Smile! You're In My Candid Camera Now.
September 12, 2010 8:38 AM Subscribe
How can I "do the right thing" as a photographer?
I'm a budding photographer, interested in candid pictures of subjects who don't always know they're my subject....what what happens when they figure it out and don't like it?
Is there a code of ethics for photographers? When is it frowned upon to take pictures, if ever?
Or should I hand such people something telling them I can take pictures of them and their small children in a public place? Is there such a set of rules or standards lawfully stating this?
And how do I deal with the annoyed people? Shrug and say "too bad"? Should I apologize to someone in the mall or on the street and delete the pictures?
If I have a picture taken in a public place, including but not limited to a street setting, a store which has no problem with me taking pictures, etc., can I sell those pictures or use them for self promotion? If I ask someone to cooperate with a picture taking, and they have no problem with it (for example, someone joking around that yes I can take their picture and they toss their hair or pose), should I present them with a model release form of some kind?
What's the right thing to do? And how do I hopefully not get kicked out of places for possibly upsetting their patrons?
(I'm not professional, as I said above, but someday I might want to be - the pictures I take now could possibly be used later as self promotion, which is why I ask)
I'm a budding photographer, interested in candid pictures of subjects who don't always know they're my subject....what what happens when they figure it out and don't like it?
Is there a code of ethics for photographers? When is it frowned upon to take pictures, if ever?
Or should I hand such people something telling them I can take pictures of them and their small children in a public place? Is there such a set of rules or standards lawfully stating this?
And how do I deal with the annoyed people? Shrug and say "too bad"? Should I apologize to someone in the mall or on the street and delete the pictures?
If I have a picture taken in a public place, including but not limited to a street setting, a store which has no problem with me taking pictures, etc., can I sell those pictures or use them for self promotion? If I ask someone to cooperate with a picture taking, and they have no problem with it (for example, someone joking around that yes I can take their picture and they toss their hair or pose), should I present them with a model release form of some kind?
What's the right thing to do? And how do I hopefully not get kicked out of places for possibly upsetting their patrons?
(I'm not professional, as I said above, but someday I might want to be - the pictures I take now could possibly be used later as self promotion, which is why I ask)
Best answer: Get a copy of the Legal Handbook for Photographers. All your questions are answered there.
The short answer is that in many cases, if your subject is in public and you can see it from a public space, you can take a picture of it (in the US). There are a bunch of bizarre misinterpretations and the book above will help you sort those out.
Of course, try not to be a creep. And check out Gary Winograd.
posted by jdfan at 8:53 AM on September 12, 2010 [2 favorites]
The short answer is that in many cases, if your subject is in public and you can see it from a public space, you can take a picture of it (in the US). There are a bunch of bizarre misinterpretations and the book above will help you sort those out.
Of course, try not to be a creep. And check out Gary Winograd.
posted by jdfan at 8:53 AM on September 12, 2010 [2 favorites]
Make eye contact before you take a photo of someone's face in public. If doing that ruins the photo then consider not taking the photo. If it's too good an opportunity to miss then make sure to make eye contact with them after, and smile, and make sure they know what you did. And yes, you should discuss the photo with them if they are interested or upset, and if they insist then the right thing to do is delete it.
The legal issues of model release for commercial exploitation vary depending on where you are in the world.
posted by caek at 8:56 AM on September 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
The legal issues of model release for commercial exploitation vary depending on where you are in the world.
posted by caek at 8:56 AM on September 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
Please don't shrug & say "too bad". You don't know why people object to having their photo taken; it could be due to a creepy ex or stalker, it could be something else. You should apologise and delete the photo. Avoid taking photos in restaurants and the like. Especially if you are using flash. It's distracting to other patrons. Leave quietly when asked to -don't make a scene about how it is your legal right to photograph people. It's obnoxious when people make a scene over such things. And, most stores/restaurants reserve the right to refuse service to people. Bottom line: don't be a dick. It works well in all areas of life.
posted by kellyblah at 8:57 AM on September 12, 2010 [4 favorites]
posted by kellyblah at 8:57 AM on September 12, 2010 [4 favorites]
You need to get signed release forms for your subjects, otherwise you leave yourself open to lawsuits later if the images are public and your subject discovers it. You could easily be sued for half of whatever you made on the images, and possibly more, depending on how upset your subject was to be photographed. If you want to sell the images as stock photography, the companies will require a release before even allowing you to post the images.
In addition to protecting yourself, it's also the right thing to do. The Golden Rule applies here. Would you like to be photographed in public by someone who uses your image to make money for themselves without talking to you? How about your child? Would you like to stumble on a Flickr site for a stranger who had taken pictures of your child and other people's children and published them online? I really would be upset if I found this, so I don't do it to others. I have even heard of this kind of photography referred to as 'photographic assault'. The right thing, the ethical thing, is not to take pictures of people without their permission and use them for your own gain.
Legally, you have the right to take pictures in public. There are plenty of websites that document this right. When you are on private property, you have fewer to no rights to take pictures, depending on the property and the owners of that property. If the face of the person you are photographing is visible, then you are opening yourself to potential lawsuits, even if it's just used for self-promotion.
