to jail for something this petty ?

0 upvotes
vetsmelter
By vetsmelter (Apr 11, 2013)

Though nice sample shots I see nothing here on display you can't do with a hand held.
Just my opinion but why not keep the streets real, be part of it in picture and memory of the subjects.

If it were shots of a heroine freight transfer or bribery I would agree you need the wheels to increase survival chances but for what it is worth on the flee market and fruit corner, just leave the intrusive tech loaded spying trucks to GOVoogle.com

5 upvotes
Ivan Lietaert
By Ivan Lietaert (Apr 11, 2013)

I like this because it shows the reality of street life.
What I like less:
1) some subjects are missing their feet due to bad framing
2) the reflection of the flash on walls and glass
I consider these distractors; get rid of those faults and you get studio quality street photography indeed!

1 upvote
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Apr 11, 2013)

any 'limited darkish background indoor studio lighting look' for outdoors for our digital era, is as backwards a look as 'flash photography' ('club black') of the film era (when they couldn't shoot without flash if too dark)

i've never liked that 'club black' look, it's too non-natural.

nowhere nearly as candid, and clearly 'staged' for a 'gotcha' look. (next closest thing being the look on one's subject if taken by a paparazzi 'up close')

given his use with strobe flash is so overt, it's worse than the 'stealth' of non-strobe/flash of 'google-earth' street-view photography

sdyue

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
mschf
By mschf (Apr 11, 2013)

All I see here is yet another coward's approach to street photography.

16 upvotes
Matt1645f4
By Matt1645f4 (Apr 11, 2013)

Personally i don't do street photography as a lot of people don't like their picture being taken and the Police in the UK have been cracking down on photography in public places on frounds of terrorism. Anyway i would always prefer to ask some before taking their photo

1 upvote
massimogori
By massimogori (Apr 11, 2013)

Totally ugly pictures. Not worth the fine he will get because distracted by his paraphernalia when driving.

14 upvotes
robogobo
By robogobo (Apr 11, 2013)

Wow, what a load of crappy comments. You naysayers are just jealous and narrow minded photo snobs. Get over yourselves.

1 upvote
Trollshavethebestcandy
By Trollshavethebestcandy (Apr 11, 2013)

That's it! I'm jealous! I am jealous over lack of genious, talent and a decency. Why did I not see that before. I am so blinded. Maybe I was one of his victims.

7 upvotes
Arn
By Arn (Apr 11, 2013)

[to robogobo] Wow, you're saying they are not entitled to their opinions?

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
7 upvotes
Trollshavethebestcandy
By Trollshavethebestcandy (Apr 11, 2013)

Yes, "Genious" is ironic spelling.

4 upvotes
robogobo
By robogobo (Apr 11, 2013)

Everyone is entitled to his opinion, and I'm entitled to say that opinion is tainted by insecurity and lack of imagination. There are so many photographers with some sick attachment to "purity" and can't see the art in punk, slam, spontaneous execution of an idea. At least this guy has the balls to go out and try something new and controversial. The purists are.just shopping for a sharper lens to photograph flowers or puppies. But their work will never get any press. Anyone who has been around the block knows that.

0 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Apr 11, 2013)

Um no, that's not it, and why you get the reactions you do to your comments. Don't forget about fact checking next time and the bad habit of lumping all into one (called generalizing) is another reason. I don't think it takes balls to roll up to PEDESTRIANS in a car and photograph them, and speed off.

Quite the contrary- asking someone permission on the street to photograph them takes much more courage and risk on multiple levels. This guy will never be famous because of that simple fact. Also the reactions by "overreactors" might cause legal waves to photographers who don't do such things- we all suffer from a bad example.

2 upvotes
desidown
By desidown (Apr 11, 2013)

@Arn: Entitled to opinions is one thing but don't you think the ferocity of some of the comments and wishing violence upon him a bit extreme ? That wouldn't necessarily mean that they are just expressing opinion but maybe there is some jealousy.

0 upvotes
iforum
By iforum (Apr 11, 2013)

There is probably a good reason for keeping out of unsavory neighborhoods... drive by shooting could create a new reality for him, or a short life

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Apr 11, 2013)

Instead of buying all those lights and paraphernalia...

He should just get a decent Full Frame Low Life DSLR.

Ooh...that's, Low Light DSLR.

...but they mean the same anyway.

Comment edited 100 times, 90 minutes after posting.

.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
marcio_napoli
By marcio_napoli (Apr 11, 2013)

I'm not exactly defending Tergo's work, but how about a bit of reality check here, please?

