Jack, that calls for a response in kind! 
There are all sorts of approaches to photographing other people. I have had a project of portraying people I encounter in the course of their work, with at least tacit approval, and sometimes explain that I'm interested in what they're doing, and please just carry on. Of course that changes the dynamic of the encounter, but while I enjoy the personal interaction, there are many others who prefer to be a "fly on the wall" in their shooting. Recently I've been watching for people taking a smoke break outside...
There are all sorts of approaches to photographing other people. I have had a project of portraying people I encounter in the course of their work, with at least tacit approval, and sometimes explain that I'm interested in what they're doing, and please just carry on. Of course that changes the dynamic of the encounter, but while I enjoy the personal interaction, there are many others who prefer to be a "fly on the wall" in their shooting. Recently I've been watching for people taking a smoke break outside...
Last edited:
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Hi Jack,
Welcome, and nice thoughts...
Definitely photographing people we don't know personally, or scenes (including unknown people) we don't want to change while being there, is not easy... We need skills and guts... And even after years of skills and guts, there are some times when we're too surprised, or too worried just before deciding to do it, and then we wonder once again, should I...?
In general the answer is yes, I should... Of course we never want to offend anyone in any way, and we behave having that on mind... But some people are easy to offend, and some others are even paranoid because of what they are, (not our fault) and we can't always know about it in advance... The only time I've been hit, she was a prostitute and I was photographing an old man who was 10 meters away from her, and I didn't even know she was a prostitute, and indeed I didn't see her until she was about to hit me...
But these things are not common fortunately, though when they happen, it's very hard to keep blood cold and continue shooting, so be prepared to breathe and take the rest of the day off... Sharing our world visually is one of the most beautiful ways to let life go... Or come?
Philosophically, it's our right to reflect reality -including people- if we talk about public places, in my opinion. Reflecting suffering is not my game, though... I don't find it interesting in any way.
As other forum member said with great reason, go on, and only then you'll like it. How could we stop liking it, if it's pure life and pure intensity?
Cheers,
Juan
Welcome, and nice thoughts...
Definitely photographing people we don't know personally, or scenes (including unknown people) we don't want to change while being there, is not easy... We need skills and guts... And even after years of skills and guts, there are some times when we're too surprised, or too worried just before deciding to do it, and then we wonder once again, should I...?
In general the answer is yes, I should... Of course we never want to offend anyone in any way, and we behave having that on mind... But some people are easy to offend, and some others are even paranoid because of what they are, (not our fault) and we can't always know about it in advance... The only time I've been hit, she was a prostitute and I was photographing an old man who was 10 meters away from her, and I didn't even know she was a prostitute, and indeed I didn't see her until she was about to hit me...
But these things are not common fortunately, though when they happen, it's very hard to keep blood cold and continue shooting, so be prepared to breathe and take the rest of the day off... Sharing our world visually is one of the most beautiful ways to let life go... Or come?
Philosophically, it's our right to reflect reality -including people- if we talk about public places, in my opinion. Reflecting suffering is not my game, though... I don't find it interesting in any way.
As other forum member said with great reason, go on, and only then you'll like it. How could we stop liking it, if it's pure life and pure intensity?
Cheers,
Juan
FrankS
Registered User
In my own experience, there are many times when I decide that I will not take a picture of someone, in public, in a vulnerable or compromised state. Sometimes it just doesn't feel right to me.
Richard G
Veteran
Welcome Jack. I too enjoyed your post. I am just over 50 and not much hair and probably considered past noticing at all, and I seem to have a half smile in the street that I am not aware of but that or something draws a lovely smile from the occasional young woman I pass. It certainly improves my day. I sometimes find the same thing with the camera. I mustn't be too threatening, and as jippiejee says above, the attention of the camera is partly an acknowledgement. The bonhomie of the moment of taking some shots is like with the smile: it surprises the giver and the receiver and the world is a slightly better place. Have you ever got someone up to dance who wasn't so keen? It's like that.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Frank,
I couldn't agree more. I try to apply the same standards to photographing others as I would wish applied to me. I try to be a reasonably well-balanced person, not ready to freak out if someone tries to steal my soul with a camera, and I expect other rational people to behave in the same way. If they're not rational, I can't really be expected to guess how they will behave.
Cheers,
R.
Jack Conrad
Well-known
Now there is a lovely analogy.
I wonder why taking pictures elicits such strong ethical issues in people compared to many other common street activities.
I wonder why street photography brings up such "ethical issues" at all, compared for instance to handing out fliers or performance art or strumming a guitar or begging or giving stump speeches or damn near anything else that is done on streets. :bang:
What are the ethical issues for driving too slow and annoying the hell out of the drivers behind us?
Is there no consideration for the feelings of those behind us?
Would it even occur to anyone that the vast advertizing hustle in the streets is vastly more intrusive and ethically questionable than some silly photographer lifting a camera to their face and clicking a little button?