I am a semi-professional photographer who took pictures of strangers when I was just starting out. I do not do this kind of thing anymore.
posted by aabbbiee at 8:59 AM on September 12, 2010 [2 favorites]
In addition to protecting yourself, it's also the right thing to do. The Golden Rule applies here. Would you like to be photographed in public by someone who uses your image to make money for themselves without talking to you? How about your child? Would you like to stumble on a Flickr site for a stranger who had taken pictures of your child and other people's children and published them online? I really would be upset if I found this, so I don't do it to others. I have even heard of this kind of photography referred to as 'photographic assault'. The right thing, the ethical thing, is not to take pictures of people without their permission and use them for your own gain.
Legally, you have the right to take pictures in public. There are plenty of websites that document this right. When you are on private property, you have fewer to no rights to take pictures, depending on the property and the owners of that property. If the face of the person you are photographing is visible, then you are opening yourself to potential lawsuits, even if it's just used for self-promotion.
I am a semi-professional photographer who took pictures of strangers when I was just starting out. I do not do this kind of thing anymore.
posted by aabbbiee at 8:59 AM on September 12, 2010 [2 favorites]
If someone notices you taking photos of them and objects, it would be polite to delete the pictures (and certainly agree not to use them publicly) but depending on your location, you're likely not obligated too and as such I don't think an apology is strictly necessary. You're not doing anything wrong but its a nice gesture to remove the pictures.
posted by missmagenta at 9:00 AM on September 12, 2010
posted by missmagenta at 9:00 AM on September 12, 2010
Well I guess it's legal in public spaces. Frankly kind of gives me the willies though. I'd say definitely at least ask any subject for permission after taking the shot, be willing to show it to them and delete if they request. And if used for profit I'd think a release would be a good idea.
Maybe I'm picturing your intentions wrong but I think you should be careful. Lurking around taking pictures of unsuspecting people sounds like a recipe for a bloody nose and broken camera sooner or later. And wrt children (!?!) add in police involvement and your camera and home computer confiscated, at least temporarily.
(Just realized I assumed you're male. If you''re female I'd expect people would be less hostile if not exactly enthralled)
posted by raider at 9:01 AM on September 12, 2010
Maybe I'm picturing your intentions wrong but I think you should be careful. Lurking around taking pictures of unsuspecting people sounds like a recipe for a bloody nose and broken camera sooner or later. And wrt children (!?!) add in police involvement and your camera and home computer confiscated, at least temporarily.
(Just realized I assumed you're male. If you''re female I'd expect people would be less hostile if not exactly enthralled)
posted by raider at 9:01 AM on September 12, 2010
I take pictures of strangers all the time. I have only once ever had someone tell me they didn't want their picture taken and of course I apologized and deleted it. Actually, what usually happens, particularly at fairs and festivals, is people start mugging for the camera. My camera is an older Canon Rebel, not a little teeny sneak thing, so it's pretty damn obvious I'm taking pictures. I have a standing thing on my flickr profile telling people to contact me if they recognize somebody in my photos and I'll give them a free print. So part of it, I suspect, is attitude. My attitude is that hey, lucky you is getting an amazing picture of yourself for free! And it's better than Olin Mills!
I took some great pictures of a child at a street festival a couple of years ago. Lo and behold, a month or two later the child and her mother walked into the place where I worked. I said, oh, I took pictures of your daughter at Bele Chere! She is so cute! Look at these great pictures! She was thrilled and said they had never had good pictures taken of their kids and please could she have copies.
Now, I do not use model releases and some of the people whose picture I take may not know it. I am mostly a fine art photographer (translation: stuff doesn't actually sell except to my friends) and I have a show up right now with a bunch of street photography with strangers in it. I'm really not worried that I'm going to be sued.
posted by mygothlaundry at 9:12 AM on September 12, 2010 [3 favorites]
I took some great pictures of a child at a street festival a couple of years ago. Lo and behold, a month or two later the child and her mother walked into the place where I worked. I said, oh, I took pictures of your daughter at Bele Chere! She is so cute! Look at these great pictures! She was thrilled and said they had never had good pictures taken of their kids and please could she have copies.
Now, I do not use model releases and some of the people whose picture I take may not know it. I am mostly a fine art photographer (translation: stuff doesn't actually sell except to my friends) and I have a show up right now with a bunch of street photography with strangers in it. I'm really not worried that I'm going to be sued.
posted by mygothlaundry at 9:12 AM on September 12, 2010 [3 favorites]
Best answer: You're asking a lot of questions that don't necessarily have one right answer, and really depends on who you are, what you're doing, your intent, what you're planning to do with the photographs, etc. etc. etc.
I'm an editorial photographer, which means I work for a news organization and I have a different set of rules than, say, a commercial photographer or a portrait photographer. I also take photos of strangers every day.
If I'm outside and take a photo that has dozens or even hundreds of people, no, I'm not going to ask every single one of them for permission. It's impractical and unnecessary, and if I'm in a public place, I have that right and protection.
If I photograph one or a handful of people, I have to get their names for the paper. Some people don't want their photo used, but it can be for all sorts of reasons. I've had people tell me explicitly that they're trying to get or stay away from someone and I certainly won't use it. (But I NEVER delete anything. Even if it won't see the light of day in the paper or our site, I never delete anything because you never know.)
Nine out of ten times I've found people don't want their photo taken for vanity or because they're shy. I handle this strictly on a case-by-case basis. I really have no formula for this--it depends on other factors.
Other points:
It's harder and harder to walk into establishments and take photos if you're not credentialed, but it can be done. Yes, you can walk into a restaurant and take photos if you have permission. Even if you annoy patrons. Trust me, I've annoyed plenty of people in my work. But it's really not my job to make everyone like me. I try to be reasonable, but I do piss people off, no matter how hard I try not to. Be prepared to get yelled at. Don't take it personally. It doesn't always mean you're doing something wrong.