If you follow your subjects in France, with a Leica, just natural light and a 50 mm (which actually forces you to be far from your subject), your the next HCB, doing arty stuff.

If you follow your subjects in LA, with a Canon and 2 strobes (which means nothing more than chasing QUALITY of light, as he's not depending on random lucky, he's making his own), so yeah... you become a selfish, creepy, disturbed azz #ole, that should be beaten to death.

Oh I get it...

It reminds me that other article about Hasselblad, with people claiming that shoot was a waste of natural resorces, bla bla bla, etc.

0 upvotes
Clyde Thomas
By Clyde Thomas (Apr 11, 2013)

There is no art created by reproducing basic security camera aesthetics found in every shopping mall and traffic light.

9 upvotes
iforum
By iforum (Apr 11, 2013)

still it is all the hallmarks of the "one trick Pony' feel about it......lets hope he is smart enough to take it further than the basement

Don't know where you got this silly idea from or is it just being naive
If you follow your subjects in France, with a Leica, just natural light and a 50 mm (which actually forces you to be far from your subject), your the next HCB, doing arty stuff.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
wansai
By wansai (Apr 11, 2013)

it's drive by shooting. There is little "art" to it. This is all technical. He does not in any way interact with his subjects. He doesn't give them a chance to react or not react to him. At the most they are reacting to a 4000W blinding flash of light from a moving truck. There is a massive difference here and the distinction is very real.

10 upvotes
Clyde Thomas
By Clyde Thomas (Apr 11, 2013)

This is tech masturbation at its finest. But no art here.

Does he not have a friend who could drive the truck, while he photographs from passenger side?

Certainly no invasion of privacy by photographing people in public spaces. But it's no more "art" than the traffic light cameras on every corner produce... or the shopping mall security cameras... which photograph these same folks multiple times a day.

The photographer denies personifying the subject, reducing the subject to objectification, as every shopping mall traffic cam does. There is no art created by imitating security cameras technology.

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
20 upvotes
Richard Schumer
By Richard Schumer (Apr 11, 2013)

Oh, boy, here we go again! Forward -- into the past!

The photos look to me like Weegee's newspaper work, except with better lighting and less dramatic tonal range (perhaps the diff between Weegee's large-format monochrome film and Tergo's color digital).

Like "60-Minutes" which cheapened and coarsened news reporting decades ago, the described technique is likely to yield lots of raging, angry faces. I smell a book deal or grant-funding application in there somewhere...

Perhaps I am just a cynic.

3 upvotes
Mssimo
By Mssimo (Apr 11, 2013)

Camera check
Strobe x 2 check
wireless trigger check
roof mounted super soaker with face detection....ohh yeah

5 upvotes
Digitall
By Digitall (Apr 11, 2013)

And I thought I'd seen everything on photography world.

2 upvotes
Dantala
By Dantala (Apr 11, 2013)

If he wasn't trying to achieve "the studio-like lighting" he might be on to something. Street photography is about stopping and preserving time. He's just letting average people know what it is like to be harassed by Paparazzi without the benefit of being famous.

6 upvotes
kadardr
By kadardr (Apr 11, 2013)

This is simply pathetic "Much ado about nothing". Anti-photography... I am wondering why does he do it? It is like a substitute of randomly killing people, shooting... yeah!

2 upvotes
erichK
By erichK (Apr 11, 2013)

Why is DPreview featuring the photographs of this arrogant and invasive stalker? His behaviour is the first convincing argument I've ever heard for openly packing and using a firearm in a city.

What a wanton, outrageous assault on the privacy and dignity of his victims. Makes me ashamed to call myself a photographer!

10 upvotes
ianp5a
By ianp5a (Apr 11, 2013)

You ask why!! DPreview is just reporting it. It is photography related and is unusual. People will make their own minds up about it.
Photographers have, and will do, all sorts of "odd" things to get photos. But please think twice before bringing guns into the topic. As people from countries not "gun obsessed" will read your view of carrying guns over cameras as "not very bright".

0 upvotes
robogobo
By robogobo (Apr 11, 2013)

Wow, erichK, you need professional help.

2 upvotes
desidown
By desidown (Apr 11, 2013)

really , you would shoot a person because they shot a picture of you ? And what defense would you present at your trial ?

