Interesting chat on Newstalk about Public Photography.

smash

cambo_gueno wrote: »

I'm interested in this perception of someone taking a photo of you in a public place invading your privacy. How would you see this as an invasion of privacy? Does the same invasion of privacy occur of someone just looks at you? Or is it just if they take a picture ?

Again, if you've nothing to hide then why not ask permission or explain the reason why you wanted to take the photo?

cambo_gueno wrote: »

This general attitude is what has this (and many other) country the way it is. Stop being so paranoid and get on with your life. People aren't out to get you, despite what government, law enforcement, special interest groups, Eircom might have you believe...

I'm not paranoid about anyone out to get me and personally wouldn't care about a photo being taken(depending on the circumstances), but I know people that are like that.

People are just protective of their young and if someone takes a photo of your child then you'd always wonder why.

if your missus was on a beach topless and you saw someone taking a photo would you object?

dinneenp

I suppose in theory you have the same right/ or should apply the same rules to taking a photo of an adult.

What does someone fear is the worst that a person will do with the picture? Besides it being part of a plan to kidnap a person (far fetched I know), I'd imagine that a parent might think the person will 'use' the photos at home......
so there's no logic that an adult wouldn't mind their picture being taken either if they thought that was what someone was up to.

In reality common sense should rule and if there's any doubt just ask.....

DaireQuinlan

steve06 wrote: »

If you hadn't noticed.... I didn't say it originally! And I also mentioned that I didn't think like that.

The argument almost always devolves to that eventually though. We had 'getz' not so long ago here finish up a ranting paranoid screed with a link to a book about gangs of highly organised and highly connected child snatchers operating in the country, stealing children to order, presumably photographing them first :rolleyes:

We had 'cork_and_proud' sneerily accuse amateur 'camera holders' of slobbering over 'young girls'

Even smellstheglove in this very thread eventually reveals her hand (if you'll excuse the pun). She starts off by sounding quite reasonable and saying that children, while engaged in 'private activities' (whatever they are) shouldn't be photographed. Eventually though, commenting on paulw's photograph she says something quite telling:

would I want a stranger looking at my child like this....

Like what ? A 6 year old in a dress playing around in the sand ? I'm increasingly thinking that the problem is in the eyes of the beholder. And as cambo_gueno says, what on earth is the difference between that and actual, y'know, PEOPLE there who are (god forbid) LOOKING AT THE CHILD. Does every little sidelong glance make you scared for your kids ?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say even if that WERE the case, so what ? what does it matter if some freak gets his jollies looking at some picture of your kid ? How does it affect you ? or the kid ? Do they transmit SEX ABUSE RAYS by just looking at the picture or something ??

I have tons of pictures of my son on flickr, including one or two in the bath :eek: I'm going to concentrate on trying to protect him from realistic threats, like for example trying to stop him from falling over and smacking his head on what we like to refer to as our 'fireplace of death' which he just loves wobbling past at speed, or maybe inculcating him with the desire not to play in traffic or something. You know, actual dangers. Not bogeymen.

Paulw

steve06 wrote: »

When you're out with your kids having fun, or even just walking around it would make people feel uncompfortable if you're minding your own business and at the same time there's somebody else sticking their nose in it! And then possible printing it and selling it...

CCTV is recorded and deleted if not needed and it's not focused on a single person unless they're doing something wrong.

There are plenty of instances where private CCTV footage ends up on youtube, bebo or other sites.

Most of the photography would (I believe) be non-intrusive. It's seldom taken with someone walking right up to a child and snapping a pict.

In most cases, when someone is minding their own business, is the best time to capture the image, since they're natural and most relaxed. Posed images can tend to ruin the idea.

I don't do street photography, it's just not my thing. But, at the same time, I don't take well to demands, especially when I am not in the wrong.

Respect goes both ways. If you have a problem with someone taking photos, then treat them with respect and talk to them. Stomping over and demanding they delete their images is not going to do you much good.

The vast majority of photographers are decent good people, and with a polite request will have no problem deleting photos.

Fajitas!

steve06 wrote: »

if your missus was on a beach topless and you saw someone taking a photo would you object?

If she's topless on a public beach, then fire away.