But you'd help yourself a lot by reading books about the subject and talking to living, breathing PROFESSIONAL photographers who deal with this sort of thing every day.
posted by girlmightlive at 9:14 AM on September 12, 2010 [4 favorites]
I'm an editorial photographer, which means I work for a news organization and I have a different set of rules than, say, a commercial photographer or a portrait photographer. I also take photos of strangers every day.
If I'm outside and take a photo that has dozens or even hundreds of people, no, I'm not going to ask every single one of them for permission. It's impractical and unnecessary, and if I'm in a public place, I have that right and protection.
If I photograph one or a handful of people, I have to get their names for the paper. Some people don't want their photo used, but it can be for all sorts of reasons. I've had people tell me explicitly that they're trying to get or stay away from someone and I certainly won't use it. (But I NEVER delete anything. Even if it won't see the light of day in the paper or our site, I never delete anything because you never know.)
Nine out of ten times I've found people don't want their photo taken for vanity or because they're shy. I handle this strictly on a case-by-case basis. I really have no formula for this--it depends on other factors.
Other points:
It's harder and harder to walk into establishments and take photos if you're not credentialed, but it can be done. Yes, you can walk into a restaurant and take photos if you have permission. Even if you annoy patrons. Trust me, I've annoyed plenty of people in my work. But it's really not my job to make everyone like me. I try to be reasonable, but I do piss people off, no matter how hard I try not to. Be prepared to get yelled at. Don't take it personally. It doesn't always mean you're doing something wrong.
But you'd help yourself a lot by reading books about the subject and talking to living, breathing PROFESSIONAL photographers who deal with this sort of thing every day.
posted by girlmightlive at 9:14 AM on September 12, 2010 [4 favorites]
The legal aspect of this question is pretty much unanswerable without knowing the jurisdiction.
From ethical and social perspectives, I think context is very important. If you are taking pictures where cameras are expected, for instance at a protest or parade, then I think you are in the clear. If I'm sitting by myself in a park and you are taking photos of me with a long lens, that would be rude. If I ask you to delete a photo of me and you refuse, I would consider that very rude. If you handed me a piece of paper detailing your legal right to take my photo in public, I would find that even more rude as it would show you know people are uncomfortable with your actions, but that you just don't care. Generally, I would say that photos of a streetscape with people in it would be OK, but a photo of one particular person or a small group of people would be rude. I am a small-town Canadian, so my norms are probably more privacy and politeness oriented than the average urban American's.
posted by ssg at 9:19 AM on September 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
From ethical and social perspectives, I think context is very important. If you are taking pictures where cameras are expected, for instance at a protest or parade, then I think you are in the clear. If I'm sitting by myself in a park and you are taking photos of me with a long lens, that would be rude. If I ask you to delete a photo of me and you refuse, I would consider that very rude. If you handed me a piece of paper detailing your legal right to take my photo in public, I would find that even more rude as it would show you know people are uncomfortable with your actions, but that you just don't care. Generally, I would say that photos of a streetscape with people in it would be OK, but a photo of one particular person or a small group of people would be rude. I am a small-town Canadian, so my norms are probably more privacy and politeness oriented than the average urban American's.
posted by ssg at 9:19 AM on September 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: Thank you to the people who've provided actually helpful answers and tips (not all of which are marked "best answer") rather than their opinion. I'll be sure to get the book mentioned by jdfan and research this thoroughly before doing anything more than nature or architectural photography.
To help better define my intention: I'd be working at this from a fine arts or hobbyist angle, as a means to better my technique and play with photo manipulation (Photoshop or GIMP) software.
My "too bad" section of my question wasn't meant to sound like an asshole - I was trying to determine how I should deal with other people who are playing at being the asshole, as in "stop that" / "delete those" / "give me your camera" / or not so much "get off this property" (which would be understandable and taken seriously, example: Wal*mart or another establishment) as "get away from here" (read: group in a park, family at a festival, etc).
posted by mentalmouse at 9:30 AM on September 12, 2010
To help better define my intention: I'd be working at this from a fine arts or hobbyist angle, as a means to better my technique and play with photo manipulation (Photoshop or GIMP) software.
My "too bad" section of my question wasn't meant to sound like an asshole - I was trying to determine how I should deal with other people who are playing at being the asshole, as in "stop that" / "delete those" / "give me your camera" / or not so much "get off this property" (which would be understandable and taken seriously, example: Wal*mart or another establishment) as "get away from here" (read: group in a park, family at a festival, etc).
posted by mentalmouse at 9:30 AM on September 12, 2010
As you can see, I have much to say on this topic!
I want to say something that a lot of people don't understand: Your camera is your property. No one--not a cop or a dude down the street--can MAKE YOU delete a photo or give up your camera, just like I can't make you give me any other possession you may be carrying. If the police want a document or a photo that a news organization might have, the almost always have to get a search warrant.
I wanted to answer your questions specifically.
Is there a code of ethics for photographers?
Absolutely. I'm a photojournalist so we have a strict code about certain things. You can read NPPA's Code of Ethics here:
When is it frowned upon to take pictures, if ever?
It can be, in certain situations. It's a judgement call. But also remember that someone not wanting you to take their photo doesn't necessarily mean you can't take it, or you're doing something illegal or you're wrong/creepy. Photography is not a crime.
Or should I hand such people something telling them I can take pictures of them and their small children in a public place?