1 upvote
tommy leong
By tommy leong (Apr 11, 2013)

GOOD JOB

but i would carry a handgun with me at
ALL TIMES

:)

0 upvotes
Camediadude
By Camediadude (Apr 11, 2013)

It is clowns like these who ruin it for the rest of us. He is giving photographers everywhere a bad name.

10 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Apr 11, 2013)

I agree that his method makes me sick to my stomach. However, he's not ruining it for us. It's people who think he's ruining it for us that make laws all of us must obide (or risk breaking the law) that ruin it for us. There is a very important distinction there more people need to get on board with. We live in a world where one bad example is enough reason to punish those who don't make them (the rest of us). But it's up to us to change that habit, and not tolerate such laws.

0 upvotes
Camediadude
By Camediadude (Apr 11, 2013)

You make some solid points, cgarrard, but I can't help but think that to some slight extent, rotten apples like these will always have some negative effect on the bunch. As far as making up laws to punish the rest for the bad actions of a few, I am right there with you. Liberties are being eroded worldwide due to such sorts of actions.

0 upvotes
UCSB
By UCSB (Apr 11, 2013)

This is just plain wrong.

17 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (Apr 11, 2013)

In this 1984 world, only big corporations like Google and cities are allowed to photograph people in public, all the time.

0 upvotes
wansai
By wansai (Apr 11, 2013)

Google aren't photographing people. It's a by product of them taking a picture of a scene by purely technical means for purely technical reasons. They will often blur people's faces out.

Their intent is not to take random people's portraits or activities.

5 upvotes
cgarrard
By cgarrard (Apr 11, 2013)

Yeah wansai is correct, there is a big difference there. This guy is going for the "effect" of his technique. I personally think all the rigging in his truck is just part of the sensationalism selling he's doing, and people are buying it. He knows sensationalism sells so make the rig bigger and crazier and he gets more attention. He's on an ego mission, not a photographers mission.

2 upvotes
mandophoto
By mandophoto (Apr 11, 2013)

It's the times we live in: A cross between invasive Google and gaudy Warhol. Interesting but wonder if it will go beyond 15 minutes. And yes, DPReview is absolutely right in assuming it is of interest to photographers, because it is indeed photography.

1 upvote
ItsNotThatEasy
By ItsNotThatEasy (Apr 11, 2013)

'I don't want to stop with good enough, I want it to be awesome." - Well Tergo, you can start by learning how to take a photograph.

21 upvotes
Paul Storm
By Paul Storm (Apr 11, 2013)

love the 'jesus' shot - puts a smile in my heart.

keep on pushing the envelope & innovating!

3 upvotes
erichK
By erichK (Apr 11, 2013)

There is nothing innovative here...anyone with most of $100k to spend on the truck and other gear could easily do the same, If this creep actually had some guts - or talent - then he wouldn't have to hide in a truck and behind blasting lights!

5 upvotes
wansai
By wansai (Apr 11, 2013)

you call this innovation? This is a purely technical solution to not having to deal with people. It objectifies the subject and does not even stick around for a reaction to the photographer. you just drive away.

All this is: a CCTV with 4000w strobes. That's all it is. The sample shots aren't even that impressive.

4 upvotes
robogobo
By robogobo (Apr 11, 2013)

Right on.

1 upvote
podli
By podli (Apr 11, 2013)

In lot of way this is truly weird way of shooting and I must agree with some of the comments below, however I like it and even more because of the strong reaction that it brings up! The rear mirror on each photo is just awesome.

1 upvote
Trollshavethebestcandy
By Trollshavethebestcandy (Apr 11, 2013)

-1
Unlike.
The "Photographer" is more ego and idiot than talent. New means of stupidity does not mean art. Let fools part with their money over this guy but don't call it art. Framing a pic with a 5,000 lb rolling crane does not make it better because his lack of knowledge of use of a flash and a bit of his rear view mirror added to be cute. Celebrate talent and art not degradation of an art. Guerrilla blinding is stupid. It's like the "Punked" but on film. DPR is not taking its role serious by highlighting fools.

6 upvotes
Jimmy jang Boo
By Jimmy jang Boo (Apr 11, 2013)

Having looked at all his pictures in the above link, I'd suggest he park the truck, take hold the camera (in his hands) and frame his subjects without the passenger mirror in the bottom left corner.

7 upvotes
Kurt_K
By Kurt_K (Apr 11, 2013)

I think it's sad that, with all the talented and classy photographers out there deserving of exposure, it's jerks like this who end up grabbing headlines at such high-traffic sites as Wired and Dpreview. Brutal.

24 upvotes
Total comments: 376
2345