Topic: Protecting the Right to Photograph, or Not to Be Photographed

[Phil Bebbington]

I know that we have dealt with such things a few times here, but, I thought it worth sharing even if it isn't worth discussing.

http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/23/paris-city-of-rights/

[Sandeha Lynch]

Worth a read, indeed.  It's increasingly problematic any place, wherever folks are moonlighting and can't face the risk of being spotted on Flickr or Facebook, or fear that their identity could be stolen as a result of images going online.  I think I probably self-censor half of the possible images I could take as sometimes a quick smile is not enough.

[Francois]

I haven't taken pictures of identifiable people in public for so long I don't think I'd be able to produce anything like that anymore.

The only way I can see of not getting into trouble is shooting 4x5 on a tripod... people can't ignore your presence. But the spontaneity would be completely gone.

[Ezzie]

More or less the same here. Street photography is dead. You need consent to use any picture of a person on the street, before using it in any way other than private.

[Francois]

That is unless you can make their face unidentifiable... Darkroom magic required here.

[Ezzie]

I usually try to take pictures side on, avoiding the problem altogether. Also avoiding unwanted attention.

[Sandeha Lynch]

I forget where I read it but a high percentage of Cartier-Bresson's street shots, at least those in Europe before the war, were taken by shooting people from behind or the side.

I feel sure this bloke only happened to turn by chance and it was never intended as a profile:
http://hophenricartierbresson2010.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/brussels_1932_p57.jpg

[Late Developer]

I don't like having my photo taken but, if I'm in a public place, I'm not stupid or arrogant enough to believe I have any say in the matter if someone wants to take a photo of me or of something else, with me in the way....

Generally speaking (unless you're in some backward thinking, uber-religious and/or police state) taking photographs of anything or anyone from a public place is not illegal. People may not like it - but "tough".

If we start being dictated to by a perceived silent majority and give up, we have only ourselves to blame. I'm not advocating that we should go round shooting photos wildly in areas run by gun-toting gangs or tribal warlords, that would be stupid. However, if we are in a public street, on holiday or witnessing an open-air event, why should our civil liberties be infringed?

</rant>

[Greg Bartley]

Hi Waster's,

Although this is a British Site its a good barometer of what has been happening for years even prior to 9/11 which in my experience has not made too much difference.

http://photographernotaterrorist.org/

If you scroll down the page to the "stand your ground" video one can see these photographers obviously set out to show the variety of responses as an example to us all ?

Naturally if I wanted to use pictures of the gorgeous filmwaster types for commercial purposes I would need a model release !

cheers

just to add the chap in the pink jumper is Grant Smith, the ex chairman of the AOP , he does a walking tour of the City of London, I will post details once I speak to him.

[Francois]

This is all pretty weird to me in a way. A few years ago, I was at a local tourist spot with my Yashicamat when a bus full of Chinese tourists and four Germans stopped, took pictures of the city with me in it, hopped back on the bus before you can even have time to think and went off. I know I'm in the travel photos of about 50 people and I don't care the slightest bit!

[DonkeyDave]

what a great link Greg

I've been stopped once, at Holborn underground, by British Transport Police. They were polite and not heavy handed, but were worried by my use of a spot meter, which on the CCTV looked like a weapon, fair enough. I'm not terribly sure on the use of cameras on the underground (and neither were they) but if you don't ask, you can plead ignorance.
I think as long as you aren't harrassing/stalking people then taking pictures in public is fair game. An exception is children, apart from my own - although they don't like it either!

[SLVR]

I'm going to have to get used to this more. Ive been out after work now on the way back and forth from the train and It doesn't feel great taking people's photo. I think its partly because Im not dressed how I want for shooting or I'm not in the right state of mind. As soon as I pull out my camera I feel like EVERYONE is watching me here.

With recent events over here it surely doesn't help one blend in with the crowd.

[kenny]

I've been stopped once, at Holborn underground, by British Transport Police.