You don't have to. Sometimes I've said, "I'm legally allowed to take photos in this public space." Even if they disagree with me, the law says I'm right. Remember, though, there are exceptions. A mall, for example, is a public space but is technically private property.
Is there such a set of rules or standards lawfully stating this?
Yes.
And how do I deal with the annoyed people? Shrug and say "too bad"? Should I apologize to someone in the mall or on the street and delete the pictures?
As I said, I never delete anything. I usually walk away and leave it at that. I do this for a living and I don't have time to have long ethical discussions with everyone I meet. If I think the photo is worth something, I'll try and fight for it. Usually my job is not that exciting and I'll move on to a person who says yes.
If I have a picture taken in a public place, including but not limited to a street setting, a store which has no problem with me taking pictures, etc., can I sell those pictures or use them for self promotion?
Generally, yes, but the safest thing to do is to get a model release and to register your photography with the US Copyright Office, assuming you are in the US. Although the photo is instantly copyrighted the moment you press the shutter, registering your photos gives you an extra set of protection for issues that might pop up down the road
If I ask someone to cooperate with a picture taking, and they have no problem with it (for example, someone joking around that yes I can take their picture and they toss their hair or pose), should I present them with a model release form of some kind?
It's the safest thing to do, yes. I, though, do not have to do this as I work for a news organization.
What's the right thing to do? And how do I hopefully not get kicked out of places for possibly upsetting their patrons?
You may very well get kicked out even if you're doing the right thing. If it's not worth it, leave and move on to the next place. If you're scared that you might get people mad at you, you won't get good photos.
Feel free to contact me if you want to know more! Educating new photographers is one of the best things we can do for each other, and I learn new lessons every day.
posted by girlmightlive at 9:40 AM on September 12, 2010 [3 favorites]
I want to say something that a lot of people don't understand: Your camera is your property. No one--not a cop or a dude down the street--can MAKE YOU delete a photo or give up your camera, just like I can't make you give me any other possession you may be carrying. If the police want a document or a photo that a news organization might have, the almost always have to get a search warrant.
I wanted to answer your questions specifically.
Is there a code of ethics for photographers?
Absolutely. I'm a photojournalist so we have a strict code about certain things. You can read NPPA's Code of Ethics here:
When is it frowned upon to take pictures, if ever?
It can be, in certain situations. It's a judgement call. But also remember that someone not wanting you to take their photo doesn't necessarily mean you can't take it, or you're doing something illegal or you're wrong/creepy. Photography is not a crime.
Or should I hand such people something telling them I can take pictures of them and their small children in a public place?
You don't have to. Sometimes I've said, "I'm legally allowed to take photos in this public space." Even if they disagree with me, the law says I'm right. Remember, though, there are exceptions. A mall, for example, is a public space but is technically private property.
Is there such a set of rules or standards lawfully stating this?
Yes.
And how do I deal with the annoyed people? Shrug and say "too bad"? Should I apologize to someone in the mall or on the street and delete the pictures?
As I said, I never delete anything. I usually walk away and leave it at that. I do this for a living and I don't have time to have long ethical discussions with everyone I meet. If I think the photo is worth something, I'll try and fight for it. Usually my job is not that exciting and I'll move on to a person who says yes.
If I have a picture taken in a public place, including but not limited to a street setting, a store which has no problem with me taking pictures, etc., can I sell those pictures or use them for self promotion?
Generally, yes, but the safest thing to do is to get a model release and to register your photography with the US Copyright Office, assuming you are in the US. Although the photo is instantly copyrighted the moment you press the shutter, registering your photos gives you an extra set of protection for issues that might pop up down the road
If I ask someone to cooperate with a picture taking, and they have no problem with it (for example, someone joking around that yes I can take their picture and they toss their hair or pose), should I present them with a model release form of some kind?
It's the safest thing to do, yes. I, though, do not have to do this as I work for a news organization.
What's the right thing to do? And how do I hopefully not get kicked out of places for possibly upsetting their patrons?
You may very well get kicked out even if you're doing the right thing. If it's not worth it, leave and move on to the next place. If you're scared that you might get people mad at you, you won't get good photos.
Feel free to contact me if you want to know more! Educating new photographers is one of the best things we can do for each other, and I learn new lessons every day.
posted by girlmightlive at 9:40 AM on September 12, 2010 [3 favorites]
Response by poster: Also, yes, it has been assumed that I am male, when I'm female.
There also seems to be some discussion of privacy in a public place. This is what I'm also concerned about: How does an artistic shot of people at a festival, examples: Macy's Day Parade or a concert, differ from an artistic shot of an individual, an old woman sitting on a park bench feeding pigeons or a child bending over the edge of a fountain to see their reflection, in terms of privacy? Or is it just that it makes people more self conscious so _now_ it seems wrong?
posted by mentalmouse at 9:41 AM on September 12, 2010
There also seems to be some discussion of privacy in a public place. This is what I'm also concerned about: How does an artistic shot of people at a festival, examples: Macy's Day Parade or a concert, differ from an artistic shot of an individual, an old woman sitting on a park bench feeding pigeons or a child bending over the edge of a fountain to see their reflection, in terms of privacy? Or is it just that it makes people more self conscious so _now_ it seems wrong?
posted by mentalmouse at 9:41 AM on September 12, 2010
And how do I deal with the annoyed people?
Don't overthink this -- you'll find that the level of annoyed people is far lower than your tolerance for shoving your camera in people's faces, especially at first. It's relatively rare to get serious pushback over taking a street picture.
