Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 24, 2009, 2:21 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,585
Default

Well Ive made my position clear on the matter. And I can see the moderators of this site dont care or accept any responsibility on what gets posted so thats the end of it.
Bynx is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 2:36 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
Calicajun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Quartz Hill, CA
Posts: 3,455
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chato View Post
"Commercial purpose" is not defined as selling an image in a gallery. It is the use of the image which links YOU to the selling a product. Such use ties the person to the product, and you need a release. You do NOT need a release if it's simply used as a form of art.
If you start putting your work into galleries without signed release forms, I would suggest talking to a lawyer first.
To make a long story short; been there, done that and lost. Court is not a fun place to be for any reason.

This thread is getting out of hand, so I'm out of this one.
Calicajun is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 3:03 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calicajun View Post
If you start putting your work into galleries without signed release forms, I would suggest talking to a lawyer first.
To make a long story short; been there, done that and lost. Court is not a fun place to be for any reason.

This thread is getting out of hand, so I'm out of this one.
If an image can be shown to cause "harm" to the person portrayed, you are correct. I too have noted that any picture destined for a gallery, a book, or a net site should be examined first by your lawyer.

In the case of the images I've posted, they are very tame. I am interested in showing human beings in their day to day activities - And making these, our, activities interesting - Which I believe they are. Showing images for their shock value is a very cluttered field, as if to say, that our lives are only interesting if there is violence, sex, or money.

Dave
Chato is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 3:35 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bynx View Post
Well Ive made my position clear on the matter. And I can see the moderators of this site dont care or accept any responsibility on what gets posted so thats the end of it.
I salute your starting this thread. Street Photography DOES have issues which can and should be discussed.

But you are a very angry man. I do not know why this is the case. Nor do I think you have spent any time examining the source of this anger.

I live in a neighborhood, and PASS through neighborhoods, filled with human misery; filled with the subjects that muck-rakers choose to photograph. These images can be found all over the net, and the subjects have No Recourse. They are poor, homeless, do not know how to use a computer, let alone post on a photo site. I could post images of these people from today till tomorow, and I suspect, the shock value alone, would keep people from criticising me. Their "news," or "social commentary," blah, blah, blah.

Try this in Google:
"Homeless people" +"images"

No one who photographs them (and I cast no stones at these photographers) will find themselves in court. Nor do these shot spark the outrage that is so apparent on this board.

Why the anger? We are discussing this as a question, and no matter what else you may say, none of my subjects are being demeaned or disrespected.

Dave
Chato is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 4:47 PM   #25
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Interesting thread.

I do see name calling in some of the posts. Debating an issue is fine. Getting personal with remarks is not. So, let's not get too passionate and make sure to leave the personal remarks and name calling out of the forums here.

Thanks.
JimC is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 5:37 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,585
Default

Ive said I dont know why I feel its so wrong what you are doing and your attitude towards doing it but I do. Posting street gangs, or perhaps people in misery would serve the purpose to show others their plight which might make some people get off their duffs and try to do something about it. I figure Im just an average guy similar minded like everyone else and I know I wouldnt do what youre doing. I wouldnt even think of it. Taking pictures of average people doing average things for the purpose of putting them on the internet without their permission. Most people probably wouldnt mind. Some might even take it as flattery. But there are some who just wouldnt want you to do it and what say do they have in your actions. None. Im not going to flog this dead horse any more. You will continue to post your series. The team here will allow you to do it. And life goes on.
Bynx is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 5:55 PM   #27
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

This tends to be a hotly debated issue on forums from time to time.

Personally, I'm of the opinion that you do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy if you're in public, and we need to balance the right to privacy with the right for others to take photos.

If you search the net, you can find opinions from a number of attorneys on this issue. Here's one example:

http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm

Here's an article discussing rights of privacy concerns:

http://www.photoattorney.com/2005/09...cerns-for.html

More links to articles on the subject:

http://www.rcfp.org/photoguide/
JimC is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 5:59 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bynx View Post
Ive said I dont know why I feel its so wrong what you are doing and your attitude towards doing it but I do.
Could it be that my arrogance is simply your reflection of your strong feelings, which I totally disagree with? I simply do not regard what I'm doing as morally wrong.

Neither one of us are kids. I'm 62, and have been around the block.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bynx View Post
Posting street gangs, or perhaps people in misery would serve the purpose to show others their plight which might make some people get off their duffs and try to do something about it.
When my community was overun by crack dealers, I photographed the thieves market on Second Avenue. I did this to embarass the police into action. Photographing people in misery is not my cup of tea. And as a search on Google shows, the field is pretty crowded.

But I grew up in the projects. I'm not some middle class suberbanite, shocked by the scenes I grew up with, and for that matter live with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bynx View Post
I figure Im just an average guy similar minded like everyone else and I know I wouldnt do what youre doing. I wouldnt even think of it. Taking pictures of average people doing average things for the purpose of putting them on the internet without their permission. Most people probably wouldnt mind. Some might even take it as flattery. But there are some who just wouldnt want you to do it and what say do they have in your actions. None. Im not going to flog this dead horse any more. You will continue to post your series. The team here will allow you to do it. And life goes on.
As you can see, most of the people I shoot are well aware of my photographing them. There's nothing hidden about my actions. As of yet, no one has asked me to either delete or stop photographing them.

But you yourself say, and I'll repeat your words:

"Ive said I dont know why I feel its so wrong what you are doing and your attitude towards doing it but I do."

No offense, but life is a process of growing, and we can only grow by examining strong emotions, and where their coming from. No one can simply say, "This is the way I feel, and I don't care where this comes from."

You've asked me if I've posted images of myself, family, etc. I posted them Before I commenced this series, and while I was posting these series, and no doubt will do so in the future.

Plain and simply, I couldn't care less about my image being on the net, and there are plenty of images of me on the net.

Calm down, think it through. I don't ask or demand agreement - But, well, once again, no offense, but you are not being completely rational on this.

Dave
Chato is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 6:24 PM   #29
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I take photos in public very often. I rarely go anywhere without a camera.

Now, if someone asks me not to take their photo, I'll comply (even though I don't have to if they're in public). I don't try to hide that I'm taking photos in any way and most people don't seem to mind.

Here's a 6 page article on the subject by Petteri Sulonen that some of you may find nteresting. It discusses how photographers should be aware of other's attitudes towards them.

http://www.prime-junta.net/pont/Pont...ds.html?page=1
JimC is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 6:31 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,585
Default

Id like to know why the people you shoot dont have a say whether you post their image on the internet or not.
Wow I just got back after chatting with half a dozen of my neighbors. The language flew about what they would do if you posted their picture without their permission. So in the real world Im not so much in left field.
Ive got a fix for this Chato. How about we keep out of each others posts. That will solve the problem for me.
Bynx is offline  
 
Closed Thread


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:59 AM.