I found this link about taking photographs in the Underground (the official way):
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/5225.aspx

[DonkeyDave]

fingers in ears, la la la, I cannot hear you Kenny 

£50 is a bit steep, I'll pass

[Sandeha Lynch]

Back in the day, I did my bit ... British Journal of Photography, 12 August, 2009 ...



 

[LT]

Hey guys - what do you expect? We live in a liberal democracy. We have a rights-based culture. None of you lot matter, what's most important is my rights. How dare you offend me, or use what is mine.

 


PS - thanks for the link Phil.

[Greg Bartley]

Oh I love the UK (very strong words from an Australian) !

[sapata]

I've been practicing new techniques.

[Francois]

Or you could get a right angle lens attachment like this one on that evil site

[Francois]

Act of Terror on Vimeo

[ChristopherCoy]

Generally speaking (unless you're in some backward thinking, uber-religious and/or police state) taking photographs of anything or anyone from a public place is not illegal. People may not like it - but "tough".

I don't think the issue is taking photographs in public, so much as it is being respected in public.

There's a fine line between respect, and being obnoxious when it comes to photographing people in public places. Digital technology and cell phones have unfortunately smeared that line for most "photographers". Cell phones allow pervs to take photographs up women's skirts, or video in public restrooms, or photos of the deposit slip handed to the bank teller. Because of digital technology, true "photography" has been forever associated with this type of disrespect, criminal behavior, and invasion of privacy.

I always try to respect a persons sense of privacy. If I do take a face forward shot in a public place, I try to be discreet about it and not blatantly obvious. If I see someone taking photos in my direction, I simply move out of the way, lower my hat, or turn completely around.

[Francois]

There is one workaround in most places to avoid getting into trouble: Take plenty of street photographs, print the images, put them in a box for maybe 20 years and then bring them out. Most of the people in your shots will have physically changed, some will have moved, others will have passed away. This minimizes the risk of running into problems...

[Windy]

I have only had trouble twice. Both times in Italy.

In Florence a street artist drawing caricatures saw me raise my camera - he promptly raised his hand and shouted no. I shrugged a pardon and moved on.

In a village in Tuscany I tried to take a snap of a girl smoking a cigarette in an alleyway. She screamed and ducked for cover waving her hands in a 'no sod off' gesture'. I turned around to see Andrea laughing - she had tried the same snap and had the same reaction 2 minutes earlier 

[Late Developer]

Generally speaking (unless you're in some backward thinking, uber-religious and/or police state) taking photographs of anything or anyone from a public place is not illegal. People may not like it - but "tough".

I don't think the issue is taking photographs in public, so much as it is being respected in public.

There's a fine line between respect, and being obnoxious when it comes to photographing people in public places. Digital technology and cell phones have unfortunately smeared that line for most "photographers". Cell phones allow pervs to take photographs up women's skirts, or video in public restrooms, or photos of the deposit slip handed to the bank teller. Because of digital technology, true "photography" has been forever associated with this type of disrespect, criminal behavior, and invasion of privacy.

I always try to respect a persons sense of privacy. If I do take a face forward shot in a public place, I try to be discreet about it and not blatantly obvious. If I see someone taking photos in my direction, I simply move out of the way, lower my hat, or turn completely around.

There's a huge chasm between taking lecherous shots using camera phones and being open about taking shots of everyday life in public streets. If someone doesn't like having their photo taken, I will usually back off. However, I have usually got a shot in the can already. Every street in almost every large town and city in the UK has CCTV. On my way to work (a one mile walk from Liverpool Street station) I've counted well over 150 cameras watching my every move. We live in a society that is the most photographed ever and I really don't see why the law should be changed to prevent street photography. People have every right to privacy in their own homes but in a public place?? Where would it stop? Could someone in a landscape photograph call 'foul'??