That said, there will be a point where you have to decide what you want more: a great picture, or not to make complete strangers a bit disquieted. As girlmightlive says, if you're scared that people might get mad at you, you're not going to get good pictures. You have to push your comfort envelope here.
You might never get comfortable with this, so it depends what you'll put up with to try and get a good photograph. The negative public reaction to Kevin Carter's shot of a vulture sitting over an emaciated Sudanese child was strong, and vicious in some cases. But it won him a Pulitzer. I'm not comparing your street photography to that, but mention it to say that in some cases there's no way to avoid upsetting people.
Don't delete your pictures. Don't make eye-contact beforehand unless you want all your pictures to be of bemused people. Don't ever apologise -- you're (hopefully) making something good and doing nothing wrong -- but instead try and sell your enthusiasm for why this particular subject looked so good you thought they'd make an amazing photograph.
How does an artistic shot of people at a festival, examples: Macy's Day Parade or a concert, differ from an ...
It doesn't. Public is public.
posted by bonaldi at 9:56 AM on September 12, 2010 [2 favorites]
Don't overthink this -- you'll find that the level of annoyed people is far lower than your tolerance for shoving your camera in people's faces, especially at first. It's relatively rare to get serious pushback over taking a street picture.
That said, there will be a point where you have to decide what you want more: a great picture, or not to make complete strangers a bit disquieted. As girlmightlive says, if you're scared that people might get mad at you, you're not going to get good pictures. You have to push your comfort envelope here.
You might never get comfortable with this, so it depends what you'll put up with to try and get a good photograph. The negative public reaction to Kevin Carter's shot of a vulture sitting over an emaciated Sudanese child was strong, and vicious in some cases. But it won him a Pulitzer. I'm not comparing your street photography to that, but mention it to say that in some cases there's no way to avoid upsetting people.
Don't delete your pictures. Don't make eye-contact beforehand unless you want all your pictures to be of bemused people. Don't ever apologise -- you're (hopefully) making something good and doing nothing wrong -- but instead try and sell your enthusiasm for why this particular subject looked so good you thought they'd make an amazing photograph.
How does an artistic shot of people at a festival, examples: Macy's Day Parade or a concert, differ from an ...
It doesn't. Public is public.
posted by bonaldi at 9:56 AM on September 12, 2010 [2 favorites]
I've seen the photographer for our local paper who covers community events quite a few times. Whenever she takes somebody's picture she hands them her card with a little note that says something like "If you want to see your pictures go to my website at [site], I upload everything within 24 hours."
Something along those lines might help you out. A professional looking business card on one side and a little note about what you do on the other. If I saw a woman taking pictures of my kids at the park I'd be really upset, if she handed me a business card where I could see (and maybe even order prints) the pictures and contact her if I had concerns I'd be more likely to back down. In my mind it would go from creepy person exploiting my kids to normal person trying to run a business or work on a hobby.
This is of course just my opinion as a Mom. When I take pictures of people in public I always ask first.
posted by TooFewShoes at 9:57 AM on September 12, 2010
Something along those lines might help you out. A professional looking business card on one side and a little note about what you do on the other. If I saw a woman taking pictures of my kids at the park I'd be really upset, if she handed me a business card where I could see (and maybe even order prints) the pictures and contact her if I had concerns I'd be more likely to back down. In my mind it would go from creepy person exploiting my kids to normal person trying to run a business or work on a hobby.
This is of course just my opinion as a Mom. When I take pictures of people in public I always ask first.
posted by TooFewShoes at 9:57 AM on September 12, 2010
mentalmouse, I'm a female photographer, too.
How does an artistic shot of people at a festival, examples: Macy's Day Parade or a concert, differ from an artistic shot of an individual, an old woman sitting on a park bench feeding pigeons or a child bending over the edge of a fountain to see their reflection, in terms of privacy? Or is it just that it makes people more self conscious so _now_ it seems wrong?
You're right--at the end of the day, there isn't really a difference. It seems as if there should be, but there isn't. It's because the one thing all those instances have in common is that they are in a public place. Even if they are alone or quiet, they are out in the world.
People feel more comfortable taking photos in a parade or festival, yes. It really can be hard to go up to a stranger, one on one, and ask them to trust you for 5 seconds.
I've experienced the gamut of human emotions. I've had people threaten to have me arrested and I've had people send me thank you cards for a photo in the paper that I may have forgotten about the next day.
If I listened to the sensibilities of many people replying in the thread, my paper would've fired me for never bringing back a photo! Yes, some people may think you're rude, but in my experience, most people love getting their picture taken (a little too much) and love the idea that they might be in the paper where everyone can see.
So people may thing you're rude. Honestly, so what? If you know you're a good person, these people's one-second judgement about you and your intentions is wrong. When I get down thinking about someone who bristled about me because I was so RUDE, I think about the people who have thanked me for paying attention to them. A lot of people love that.
On preview, I agree with bonaldi.
posted by girlmightlive at 10:01 AM on September 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
How does an artistic shot of people at a festival, examples: Macy's Day Parade or a concert, differ from an artistic shot of an individual, an old woman sitting on a park bench feeding pigeons or a child bending over the edge of a fountain to see their reflection, in terms of privacy? Or is it just that it makes people more self conscious so _now_ it seems wrong?
You're right--at the end of the day, there isn't really a difference. It seems as if there should be, but there isn't. It's because the one thing all those instances have in common is that they are in a public place. Even if they are alone or quiet, they are out in the world.