I'd most likely laugh.

smash

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say even if that WERE the case, so what ? what does it matter if some freak gets his jollies looking at some picture of your kid ? How does it affect you ? or the kid ? Do they transmit SEX ABUSE RAYS by just looking at the picture or something ??

That's so wrong on so many levels!

dinneenp wrote: »

In reality common sense should rule and if there's any doubt just ask.....

But what I'm saying is, why should you have to ask? Why not be told "I just took this great photo" maybe the parent would even like a copy and be willing to pay good money for it!

Fajitas! wrote: »

If she's topless on a public beach, then fire away.

I'd most likely laugh.

Cool, so where are you going on holidays? only messin!

Paulw

steve06 wrote: »

if your missus was on a beach topless and you saw someone taking a photo would you object?

I'd have no problem with that at all. If she doesn't want them seen, she doesn't get them out. Simple as. If she wants privacy, she can put up a screen.

DaireQuinlan

steve06 wrote: »

That's wrong on so many levels!

why so ? What I'm saying here is that I'm not going to get uptight about the (remote or nonexistent) possibility of it happening. If I was concerned about it then I wouldn't have a single picture of my kid publicly available.

smash

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

why so ? What I'm saying here is that I'm not going to get uptight about the (remote or nonexistent) possibility of it happening.

No, that's not quite what you were saying...

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

what does it matter if some freak gets his jollies looking at some picture of your kid ?

DaireQuinlan

steve06 wrote: »

No, that's not quite what you were saying...

I'm not seeing the difference here ...

Trojan911

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

what does it matter if some freak gets his jollies looking at some picture of your kid ? How does it affect you ? or the kid ?

A very irresponsible comment there.

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Do they transmit SEX ABUSE RAYS by just looking at the picture or something ??

No, however the images can & have been used to create pseudo images of children in pornographic scenarios. I've seen some of these images at lectures in my previous job.

KarmaGarda

I find this thread extremely interesting for several reasons. Firstly is the paranoia that exists in society today. We have freaks that do indulge in these horrible activities, which has made us so suspicious of every stranger it can become almost comical. We, as a race, invented the camera, we should put up with the consequences. I know all of you as individuals didn't, but it's a part of society now. If you're out in "public", you immediately lose every "invasion of privacy" arguement full stop. Invasion of privacy just doesn't exists in public in this manner that's being discussed.

Also, and I'll pick on Steve06, I have to laugh that you're now deciding what DaireQuinlan meant in his post. I disagree with you, you can't just go and rip a completely different parts of a persons post and then decide in your head what they meant in another paragraph. I completely agree with Daire here. Quite frankly, if you're in public and don't want your kid photographed then cover him/her up.

I've seen this same argument being tried against many topics. Bottom line is when a photographer is in public, they can take a damn photo of whatever they want. If your at home in the privacy of your own property, then I'm crossing the line.

But, me personally? I wouldn't take the photograph. Why? Because I can't be arsed putting up with the agro of somebody claiming x/y/z against me if I do spot an excellent picture of what just happens to be of a person under a certain age.

smelltheglove

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

Even smellstheglove in this very thread eventually reveals her hand (if you'll excuse the pun). She starts off by sounding quite reasonable and saying that children, while engaged in 'private activities' (whatever they are) shouldn't be photographed. Eventually though, commenting on paulw's photograph she says something quite telling:

You took that completely out of context so I will remind you,

Ok lets look at Pauls picture on I think the previous page, thats pretty much ok right? I have taken some very very similar of my own children and there is no harm there really but a child splashing about int he water in a swimsuit really to most people would be crossing the line, yes people have different attitudes but envisage the child as your own and you are a wary parent and then think would I want a stranger looking at my child like this....

I wouldnt like someone looking at my child splashing about in the water in a swimsuit. And does it matter if some creep gets his jollies looking at my kid, GOD YES, whether the child is there or not, aware or not, it breaches their innocence, and their right to be a child and be seen as a child and a child alone!

So Daire you say I start off sounding reasonable, but I eventually show my hand, are you trying to say that I am not reasonable?


