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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 24, 2009, 9:15 PM   #41
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rinniethehun View Post
The reason I didnít respond to this thread was that I could see it was going down the crapper from the start. But now that weíre already there, I think Iíll put in my 2 cents...

I believe you should be able to photograph anything you want. However, before you print a picture of someone and hang it on a wall in a public place, or post it on the internet for the whole world to see, I believe you should have that personís knowledge and approval. Iím not talking about legalities, and Iím not talking about forms and attorneys and courts and lawsuits...a simple, ďDo you mind if I take your picture?Ē would suffice. Or, if the picture was already taken candidly, ďExcuse me, I just took your picture. It came out really well - would you like to see it? If they say yes or show no objection to being photographed, then you should feel free to use it as you wish. However, if they object or seem angry, then you shouldnít post it. Subjects have rights too. Just because you donít give them a chance to object doesnít mean they wouldnít.

Iím not talking about pictures in which you canít identify an individual, such as a crowd of people at a ball game, or a sea of humanity at Times Square on New Yearís Eve, Iím talking about the pictures in which you can positively identify an individual, what the individual is doing, the location, and the time of day.

I donít think some of you realize the harm that a picture can cause. Itís one thing to have rights. Yes, we all have rights - but not the right to hurt other people. How would you feel if one of your candid street shots caused someone harm? Most of you look at this thread through the eyes of a photographer...a photographer with many rights. Try looking at it from the subject and the subjectís familyís point of view...what about their rights?

Tell you what - Iím going to follow you and your family around and take candid photographs of you - I have the right to do so, donít I? All of the photographs will be taken in public places. When Iím done, Iím going to post those photographs on the internet...on sites which will get the most exposure.

Example 1 - You decide to call in sick from work one day, and go fishing. You catch a really nice fish, and hold it up to look at it - [CLICK] - I post the pic. The next day at work, one of your coworkers sees the picture, prints it out, and posts it on the bulletin board in the main lobby. The president of the company sees it. You get fired.

Example 2 - You go to a retirement party for one of your coworkers - another one of your coworkers canít start her car and it has to be towed away - you have to drive right past her apartment on your way home, so you offer to give her a lift. You hold the car door open for her as she gets in - she is wearing a rather short skirt, and a blouse with a plunging neckline - she is extremely attractive - as she gets in, she looks up at you and smiles - you smile back - [CLICK] - I post the pic - your wifeís best friend sees it. You get divorced.

Example 3 - I see your young daughter standing on a corner waiting for the school bus to come. Very pretty little girl, holding her school books - [CLICK]. The picture I took shows a street sign directly over her head. It is legible and clearly defines the corner on which she is standing. From the EXIF information, one can ascertain the exact time of day the picture was taken. I post the pic - 1,000 pedophiles see the pic, and know where and when this pretty little girl will be every morning. Your daughter gets abducted (Iíll leave the rest up to your imagination).

Iím sure each and every one of you can come up with some other examples where a photograph can hurt someone. The point Iím trying to make is, you canít possibly know what harm one of your pictures can cause. In all innocence, you could ruin someoneís life. Is it worth the risk to prove you have some kind of rights? Are your rights more important than mine? Than theirís?

Think about it.

The Hun
Existing law states that an image which can cause "harm" leaves the photographer open to legal action.

1. I take a picture of someone playing hooky from work? So? Do I also post the time and the location, along with the date?

2. This can be an example of causing "harm." Photographer beware...

3. These are very, very hard up pedophiles if they have to travel to see one child. Surely they can abduct a neighbors kid?

If you follow me around to take pictures, at some point, since I'm not a public figure, you will find yourself in jail for harrasment - Existing Law.

Now, back to the question of morality in general. You've dodged the issue by claiming that people only get photographed in mob or crowd scenes. Is this true? I challenge you to pick up a daily newspaper, and glance at the photographs of people. Many are clearly recognisable.

New York's best walking tours: Discover what's afoot when experts guide the way to city landmarks

We live in a society in which the individual is protected by law. That the laws are not always enforced is besides the point. No law is of any value if it's not enforced. In my case, I stand behind my images. At any time, I can remove them. Whereas, if your view prevailed, the photographer would be ananymous, and you would have no recourse at all. Moreover if you Choose to do things in PUBLIC which you are ashamed of, why are you complaining at all? Does it matter if a hundred people see it, or a thousand?