People feel more comfortable taking photos in a parade or festival, yes. It really can be hard to go up to a stranger, one on one, and ask them to trust you for 5 seconds.
I've experienced the gamut of human emotions. I've had people threaten to have me arrested and I've had people send me thank you cards for a photo in the paper that I may have forgotten about the next day.
If I listened to the sensibilities of many people replying in the thread, my paper would've fired me for never bringing back a photo! Yes, some people may think you're rude, but in my experience, most people love getting their picture taken (a little too much) and love the idea that they might be in the paper where everyone can see.
So people may thing you're rude. Honestly, so what? If you know you're a good person, these people's one-second judgement about you and your intentions is wrong. When I get down thinking about someone who bristled about me because I was so RUDE, I think about the people who have thanked me for paying attention to them. A lot of people love that.
On preview, I agree with bonaldi.
posted by girlmightlive at 10:01 AM on September 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: Side note then, since I'm not professional and don't have the money to make actual prints at this time, would a business card and offer of said photo(s) on CD or DVD suffice? I'm willing to do that - it's inexpensive and I could provide such interested persons with the original photo and/or degrees of the edited version of said photo (color, black & white, and the extremes if I felt the picture warranted that).
posted by mentalmouse at 10:09 AM on September 12, 2010
posted by mentalmouse at 10:09 AM on September 12, 2010
The way I operate when I take pictures of strangers (95% of what I shoot and probably 60% of what gets published) is to be pretty obvious about what I'm doing. Don't stand afar with a telephoto (I've written on here about that previously). You'll find that people get annoyed far less often than you expect. I mean, I have been kicked out of all sorts of places while working as a newspaper photographer, but generally people don't care too much. If they do, be ready to respond with a quick answer. "Hey why'd you take my picture!!!" says the angry photo subject. "Oh, sorry...I love your hair." or something similar. Be ready to hand a business card out. Mine have my name, phone number, email address, and website address. It gives off the (correct) impression that I do this sort of thing a lot, that I'm a professional, and that I'm not hiding anything. "What are you going to do with these pictures?" says the angry subject. Be honest in your responses. It could be "I don't know." or "I'm building a portfolio of street photography." or "I'm working on a travel story about this area and it will be published in [insert publication name]" or whatever the case may be. These sorts of questions can quickly be turned around to get more information about the place/person/whatever, too. "I'm doing a travel piece on the area. Do you come here often? It sure seems like a nice place." That line could easily turn into the subject saying, "Hey, you should go down the street a bit, there's a cool store full of antiques." or "I'm a glass blower and I'm working in my studio later today, you should swing by." You'd be surprised what giving a little thread to pull will do to make somebody open up with something interesting.
Also, especially for male photographers, stray away from taking pictures of solitary women and playgrounds. There are perfectly valid reasons for both of those types of pictures, and they can be done. But it's usually not worth the hassle or potential of looking like a creep. In the playground example, for instance, it could be photographed by first introducing yourself to all the moms/dads around, handing out your business cards, explaining what you're doing, etc. Still, though, nobody needs another cute kid picture in the world....
And if somebody really doesn't want their picture taken, respect their wishes. You can always get another picture that'll fit into the piece where their picture would have gone. The only people, in my mind, that should be photographed against their will are criminals and politicians.
posted by msbrauer at 10:10 AM on September 12, 2010
Also, especially for male photographers, stray away from taking pictures of solitary women and playgrounds. There are perfectly valid reasons for both of those types of pictures, and they can be done. But it's usually not worth the hassle or potential of looking like a creep. In the playground example, for instance, it could be photographed by first introducing yourself to all the moms/dads around, handing out your business cards, explaining what you're doing, etc. Still, though, nobody needs another cute kid picture in the world....
And if somebody really doesn't want their picture taken, respect their wishes. You can always get another picture that'll fit into the piece where their picture would have gone. The only people, in my mind, that should be photographed against their will are criminals and politicians.
posted by msbrauer at 10:10 AM on September 12, 2010
This exhibition would interest you. In the recorded interviews accompanying the photos, the artist has a lot to say on the question you've asked. Not sure if the same material is available elsewhere.
posted by Right On Red at 10:21 AM on September 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by Right On Red at 10:21 AM on September 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
On your side note, I think just giving your card with contact information would be good enough. It just shows good faith and makes it so you aren't hiding anything. It takes away the creepiness.
posted by TooFewShoes at 10:45 AM on September 12, 2010
posted by TooFewShoes at 10:45 AM on September 12, 2010
Make eye contact first. Watch for the people who are quickly slipping away or interposing objects between themselves and the lens. If asked, apologize and delete in front of them.
Not everyone has had great experience with cameras.
posted by adipocere at 12:15 PM on September 12, 2010
Not everyone has had great experience with cameras.
posted by adipocere at 12:15 PM on September 12, 2010
adipocere and others who've said similar things: do you think that will help mentalmouse make better pictures? Because everything I've heard from all the photographers I've worked with suggests exactly the opposite
The goal here is not be the nicest person; it's about doing the right thing as a photographer. Photographers often aren't the loveliest people (though of course there's a spectrum from professional baby snapper to celebrity paparazzo).
Asking for pictures to be deleted is a big deal; it's a huge deal in certain situations. Making clear eye contact will very often ruin the shot. People slip away from lenses for all sorts of reasons.