There are people who feel photographs are an invasion of their privacy and are not happy to have their photo taken, I came across one person at an event once and she came straight up to me and asked me not to take her photo, she said she hates it, she feels it is disrespectful and it upsets her if someone takes her photograph. She asked me matter of factly not to photograph her and I respected her request and did not once point my camera in her direction.

smash

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

I have tons of pictures of my son on flickr, including one or two in the bath

So you have naked photos of your child on Flickr in the public domain... I do find that irresponsible and I'm sure you would have a major problem if they ended up on child pornography website!

DaireQuinlan

Trojan911 wrote: »

A very irresponsible comment there.

ok, go back and re-read my entire post. I'm not saying it doesn't happen in general. I'm not saying that it WILL happen to any one of my pictures, I'm certainly not ENCOURAGING it. I'm saying that it's something that just never concerns me when I'm uploading a picture, or taking a picture. or whatever.

smash

KarmaGarda wrote: »

Also, and I'll pick on Steve06, I have to laugh that you're now deciding what DaireQuinlan meant in his post.

I could only see one meaning from his post.

KarmaGarda wrote: »

Quite frankly, if you're in public and don't want your kid photographed then cover him/her up.

Some people don't like being photographed or don't want others taking photos of their kids and it's unreasonable to tell them to cover up when they want to leave the house to go out and play.

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

ok, go back and re-read my entire post. I'm not saying it doesn't happen in general. I'm not saying that it WILL happen to any one of my pictures, I'm certainly not ENCOURAGING it. I'm saying that it's something that just never concerns me when I'm uploading a picture, or taking a picture. or whatever.

All you had to do was clearly add this to your original post to put it in context.

Paulw

smelltheglove wrote: »

Ok lets look at Pauls picture on I think the previous page, thats pretty much ok right? I have taken some very very similar of my own children and there is no harm there really but a child splashing about int he water in a swimsuit really to most people would be crossing the line, yes people have different attitudes but envisage the child as your own and you are a wary parent and then think would I want a stranger looking at my child like this....

What about the other photo I posted, with kids in swimsuits?? Just curious on your view of that.

smelltheglove wrote: »

There are people who feel photographs are an invasion of their privacy and are not happy to have their photo taken

Which is perfectly fine. It works both ways. If they show you respect and ask nicely, then the vast majority of photographers will have no problems not taking someone's photo or deleting the photo.

The problem arises when people "demand", when they have no right to.

trishw78

steve06 wrote: »

So you have naked photos of your child on Flickr in the public domain... I do find that irresponsible and I'm sure you would have a major problem if they ended up on child pornography website!

I find it disturbing that you feel you need to judge him or the choices he makes

KarmaGarda

steve06 wrote: »

I could only see one meaning from his post.

My argument still stands. You can't decide what he actually meant, even if you percieve it differently.

steve06 wrote: »

Some people don't like being photographed or don't want others taking photos of their kids and it's unreasonable to tell them to cover up when they want to leave the house to go out and play.

And I think it's unreasonable for you to decide what I can and can't take a photo of.

smash

Paulw wrote: »

Which is perfectly fine. It works both ways. If they show you respect and ask nicely, then the vast majority of photographers will have no problems not taking someone's photo or deleting the photo.

But like it's been mentioned before, it's a public place and the photographer might still want to take the photo and the subject doesn't really have any rights here, but they should.

EDIT: point proven in the post above

KarmaGarda wrote: »

And I think it's unreasonable for you to decide what I can and can't take a photo of.

I'm not deciding what you can and can't take photos of, but if someone asks you not to you should respect that!

trishw78 wrote: »

I find it disturbing that you feel you need to judge him or the choices he makes

I'm not really judging him, different strokes for different folks and as he said before, it doesn't concern him. It would concern me... just a different opinion really.

Trojan911

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

ok, go back and re-read my entire post. I'm not saying it doesn't happen in general. I'm not saying that it WILL happen to any one of my pictures, I'm certainly not ENCOURAGING it. I'm saying that it's something that just never concerns me when I'm uploading a picture, or taking a picture. or whatever.

I did read your post several times prior to posting, as I wanted to make sure I was not misreading it. The quote above still doesn't sway me.