I personally, am not interested in such images, and chances are you can get legal restitution if such an image was indeed published - But so what?

In all honesty, and no offense intended - Do you do things in public which you are ashamed of?

I would like to challenge all those who oppose the taking of these pictures to briefly write a law that in some way would stop me from my photography, and at the same time allow ANY photography that included a recognisable person.

The Supreme Court of the United States ruled on this question a long time ago, and ruled that photography IS speech. They did this for the reason I post - You cannot write such a law, without effectively banning almost all photography.

And what a world that would be!

Dave
Chato is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 9:20 PM   #42
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,990
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rinniethehun View Post
"From my perspective, the bottom line is that you need to be aware that if you are in public, your actions may be documented by others."

" Now, if you're taking photos to deliberately harm someone, then you may be crossing the line, depending on your local laws."

I have every right to take your picture in a public place, and you need to be aware that your actions may be documented by me. What line is being crossed here? You do something stupid in public, and I'm going to take a picture of it and post it on the web for all to see. According to your perspective, I have every right to do that. It's OK for you to sit on a park bench and snap pics of random passersby to post on the net. If I'm sitting on the next park bench taking pictures of you, taking pictures of others (in case one of your subjects wants to pay you back for posting their likeness on the web), that's not OK? That's crossing a line? What's the difference? Because you may be hurt by it? Too bad - I'm within my rights...according to you...

the Hun
What's wrong with taking pictures of someone taking pictures? Someone did indeed take a picture of me taking pictures. Do you think I minded?

Would you mind?

Dave
Chato is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 9:30 PM   #43
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Rinnie,

I'll take a crack at this:
You feel it's wrong to post any photo of a person so you won't do it. That's cool. Nothing wrong with that.

Others don't believe the same as you do. Others believe that as long as they're not intentionally trying to portray someone in a negative light then there is no harm in posting an image.

And still others believe anything in public is fair game. If you embarass yourself in public then tough luck.

The bottom line is different people have different values. But you can't expect everyone to share your value system. To some people, drinking alcohol is wrong. Does that mean, just because some people believe that, that everyone else should give up drinking if they're doing it responsibly?

It's a value judgement. I'm not sure why people here are trying to argue 'Im right and your wrong' - when you talk about value systems that's an argument that can't be won.

Honestly, what makes your value system 'right' and someone else's 'wrong'? Each person has their own value judgement. For example, let's take cussing. Some people will drop an f-bomb anywhere. Others do so in the privacy of their own home but not in front of their children. Still others will cuss in front of children of a certain age. Is it really necessary to define a line and definition for when it's OK to cuss? Or is it black-and-white - because someone here doesn't like cussing - no one should ever cuss?
Get my point? Not everyone has the same value system you do. It's not a good or bad thing. There may be value judgements YOU make that a street photographer finds offensive. That doesn't mean you're wrong and he is right.

But, back to your question - yep people have the right to make certain judgement calls other individuals dont like. As Craig said, that's the price of an open society. In an open society people have freedom to do things others might find objectionable. It's not absolute and that's why we have the ability to make laws. But, the only arguments I've seen about harm are "what ifs" - hypotheticals. Show some actual statistics indicating people are being harmed by this. Otherwise all this is, is trying to convince people your value system is right and theirs is wrong.

Just like when I have posted in the past I disagree with the practice of giving away sports photographs for free and undercutting the market. Others still choose to do it. I disagree with them but it's not a case of them being wrong and me being right. We just have different value systems. Now, I may exercise my prerogative to not help those indivudals improve their skills but I don't tell them that they're wrong.
JohnG is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 9:30 PM   #44
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rinniethehun View Post
" I have every right to take your picture in a public place, and you need to be aware that your actions may be documented by me. What line is being crossed here? You do something stupid in public, and I'm going to take a picture of it and post it on the web for all to see. According to your perspective, I have every right to do that. It's OK for you to sit on a park bench and snap pics of random passersby to post on the net. If I'm sitting on the next park bench taking pictures of you, taking pictures of others (in case one of your subjects wants to pay you back for posting their likeness on the web), that's not OK? That's crossing a line? What's the difference? Because you may be hurt by it? Too bad - I'm within my rights...according to you...