Why should mentalmouse do these kinds of things if she also wants to be a good photographer -- just to be nice?
posted by bonaldi at 12:44 PM on September 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
The goal here is not be the nicest person; it's about doing the right thing as a photographer. Photographers often aren't the loveliest people (though of course there's a spectrum from professional baby snapper to celebrity paparazzo).
Asking for pictures to be deleted is a big deal; it's a huge deal in certain situations. Making clear eye contact will very often ruin the shot. People slip away from lenses for all sorts of reasons.
Why should mentalmouse do these kinds of things if she also wants to be a good photographer -- just to be nice?
posted by bonaldi at 12:44 PM on September 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
I was always ready, in my last photography class, to whip out my student ID, the syllabus for the class, and the exact text of my current assignment. Not a single person asked me what I was doing, not even when I spent an hour at the Zoo carousel taking photos the whole time. The only person who has ever been freaked out about me taking pictures is the security manager at Motorist's insurance on East Broad Street here in Columbus, who thought that me standing on the sidewalk outside his building to take photos of the church next door made me very suspicious and entitled him to my home address. He was incredibly rude; this (me talking about it) is my response. I was nice to him at the time, but didn't give him everything he wanted. I think this is a good strategy.
posted by SMPA at 1:23 PM on September 12, 2010
posted by SMPA at 1:23 PM on September 12, 2010
Here is a set of cards with Photographers' rights printed on them that you can wear around your neck.
posted by sweetkid at 1:36 PM on September 12, 2010
posted by sweetkid at 1:36 PM on September 12, 2010
Taking pictures of children is a bad idea, often, especially with the paranoia about paedophiles right now. Even if you don't fit the stereotype, people do not tend to react well to this.
Anecdata: I took a photo of some graffiti on the side of a house once. This wasn't a case of me going into someone's garden or shooting through a window- it was completely visible from the pavement, on the side so not near anything identifiable, and appeared no more 'private' than a street sign. The owner came out, followed me down the road, jumped the barrier at the station, followed me onto the tube train and very aggressively (the train was packed) shouted at me for taking a picture of where her kids play and demanded to take my camera off me. I honestly thought she was going to punch me, and the passengers stared and tutted at me, clearly thinking I was Up To No Good. I deleted the photos and showed her me deleting them - I was NOT keen to give my camera to an angry and scary woman - but I was shaken pretty badly and too scared to walk down the side of the road for a long time. Sometimes "too bad" or arguing fair use is not going to be the way out of a confrontation.
posted by mippy at 1:37 PM on September 12, 2010
Anecdata: I took a photo of some graffiti on the side of a house once. This wasn't a case of me going into someone's garden or shooting through a window- it was completely visible from the pavement, on the side so not near anything identifiable, and appeared no more 'private' than a street sign. The owner came out, followed me down the road, jumped the barrier at the station, followed me onto the tube train and very aggressively (the train was packed) shouted at me for taking a picture of where her kids play and demanded to take my camera off me. I honestly thought she was going to punch me, and the passengers stared and tutted at me, clearly thinking I was Up To No Good. I deleted the photos and showed her me deleting them - I was NOT keen to give my camera to an angry and scary woman - but I was shaken pretty badly and too scared to walk down the side of the road for a long time. Sometimes "too bad" or arguing fair use is not going to be the way out of a confrontation.
posted by mippy at 1:37 PM on September 12, 2010
Despite courses and suggestions on Metafilter, in the end, photography is a very personal and intuitive process. There is no guidebook for the intuitive eye. If you want to grow in your own abilities, passion, and internal photographic sense, always trust your eye. it will tell you when to take a photograph and when not to. it will never be wrong. It requires no business or photographers rights card. It has ethics, integrity, and a sense of humanity and respect. The choice is clear, do you want to be a technician or practice the art?
posted by Xurando at 4:12 PM on September 12, 2010 [2 favorites]
posted by Xurando at 4:12 PM on September 12, 2010 [2 favorites]
I've done street / fine art photography for years, and have been successful at it, I think. I've taken photos of people without their knowledge many times. Often because to take the time to inform the subject would mean ruining the moment. In fact, with street photography, this is usually the case.
A few guidelines that have served me well:
Always show someone the photograph when asked, and when that is practical. Offering a print will win you some friends.
Never, ever take away someone's dignity. That homeless person that looks wretched under the viaduct? Never take a wretched looking picture of them. It will fail as a photograph. And it may anger them. As it turns out, people don't usually mind having their privacy taken away. They dislike having their dignity taken away. The only good photo of poverty I ever took was of two men struggling to push a heavy cart of scrap metal up an incline. They looked shabby and heroic and beautiful in their labor.
Consider something other than a DSLR. One drawback of these cameras is that you look like the cliche of every clueless tourist, obnoxious paparazzi, or annoying fine art photographer. I had great success with an ancient Speed Graphic. No meter. All manual. You have to remember to arm the shutter before firing it. Focusing was an exercise in frustration. It took me about 60 second to take one photograph. And yet, some of my most spontaneous work was done with this camera. People reacted to me very differently when I used this rather than a dslr. They were very curious about the camera, which helped distract from their anxiety over how they would be depicted. I was forced to be open and talk to my subjects, which helped them relax and lose their "photo front." And I think they trusted me more because I was clearly doing a lot of work just to take their photo.
Every street photographer struggles with this at first. Just remember to be bold, be firm, and to fall in love with your subjects. The rest comes with practice. Good luck.
posted by centerweight at 6:04 PM on September 12, 2010
A few guidelines that have served me well:
Always show someone the photograph when asked, and when that is practical. Offering a print will win you some friends.