PaulieC

steve06 wrote: »

But what I'm saying is, why should you have to ask? Why not be told "I just took this great photo" maybe the parent would even like a copy and be willing to pay good money for it!

you're tying yourself up in knots here. Earlier you said that if someone wanted to photograph your kid that they should ask permission first. Now your saying snap first then ask permission? Make your mind up...although I suspect that most people with these kinds of irrational fears don't actually know in their own mind what exaclty they are afraid of

smelltheglove

I think its ok Paul, I dont think it would bother me too much.

Although, and there is an although, if it were closer it might bother me. I have particular reservations about my eldest child, I know how many people and how often people comment on her looks, her height, her figure, at only 7 the child is stunning and I am CONSTANTLY trying to make sure she still looks like a child. There are outfits my little niece of 8 can wear that I would never put on my child because of the differences between them and I am very paranoid of her being photographed in a swimsuit. I suppose the difference between me and some others here is the fact that I try to retain her childhood and I am aware of the risks when in public and for this reason choose her swimsuits etc carefully.

My youngest may also end up being that way but has a much cheekier demeanour about her and not so vunerable and I would not be as paranoid about her, however that could change when she grows also.

Having said that, I still believe that some of these moments are best left to the memory, and to the privacy of the people involved, also the fact that these people knew you were photographing them and were happy to continue as they were whilst being photographed would be a sign of permission in my eyes.

AnCatDubh

cambo_gueno wrote: »

you're tying yourself up in knots here. Earlier you said that if someone wanted to photograph your kid that they should ask permission first. Now your saying snap first then ask permission? Make your mind up...although I suspect that most people with these kinds of irrational fears don't actually know in their own mind what exaclty they are afraid of

In fairness to the poster, there is a common theme of 'permission' in his posts thus far even though the timing of requiring a permission within the sequence of posts appears to have switched around.

Paulw

steve06 wrote: »

But like it's been mentioned before, it's a public place and the photographer might still want to take the photo and the subject doesn't really have any rights here, but they should.

EDIT: point proven in the post above

I'm not deciding what you can and can't take photos of, but if someone asks you not to you should respect that!

Yes, the photographer may still want to take the photo, and the photographer is well within their rights to do so. The subject does not have the right to demand that the photographer deletes the photo. But, the subject can turn away, shield themself, or other means.

As I've continued to state, respect works both ways. Asking politely will get you a lot further than making demands.

KarmaGarda

steve06 wrote: »

I'm not deciding what you can and can't take photos of, but if someone asks you not to you should respect that!

You're changing the argument here. I was never talking about if someone asks you not to take a photograph. That's a completely different issue. I'm talking about what I have the right to photograph in a public domain.

trishw78

steve06 wrote: »

I'm not really judging him, different strokes for different folks and as he said before, it doesn't concern him. It would concern me... just a different opinion really.

But you are juding him by calling him irresponsible for put the pictures up on flickr.

Fajitas!

Wrap them all up in bubblewrap. It's the only way.

Paulw

smelltheglove wrote: »

I think its ok Paul, I dont think it would bother me too much.

Although, and there is an although, if it were closer it might bother me.

Having said that, ........ the fact that these people knew you were photographing them and were happy to continue as they were whilst being photographed would be a sign of permission in my eyes.

I do have "closer" versions of the image. I was not there to capture the people, but was there to capture waves. They just walked in to my scene and in many ways, added to it.

I understand your desire to keep your children's childhood. I think that is something worth protecting, but at the same time, it's something worth capturing too.

The look on a child's face can say so much. Those expressions are totally unique, and generally things you'd never see in an adult.

Some of the best photographs tend to be of children, because of their emotions and expressions. We "Ooooo" and "Aaaaaahh" over kids so much.

There are now (unfortunately) places in the Western World, where you can't even take photos of your OWN children, because of this paranoia about photography.

It's not helping the world, it's ruining the world.

PaulieC

smelltheglove wrote: »

I wouldnt like someone looking at my child splashing about in the water in a swimsuit. And does it matter if some creep gets his jollies looking at my kid, GOD YES, whether the child is there or not, aware or not, it breaches their innocence, and their right to be a child and be seen as a child and a child alone!

This is kind of what I was asking about earlier. Do you ever bring your child on holidays ? Do they play in the pool ? Or do you keep them inside in case someone looks at them ?