the Hun
It happens all the time (people getting their picture taken while doing something stupid in public). You'll find those types of photos all over the net, in magazines, newspapers, etc. As for having my photo taken while I'm in public, I don't have a problem with that either. I simply assume that my photo may be taken if I'm out in public. Why get upset over something that you can't control? ;-)
JimC is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 9:54 PM   #45
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,646
Default

If everything is on the up and up what's wrong with at least asking the people you shoot for their comments on your posting them on the internet? Ive just talked with a few more of my neighbors. Got some funny comments. One thought it would be funny at your autopsy for the coroner to wonder how that camera got up there. It seems to me that there are even more people like minded than I thought. I might do a lot of things which cross the line. I usually live outside the realm of rules. But whatever I do affects only me or people I know who have given me permission. I would never involve individuals in my affairs without their input. Never mind whether the law says you can or you cant. It just shows what kind of person you are. I even ask my kids if I can post their picture.
Jim says "Why get upset over something that you can't control? Well if people dont speak up about this then yes, we have lost control. Maybe if a few photographers with your cavalier atitude had their cameras smashed maybe then they will discover there is a consequence to their actions. It should never have to come to this if we just minded our own business. Shoot for the crowd all you want. But when you shoot for the individual then get that individuals permission especially if its to post them on the internet.
Bynx is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 10:12 PM   #46
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
Default

And Chato said...

“Do I also post the time and the location, along with the date?”

EXIF data shows me the time and date. Any building, object (e.g., well known fishing pier) can establish a location.

“This can be an example of causing "harm." Photographer beware”

Why? This is a totally innocent picture...I am capturing chivalry in 2009 - a man holding a car door open for a woman. What is wrong with that?

“These are very, very hard up pedophiles if they have to travel to see one child. Surely they can abduct a neighbors kid?”

They are attracted to the child from the picture that was posted. If you think pedophiles don’t travel to find their victims you’re a fool. They prefer to travel across state lines to locate their victims - much less chance of being positively identified. I hope you don’t have any young children.

“If you follow me around to take pictures, at some point, since I'm not a public figure, you will find yourself in jail for harrasment - Existing Law.”

Please post a link to that law - I’d like to see it. Is that a federal law? State law? NYC law? How does my taking pictures of you differ from you taking pictures of others?

“You've dodged the issue by claiming that people only get photographed in mob or crowd scenes.”

When did I claim that?

“Moreover if you Choose to do things in PUBLIC which you are ashamed of, why are you complaining at all?”

I don’t do things in public which I am ashamed of, and I’m not complaining. Where are you digging this crap up from?

“I would like to challenge all those who oppose the taking of these pictures to briefly write a law that in some way would stop me from my photography, and at the same time allow ANY photography that included a recognisable person.”

Why don’t you go back and read my post again...what did I say in the second sentence? I don’t recall ANYONE saying that you or anyone else can’t take pictures. The point of this entire thread was the POSTING of these pictures - not TAKING the pictures. POSTING STREET PHOTOGRAPHY -- GOOD OR BAD?

The Hun
rinniethehun is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 10:13 PM   #47
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,870
Default

This is why I stayed away from this thread as long as I did. I should have avoided it completely, but that goes against my grain. I have no agenda. I have no value system. I never said I was right and you were wrong. I stated an opinion. I’ll state it again for those who have difficulty with the English language:

1. I believe you should be able to photograph anything you want.
2. I don’t feel you should post people’s likenesses without their permission.

That’s my opinion. I don’t care whether you like my opinion or not - it is my opinion. Now I know some people here are professional photographers and photographer rights activists, who take offense to any hint that their rights to take pictures may be infringed upon, but they can relax, because I don’t care...I DON’T CARE. You can take pictures of anything you want...post anything you want...wallpaper your house with prints of strangers - I DON’T CARE.

And I’m not upset. I simply object to people trying to tell me what my opinion is...