Never, ever take away someone's dignity. That homeless person that looks wretched under the viaduct? Never take a wretched looking picture of them. It will fail as a photograph. And it may anger them. As it turns out, people don't usually mind having their privacy taken away. They dislike having their dignity taken away. The only good photo of poverty I ever took was of two men struggling to push a heavy cart of scrap metal up an incline. They looked shabby and heroic and beautiful in their labor.
Consider something other than a DSLR. One drawback of these cameras is that you look like the cliche of every clueless tourist, obnoxious paparazzi, or annoying fine art photographer. I had great success with an ancient Speed Graphic. No meter. All manual. You have to remember to arm the shutter before firing it. Focusing was an exercise in frustration. It took me about 60 second to take one photograph. And yet, some of my most spontaneous work was done with this camera. People reacted to me very differently when I used this rather than a dslr. They were very curious about the camera, which helped distract from their anxiety over how they would be depicted. I was forced to be open and talk to my subjects, which helped them relax and lose their "photo front." And I think they trusted me more because I was clearly doing a lot of work just to take their photo.
Every street photographer struggles with this at first. Just remember to be bold, be firm, and to fall in love with your subjects. The rest comes with practice. Good luck.
posted by centerweight at 6:04 PM on September 12, 2010
Side note then, since I'm not professional and don't have the money to make actual prints at this time, would a business card and offer of said photo(s) on CD or DVD suffice? I'm willing to do that - it's inexpensive and I could provide such interested persons with the original photo and/or degrees of the edited version of said photo (color, black & white, and the extremes if I felt the picture warranted that).
(FWIW, I'm a photographer.)
I'd say you're setting yourself up for a looooooot of unpaid, pointless work right there. It seems simple, but it's time consuming and a lot more expensive than prints (have you looked up prices for digital prints recently?) Lots of people will say, "sure! you can send me a CD! And I want a black and white and one where that cupcake I was holding is in color and the rest is all foggy and sepia toned," and bla bla bla. You're also opening yourself up to people using your image without permission and the whole bag of crap that comes along with that.
My thought is, your subject is in public, you don't owe them anything except basic human decency. If they give you crap in the moment say, "ok, I'll stop, have a good day," and move on. If they're cool, give them a card and if they want to buy a print or to see the image or whatever they can contact you later and you guys can work it out later. But offering right off the bat? Everyone takes what's free, and you will be taken advantage of.
posted by AlisonM at 6:41 PM on September 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
(FWIW, I'm a photographer.)
I'd say you're setting yourself up for a looooooot of unpaid, pointless work right there. It seems simple, but it's time consuming and a lot more expensive than prints (have you looked up prices for digital prints recently?) Lots of people will say, "sure! you can send me a CD! And I want a black and white and one where that cupcake I was holding is in color and the rest is all foggy and sepia toned," and bla bla bla. You're also opening yourself up to people using your image without permission and the whole bag of crap that comes along with that.
My thought is, your subject is in public, you don't owe them anything except basic human decency. If they give you crap in the moment say, "ok, I'll stop, have a good day," and move on. If they're cool, give them a card and if they want to buy a print or to see the image or whatever they can contact you later and you guys can work it out later. But offering right off the bat? Everyone takes what's free, and you will be taken advantage of.
posted by AlisonM at 6:41 PM on September 12, 2010 [1 favorite]
For photos taken in public places, might something like this help?
posted by blueberry at 2:33 AM on September 13, 2010
posted by blueberry at 2:33 AM on September 13, 2010
Response by poster: A good point about people being able to use my pictures from CD for unknown purposes.
And no, I don't want to be sneaky about it with a spy camera or lens. If people are going to have their picture taken, it's going to be via some style of camera pointed obviously in their direction, not sneakily from the side. Besides, I'm still possibly going to get problems from the people I'm pointing the camera at anyway.......
Also, I'm currently buying a Polaroid model folding Land Camera, and two other styles of instant cameras as a personal study to make me really look at what I'm taking a picture of, instead of taking 20 pictures and knowing I can crop at least one. I figure if I don't enjoy using one or any of them, I can try either donating them to an arts school, if they care, or an antiques store, which is where I got them from.
posted by mentalmouse at 5:07 AM on September 13, 2010
And no, I don't want to be sneaky about it with a spy camera or lens. If people are going to have their picture taken, it's going to be via some style of camera pointed obviously in their direction, not sneakily from the side. Besides, I'm still possibly going to get problems from the people I'm pointing the camera at anyway.......
Also, I'm currently buying a Polaroid model folding Land Camera, and two other styles of instant cameras as a personal study to make me really look at what I'm taking a picture of, instead of taking 20 pictures and knowing I can crop at least one. I figure if I don't enjoy using one or any of them, I can try either donating them to an arts school, if they care, or an antiques store, which is where I got them from.
posted by mentalmouse at 5:07 AM on September 13, 2010
To help better define my intention: I'd be working at this from a fine arts or hobbyist angle, as a means to better my technique and play with photo manipulation (Photoshop or GIMP) software.In that case, also take this as an opportunity to improve your rapport with your subjects and engage with the people you're photographing BEFORE you take their photo.
posted by MesoFilter at 5:28 PM on September 13, 2010
This thread is closed to new comments.
No.
Should I apologize to someone in the mall or on the street and delete the pictures?
Yes. Use your common sense.
posted by proj at 8:48 AM on September 12, 2010 [1 favorite]