Also, regarding your comment on your child being 'stunning' ...well everyone thinks their own children are gorgeous, don't they? It doesn't actually mean that everyone else does...

Man this kind of thread really brings out the whole range of opinions, doesn't it? Sure beats a thread about sensor size or pixel pitch :pac:

smash

cambo_gueno wrote: »

you're tying yourself up in knots here. Earlier you said that if someone wanted to photograph your kid that they should ask permission first. Now your saying snap first then ask permission? Make your mind up...although I suspect that most people with these kinds of irrational fears don't actually know in their own mind what exaclty they are afraid of

As mentioned by another poster, the best shots are usually those that aren't posed and a spontaneous shot could always be good, if you do this and get a good shot I think you should mention it to the parents. Yet if you're out somewhere to specifically take photos then I think you should ask permission, and if you don't you should respect the wishes of a person to delete a photo weather they ask or demand... If someone demands then it's probably because of fear and rather than saying no it's a public place, an explanation could easily calm them down.

thebaz

many kids on the streets , end up on the streets cause of real physical and sexual abuse , after a few months predators and drug addiction will rob their innocence and life - do people question why primary teachers want to teach children - 99.99 % its for the right reason , same with photographers , the pervert ones will not be transparent , and would not post to flickr or boards with their names - if the same energy was used to fight the real problem we may get some where

Paulw

steve06 wrote: »

As mentioned by another poster, the best shots are usually those that aren't posed and a spontaneous shot could always be good, if you do this and get a good shot I think you should mention it to the parents.

You don't always have that chance. Besides, the photo is for you, not for them. I certainly wouldn't approach someone and say "I got this great photo of your kid ... look".

Sometimes you just see a scene or see a kid, and know that it's a wonderful image. 1-2 seconds later and the scene is gone.

steve06 wrote: »

Yet if you're out somewhere to specifically take photos then I think you should ask permission, and if you don't you should respect the wishes of a person to delete a photo weather they ask or demand... If someone demands then it's probably because of fear and rather than saying no it's a public place, an explanation could easily calm them down.

You can't go around asking permission of everyone you see or everyone on a beach.

Of course most people will respect the wishes of a person if they ask to have the image deleted.

But, again, if someone demands, most people are less likely to comply. They have no right to demand anything. They are the ones causing the problem.

If you show some respect to the photographer, they will respect your wishes, in the vast majority of cases. If you can't live with that, then you are the one with the problem.

PaulieC

^^^ hey! Covey is back!!

smelltheglove

cambo_gueno wrote: »

Do they play in the pool ? Or do you keep them inside in case someone looks at them ?

Also, regarding your comment on your child being 'stunning' ...well everyone thinks their own children are gorgeous, don't they? It doesn't actually mean that everyone else does...

As I said I try to keep my eldest looking like a child, I am going on holidays in a few weeks and it is my first time going on a peak of the year holiday, yes I feel a little strange about it but thankfully we will be staying in a villa with family! I have more reservations about the one child considering the amount of comments she gets and the fact that there is nothing childlike about her appearance makes me work even harder to keep the innocence about her. I do love her being photographed and I love to see the appreciation people take in looking at and taking her picture however I do believe that there are boundaries and should her photograph be taken whilst she is in a swimsuit or outside palying in the garden then permission should be asked.

I am not thinking oh everyone who tries to take her photograph is a paedo, not at all but I would worry if her photo would be put onto the likes of flickr and maybe someone looked at her in the wrong way, like daire said some creep could get his jollies. I do have experience that would make me more paranoid than the next person so maybe I am slightly more on edge but I would like permission to be asked first.

trooney

smelltheglove wrote: »

I am not thinking oh everyone who tries to take her photograph is a paedo, not at all but I would worry if her photo would be put onto the likes of flickr and maybe someone looked at her in the wrong way, like daire said some creep could get his jollies. I do have experience that would make me more paranoid than the next person so maybe I am slightly more on edge but I would like permission to be asked first.

Its good you can view this subject from both sides of the fence, as it were. But there are too many people who have the whole alarmist reaction and label people incorrectly, adding to the perceived fear.