[Phil Bebbington]

I go for the old and slow  I have had many a conversation with people whilst firing off 3 or 4 shots with my Holga. Even the lifting and winding on whilst talking doesn't seem to bother them!

[ambaker]

There is an older gentleman that sells corn alongside one of the roads outside of our town.

One day, while buying corn I asked permission to take his picture.  His response was a fairly gruff, "Now why would you want to do that?" 

His wife said, "Honey, at least he asked.  Everybody else just takes your picture.  Now let the young man take your picture."

It was hard not to blur the picture from shaking trying to hold in the laughter.

For the record, I was 61 at the time... 

If you are in public, your picture is being taken whether you notice it or not.  Ask the people of Boston.  (Not trying to make light of a tragic situation.)

[ChristopherCoy]

There's a huge chasm between taking lecherous shots using camera phones and being open about taking shots of everyday life in public streets.

Yes, but unfortunately society today has been groomed to believe that cameras are bad.

People don't hear about the art of iPhoneography, they hear about those lecherous shots taken by the creepy guy in the womens dressing room.
The only stories featuring CCTV in the news, are those of crimes and police activity.
And the guy with the long lens is "probably a child molester taking photos of kids".

Because of the sensationalized news media, people now think that if you're in public with a camera you have an agenda, or are there for some criminal motive.

[Greg Bartley]

Anyone with a camera and especially a tripod has been a soft target for many years !! Even pre 9/11, I don't think a non-lawful person is going to use a 8x10 or even a pinhole camera.

The continual targeting of photographers shooting in public places is both naive and wasteful of lawmakers .

Banning computors would be more of a contribution for the war on terrorism. Harrassing Mr and Mrs photographer will continual to get worse in all regions as governments use more surveillance cameras.

The press has been very negligent and has created an easy scapegoat in the photographer for all things dark and illegal

Finally "Respect" in in capturing an image in public is certainly not something that the busload of tourist have very often , I have NEVER seen them being questioned by any local authority in any part of the planet

[LT]

Greg - it's not really down to the law makers ... to be fair, neither parliament not the courts have explicitly demonised photographers. It's the ignorance and misuse of powers by the law enforcers that is the problem, and, of course with a helping hand from the paranoid tabloid press and 24-hour media drivel.

There certainly is a case for stop and search powers to be made less ambiguous, and maybe that is the fault of the legislative, but if the private security firms and police constables had some perspective in the first place, I'm sure we would not be commenting on this thread anyway.

[Francois]

As long as it doesn't get to that point, I'm able to live with it...

http://petapixel.com/2013/04/28/american-citizen-facing-imprisonment-or-worse-for-photographing-homeless-in-north-korea

[Nigel]

If you are concerned (and in the UK) you could do worse than carry a copy of the ACPO letter Guidance for Photographers. It probably slow down any overenthusiastic bobby.

http://issuu.com/alanlodge/docs/trotter_taking-of-photographs-all-forces-guidance-

 

[moominsean]

In my experience, the main issue I've encountered with photographing people is "What are you going to do with it?" People seem to live in this oddball fantasy world where they think that photos will be used against them somehow, like gee I might be on the internet and someone might see me doing something and I don't like that. People generally seem to think they matter more than they really do, and a healthy dose of paranoia is commonplace. Sure, I can see a cop being worried, but, hey, don't do something stupid and you don't have to worry who is photographing or filming you. The general public? Unless you are a fugative or are somewhere you shouldn't be, like cheating or commiting some crime, or you truly don't want to be identified, like I figure some homeless are from the attitudes I've gotten from some...get over yourself, no one really cares who you are or what you think you don't want anyone to know about. It's the everyman on the street that is afraid of everything...I've met true recluses out in the desert, people who actively avoid society, and not once have I ever been refused a photograph.

[Francois]

Sometimes, this makes you think about who the real recluses are.
Living isolated in your head can be a lot worse than being isolated by distance.

If the media and politicians would just stop feeding people's mindless appetite for fear...