The Hun
rinniethehun is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 10:28 PM   #48
Senior Member
 
Bynx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 8,646
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rinniethehun View Post
This is why I stayed away from this thread as long as I did. I should have avoided it completely, but that goes against my grain. I have no agenda. I have no value system. I never said I was right and you were wrong. I stated an opinion. Iíll state it again for those who have difficulty with the English language:

1. I believe you should be able to photograph anything you want.
2. I donít feel you should post peopleís likenesses without their permission.

Thatís my opinion. I donít care whether you like my opinion or not - it is my opinion. Now I know some people here are professional photographers and photographer rights activists, who take offense to any hint that their rights to take pictures may be infringed upon, but they can relax, because I donít care...I DONíT CARE. You can take pictures of anything you want...post anything you want...wallpaper your house with prints of strangers - I DONíT CARE.

And Iím not upset. I simply object to people trying to tell me what my opinion is...

The Hun
Well said and worth saying again. I'll second that.
Bynx is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 10:36 PM   #49
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Gee Bynx, I asked a 1/2 dozen people and they DIDN't have a problem with it. So, where does that leave things? You want to talk about morality but you joke about assaulting other people. Where's the morality in that? Or are your particular set of morals the only ones that matter?

Here's some examples of photos I took when on a business trip to India. These photos were shown to people back here in the states and posted on the internet. It allows people here to get an idea of the slice of life I witnessed. If you had your way, this would be against the law to post them. Yet other people have benefitted from seeing them and learning a bit about the life of a completely different culture.

In some ways no different than a hotdog vendor in NYC, but in other ways very different. Kind of thought provoking to some


Another vendor setting up daily to sell his wares.


a farmers market there.


A work crew clearing a ditch to lay new piping. While some power tools are used, they still carry the rocks away in the same manner they did for the past 100+ years



A side street in one of the commercial districts


Here's a group of people helping a motorist who'se car stalled. Imagine seeing THIS in a major US city? Probably lots of swearing and beeping of horns but how many woud stop and help?


A local barber shop


Even children will work to put food on the table. But these children were still happy and playful despite their surroundings


This guy is off to the market to sell his produce. No different than the local farmer's market here in USA. Except his mode of trasnporting his goods isn't a truck.


Bartering is all part of the deal here. It isn't like shopping in your local Target store. Yes they have large stores - but not for the masses. For many in Mumbai, this is how shopping is done.


But just like here youths like to gather and enjoy friendship. This happens to be at a system of cave dwellings that is a park. So a little different than Central Park. But, only in that particular. It's still young people enjoying each other's company and the beauty of what is around them


And, here are some people enjoying the Emerald Necklace area. Its a grey day, but at the height of the Monsoon at least it isn't raining. Not much sun to be had but still a chance to escape the indoors.


So, you may not approve of the fact I'm posting these photos, but others appreciate them because they have a window into the real-life world somewhere else. Now, I could also have taken photos of people urinating or defecating on the side of the road because they lived in shacks and had no toilets nor even an outhouse. In my particular value system I chose not to do that. In my value system I made the choice to determine that certain photos were positive in nature and others were not. Fortunately, being a human being, I can apply reasoning. I don't have to have a black and white world where either I take and post photos of everything people do or I don't post photos of anything. Lots of people have appreciated seeing these photos. Are they the best street photos? No. But they served their purpose.
JohnG is offline  
Old Sep 24, 2009, 10:39 PM   #50
Senior Member
 
VTphotog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Extreme Northeastern Vermont, USA
Posts: 4,234
Default

I knew this would be divisive. My feelings are the same as the Hun's, I don't post without explicit permission. Why? It's rude, it's insensitive, it's disrespectful of peoples' feelings, and depersonalizes others.

There is a place near where I live which is sacred to Native Americans. A place of healing and peace. Some who go there leave items as surrogates for others or themselves, so the spirits of the place will know to remember them and heal them. Very photogenic. Would make nice art. Some of the pictures I have taken there have inadvertently included some of these. I crop them out. Why? It's rude and disrespectful. Would anyone be harmed? No. It would be legal, but not moral, unless I asked those who left the items for permission, and they can't all be found. But I wouldn't post these pictures in public, anyway, any more than I would walk in to your church and urinate on the floor. If you can understand that, you can understand why you should obtain permisson prior to posting recognizable pictures of people.

brian
VTphotog 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 12:43 AM.