I think we all understand the maternal/paternal need to protect your progeny, but it would seem that rather than make the assumption everybody is out to get them, to use better judgement to make an informed decision, rather than being swayed my mass hysteria – (not aimed at anybody in particular, more of a generalisation).

Out of curiousness, can I ask, if somebody were to ask permission to take a photo (in a public setting) and you said "no", but they went and took it anyway, what would your reaction be?

smelltheglove

I think i would most likely up and leave, I wouldnt be comfortable being there with someone taking pictures without my permission.

Then again I could always whip out my camera and take their picture until they got bored! (blocking the kids at the same time):o

Also I would be quite unlikely to say no anyway if I were asked permission and I was happy that the kids were adequaltely covered up and the pictures were tasteful.

Covey

Haven't posted here in months. Someone pointed me in the direction of this and other similar threads and I've been trying to keep stum, but quite frankly can't in this case. :eek:

I'd consider myself first and foremost as a street photographer and that by it's nature generally includes people. People, generally include children quite often, the little blighters are all over the place. I don't really differentiate.

Street photography by it's nature involves respect for your subject. Sometimes I ask beforehand, sometimes afterwards ( and generally have a giggle over the photo) but quite often it's not practical to do so.

I have at say a conservative estimate 200-300 photos that either have kids as the main subject or a large part of the "action". No apologies whatsoever for photos I've taken and fully intend to continue in the same vein. I generally shoot at 50mm or less so I'm quite visable.

The legalities have been pointed out by many, the respect also and yes I would have no problem deleting a shot. I've only been asked once in relation to a child, bizarrely a child being used be a street artist in their act. They didn't have any problem with photos being taken on mobile phones and compacts and I was the only one to ask

We don't have a privacy law to restrict photography. The call here to have one I find disturbing and as some have pointed out if ever enacted, should apply equally to children and adults. In one swoop, street and large sections of documentary photography is gone, with potentially far more consequences than random snap of kids, as can be seen already in the UK. A policeman is currently up for Manslaughter in the UK, with a lot of what might be classed as "bordering on the illegal" photographic evidence from journalists (under amended UK laws) , for instance. Society would be by far the worse for any Censorship as some here have proposed not least those images of kids at play which are unique. I know some people would have no problem taking and posting images of kids in say India (they are so photogenic) and would baulk at an image of a child in Ireland. How truly bizarre!

I don't manipulate my photos, but quite often my photos depict scenes that have not happened in reality. This is easy to achieve by what is excluded from the photo. I suppose people would object to that also " How dare you, I didn't use my child as a tent peg" ! :mad: It was a joy last weekend at Phillippine Independence Day to see the difference between the Irish and the Phillippinos attitude to taking photos of kids. I literally had to fend them off.

I find boxing to be an abhorent activity, but in no way would I advocate restrictions on photographing or publishing the activity. As a photographer, I could well even envisage photographing it in certain circumstances.

I have taken the liberty to attach a few photos as illustrations. My Photo a Day Blog even has a category called Kidz as it's a major part of what I do, almost all Kids I don't know.

Off now to scrub out my lenses with soapy water and retire to my den for another spot of hibernation.

T.

PS on a totally unrelated note, my most recent Blog post has been removed from a blog aggregator for "poking fun at Muslims" . Mohammad, the world's gone totally mad !!

I'll reduce the size of the photos when I get home.

EDIT:

Sorry, photos deleted as I find the direction the thread has subsequently gone very objectionable. T.

smash

Covey wrote: »

Street photography by it's nature involves respect for your subject. Sometimes I ask beforehand, sometimes afterwards ( and generally have a giggle over the photo) but quite often it's not practical to do so.

Thanks for your post, the attitude of having respect for your subject is a breath of fresh air to read about as it seems to have been lost or at least not mentioned by others who are only interested in talking about the legalities of shooting in public.

KarmaGarda

steve06 wrote: »

Thanks for your post, the attitude of having respect for your subject is a breath of fresh air to read about as it seems to have been lost or at least not mentioned by others who are only interested in talking about the legalities of shooting in public.

Woah, hang on a sec there now. You were the one mentioning that it was "disturbing" people taking pictures of people under a certain age, in certain "public" environments... and with no mention of "permission" anywhere. Anyway, have I lost my marbles here? This thread was never about "whether or not you ask for permission", it was about the "photographry of people in a public place"?

