Original question and text by @MostlyBlindGamer@rblind.com

Disclosure: I do street photography on Fuji Instax color and monochrome, B&W film, and color and B&W edited digital. My username is accurate, I have low vision.

What we now call street photography - that many of us do as a hobby or with a focus on art - came from journalism and documentary photography, right? The Leica and black and white workflow was good for professionals documenting current events.

As photographic technology progressed, photojournalism moved to color film, then to digital as those became more appropriate for the workflow and for the reader.

In general broad strokes, photojournalists have been capturing current events with the technology of their time, therefore they’ve been representing their times with the look that technology brings. If the early 1900s happened in black and white, and so much of the rest of the century happened in Kodachrome, the 21st century is happening in whatever “color science” means. Sharp lens - lacking in character? - and balanced - realistic? - colors.

With all that context, when we use film simulations, edit in black and white or - gasp! - shoot on film, are we documenting our own time or are we bound to nostalgia? Magnum Photos was all about the most effective technology to capture the moment, not charcoal sketches. Are we effectively capturing the spirit and visual aesthetics of the 2020s or are confusing future historians? Or… are we just really enjoying ourselves and creating art, while we leave the documentation to people using their smartphones and PJs?

What are your thoughts? I’d love to hear from hobbyists and pros alike. Are you editing for a nostalgic feel or focusing on focusing on sharp realism? Both? Why and when? And how do you feel about others’ work? Do you miss a more current look in street and documentary photography?