What about travelling, should you request permission from everyone who might appear in your lens? I know what I think, what do you think?
Tuesday, June 1
Thanks G, you've given me a blog topic!
I don't know if anyone has been following the comment string in the post below (Summer of '74), but if so (or if not) I've decided to post the images in question and pose this to you: Is it intrusive for me to have taken these photos? Am I bound to some sort of privacy/trust with people I don't know who are in a public place? I'd seriously like to know what people's take is on this. I personally think it's a bit of a Catch-22... where do your needs/desires/creative vision photographically trump those of oblivious subjects and vice versa? If you are photographing an event, do you feel you should obtain permission from every person there? I'm pretty sure this isn't a legal requirement, at least not until you start making a profit on an image where someone is identifiable.
What about travelling, should you request permission from everyone who might appear in your lens? I know what I think, what do you think?
What about travelling, should you request permission from everyone who might appear in your lens? I know what I think, what do you think?
32 dirty hippies blowing your mind:
I love these candid shots. The people in them are in either an extremely natural or posed state, so they're not doing anything objectionable. And you're not profiting from the photos, so I don't see the harm.
With camera phones being so common, I think everyone expects to have their picture taken surreptitiously now and again.
I think the days of Model Release forms are gone. Unless you are going to use the photos for commercial use.
You could make a business card and hand it out to everyone you shoot. If they are too far away then fold it into a paper airplane and throw it at them. Those who send you an email mail asking you to not post the photos..
p.s. i use Adobe After Effects for the tilt-shift look.
i am so happy to have inspired a post! :)
it's not that i think it is wrong per se, i don't think there is any real harm in taking pics of strangers who are obllivious to your actions. for me it's just intriguing to think about what constitutes voyeurism and is there a line that can be crossed.
i'm sure we'd all agree that if these people were nudists there would be more of a question mark over the whole thing. but still ... would it be crossing a line? they are in public, they know other people are around. fair game, oui?
but what about if the couple was arguing? what if the man was yelling at the woman, and she was in tears? if you, hidden, used your zoom to zero in and capture her agony it could certainly make a beautiful picture -- a portrait of anguish unfiltered and unstaged, complete and total honesty.
but ... would that feel invasive? would the person viewing the photo, if they knew it was taken from a secret voyeuristic POV on the part of the photographer, react differently to it emotionally? would the photographer themself feel a tinge of intrusion, of invading on a personal moment, of crossing a line?
these are the kind of questions that intrigue me. i think it's because on the weekend i had to DJ this huge swanky gala and basically all i did was sit in the corner and people watch. and you begin to observe the details in people -- the body language, the subtle signals that indicate mood or emotion. it's compelling.
i also took some pictures of the performers while i was there. but i asked each performer first if i could take their picture. since they were topless (both men and women) i felt i had to ask. but i think i would have asked even if they were fully clothed. it just seemed ... necessary.
but that said, i could have taken the same pics without them knowing. would it have made a difference? to them? to me? and how would the quality of the picture have changed if they had NOT know i was taking their picture ...?
food for thought.
OK, well I think in the case of "if these people were nudists", they (and I) would be in a special area devoted to that pursuit, and within that area there would be rules which I would follow. However, in my opinion, if they had doffed their clothing in this very public place, well that's fair game since it is not generally accepted that you be nude in most tourist areas.
If a couple are arguing in public, well I think that right there shows they have limited social boundaries... and if I felt like photographing them, I would. The very act of public aggression between them would be attracting unlimited attention anyway.
I think in the context of the event you were at... I would assume if I were a performer, that the possibility of photos being taken is not only probable but a given. That is something I would have to take into consideration before accepting the job. And again, in that respect, provided someone is not using those images to promote something and earn money, those images belong to any photographer who takes them UNLESS there was a provision regarding no photography at that venue. In that case, I would respect that personally, I am and always have been in many ways, a rule follower.
I despise DESPISE posed photos for the most part only because people are generally TERRIBLE at posing, it inspires fake smiles, goofy expressions, weird body contortions.... I think candid shots (i.e. "secret" shots if you like) are much more revealing as to the true nature of a subject. Even the girls I caught posing for someone else don't look as silly as I think the orginal photos probably look, because they were not "putting it on" for me or my camera.
These are the kind of photos that I think provide "food for thought" as you say. Even in a high school yearbook, what is more compelling? the photos of the class all lined up like a bunch of drones or the candids taken throughout the school year?
Hey your blog looks different! I thought it was somebody elses!
wow Zibbs... you just haven't been paying attention. I ditched the drab (albeit better designed) format a couple of weeks ago...consider this a purgatory if you will... a pitstop on the road to some grand redesign...when I feel like getting around to it.
If there are no legal ramifications, I think it's ok. As long as the people aren't being photographed doing something TOO personal and people taking photos aren't being too intrusive.
Kris, that's pretty much how I feel. I'd be pissed if someone took a photo of me through the window of my home...but out in public, that doesn't bother me. For all I know (or don't know)it's happened many times already!
i don't know the laws in canada, but in the us any public place is fair game for having your photo taken. it is illegal for someone to take photos of you inside your house, through the windows.
if it's legal, it doesn't really matter much what people think b/c they can't do shit about it.
Post a Comment