I haven't been asked ONCE if I'd ask for permission to take a persons photograph, so you're equally to blame on that not being included.

Covey

In case Steve06 has misinterpreted my post, I sometimes ask, but quite often do not for various reasons. Of the three photos posted, only the last one was asked for and that after I took it.

It's polite if the opportunity is there to ask, but quite often it's not.

KarmaGarda

Same here Covey. And sometimes it's just a "nod of approval" I look for. I don't even speak with the person. Other times the opportunity to ask, or show the picture isn't there. And I'm not going to delete a good photograph just because of that!

smash

What was said was "Street photography by it's nature involves respect for your subject" - you were the first person to mention this in 6 pages! That's what I was getting at...

Paulw

steve06 wrote: »

Thanks for your post, the attitude of having respect for your subject is a breath of fresh air to read about as it seems to have been lost or at least not mentioned by others who are only interested in talking about the legalities of shooting in public.

Maybe you should go back and read the posts so. I think, so far, I've mentioned the word "respect" more than anyone else, yourself included. :mad:

smash

well then it got lost among the string of people telling me that they have a right to take a photo of whatever they want, where they want and when they want.

If you've read my posts and I know you have then you'll see that I don't have an issue with it once it's done respectfully and where permission is asked under certain circumstances.

I'm not out for a fight here!

KarmaGarda

steve06 wrote: »

well then it got lost among the string of people telling me that they have a right to take a photo of whatever they want, where they want and when they want.

Damn straight we do. But don't get me wrong here, I'm seperating the issue of

1. Photographer having the right to take a photo
2. Does the photographer ask for permission, or show the picture afterwards

I tend to avoid street photography, because of this. But if I do take a picture of someone I intend to keep, I'll generally show them the picture afterwards. But as was pointed out, it's not always possible.

PaulieC

steve06 wrote: »

string of people telling me that they have a right to take a photo of whatever they want, where they want and when they want.

eh, they can...whether they respectfully ask you or not.

steve06 wrote: »

I'm not out for a fight here!

well you talk about respect but you obviously have none yourself, implying that photographers should seek your permission for anything in public.

DaireQuinlan

steve06 wrote: »

If you've read my posts and I know you have then you'll see that I don't have an issue with it once it's done respectfully and where permission is asked under certain circumstances.

You most certainly seem to have an issue with it regardless, it seems, of the circumstances.

steve06 wrote: »

Yes they do have a right, it's a minor, their child and god knows who you could be or what you'd do with the photos or why you'd take them in the first place!

steve06 wrote: »

That's what I was trying to say... If it's not an event and it's a private family activity I don't think anyone that's not involved should be taking photos!

steve06 wrote: »

Again, if you've nothing to hide then why not ask permission or explain the reason why you wanted to take the photo?

If you've nothing to hide ? I would certainly respect someone's wishes if they asked me not to take their picture or their kids picture. However the way I see it its opt-in, its not up to me to approach them. If someone has a problem they can approach me and discuss it with me. If the picture's already been taken obviously there's no question of deleting it.

smash

KarmaGarda wrote: »

Damn straight we do.

I never tried to argue that point, and by using common sense most people would know when to draw the line and not abuse, this which is what I've been trying to say.

KarmaGarda wrote: »

I'll generally show them the picture afterwards. But as was pointed out, it's not always possible.

But the point is that you make the effort where possible.

cambo_gueno wrote: »

well you talk about respect but you obviously have none yourself, implying that photographers should seek your permission for anything in public.

No, but I think certain activities should require permission, like kids swimming etc.

DaireQuinlan wrote: »

If someone has a problem they can approach me and discuss it with me. If the picture's already been taken obviously there's no question of deleting it.

Why discuss it when you're going to say no? a lot of people don't like being photographed and to say "no I wont delete it" is disrespectful!

KarmaGarda

Ok, I'll stop arguing about it now! It's just I've got the impression that your argument changed to "looking for permission/respect" as opposed to arguing about the peoples rights vs the photographers rights since I started stating my points.

Anyway, it's all fun and games.