Street photography at its best is a visual art form
and at its worst, a waste of time. That's really about all there is to it, other than what we make of it in our hive minds.
furcafe
Veteran
I agree that more aspiring street photographers should self-interrogate, but IMHO that interrogation should be more about the quality of their photographs rather than wringing their hands about the ethics/morality of taking pictures of strangers. I think that approach is more in keeping w/the way most of the great street & documentary shooters, past & present, actually work(ed).
Last edited:
claacct
Well-known
And somewhere in the middle a meditation on life as it is...
JackForster
Established
Jack, that calls for a response in kind!
There are all sorts of approaches to photographing other people. I have had a project of portraying people I encounter in the course of their work, with at least tacit approval, and sometimes explain that I'm interested in what they're doing, and please just carry on. Of course that changes the dynamic of the encounter, but while I enjoy the personal interaction, there are many others who prefer to be a "fly on the wall" in their shooting. Recently I've been watching for people taking a smoke break outside...
Ha, that's amazing, I love the "response in kind." Great minds, eh?
. Kinda love the way they both speak to the disposable nature of beauty in our media dominated culture yet at the same time reify the eternal nature of beauty even in the face of decay, type of thing .Funnily enough as I get a bit better at prefocusing and metering (the sophisticated technique known as "thinking ahead"
the less of a barrier there is to quickly bringing up the camera, framing, and shooting. One of the things I'm kinda loving about using the Leica is that once it is set up for a given focus range and light, it really is as quick and unobtrusive to use as I've read. Half the time, to my surprise, people don't even seem to notice you have taken a picture and the other half of the time even if they see the camera it happens so fast they're not sure you even took a picture at all. Live and learn. . .J.
JackForster
Established
Thank you Juan for the welcome and the thoughts --I have yet to have anyone take a swing at me, fortunately, and I think I agree with what you are saying about "our right to reflect reality" --I like that formulation very much.
It's very interesting --just from starting this thread and reading what people have to say on the subject I feel myself growing more at ease with the process. Still don't like having my picture taken though
.Jack
furcafe
Veteran
Amen.
I'm also mystified as to why street photography seems to elicit a quasi-Jainist response from some folks.
I'm also mystified as to why street photography seems to elicit a quasi-Jainist response from some folks.
Now there is a lovely analogy.
I wonder why taking pictures elicits such strong ethical issues in people compared to many other common street activities.
I wonder why street photography brings up such "ethical issues" at all, compared for instance to handing out fliers or performance art or strumming a guitar or begging or giving stump speeches or damn near anything else that is done on streets. :bang:
What are the ethical issues for driving too slow and annoying the hell out of the drivers behind us?
Is there no consideration for the feelings of those behind us?
Would it even occur to anyone that the vast advertizing hustle in the streets is vastly more intrusive and ethically questionable than some silly photographer lifting a camera to their face and clicking a little button?
Street photography at its best is a visual art form
and at its worst, a waste of time. That's really about all there is to it, other than what we make of it in our hive minds.
JackForster
Established
Hi Frank, Roger,
Well, I agree on both your points obviously --in a cynical mood I could wonder whether some of the people I see wandering around have souls to steal
but in general, yeah, even though I'm getting more comfortable with the process I still think bearing in mind the degree of comfort someone else has with being photographed is a polite thing to do. If they don't notice it's less of a practical problem, of course, but the ethical conundrum remains. Roger, I'm not sure how to read some of what you wrote --do you mean "unreasonable" when you say "irrational" ie are you saying that no reasonable person should object to having their picture taken?Jack
JackForster
Established
It can also be insulting to walk around town with your camera and *not* take a picture of someone all dressed up. Just imagine you're that woman who spent hours getting her outfit all perfect and then there's a guy with a camera completely neglecting you?
Haha, indeed --and my apologies for not replying sooner. Absolutely there are circumstances when it would be a positive blow to someone to have a camera and not take their picture, as anyone who has attended the Halloween Parade in Greenwich Village here in New York can attest
.Jack
JackForster
Established
That is very nicely put. Like inviting someone to dance --I like that very much.
Jack
JackForster
Established
Now there is a lovely analogy.
I wonder why taking pictures elicits such strong ethical issues in people compared to many other common street activities.
I wonder why street photography brings up such "ethical issues" at all, compared for instance to handing out fliers or performance art or strumming a guitar or begging or giving stump speeches or damn near anything else that is done on streets. :bang:
What are the ethical issues for driving too slow and annoying the hell out of the drivers behind us?
Is there no consideration for the feelings of those behind us?
Would it even occur to anyone that the vast advertizing hustle in the streets is vastly more intrusive and ethically questionable than some silly photographer lifting a camera to their face and clicking a little button?
Street photography at its best is a visual art form
and at its worst, a waste of time. That's really about all there is to it, other than what we make of it in our hive minds.
Hi Jack,
I liked the "invitation to dance" analogy too. It's a way of thinking about it that reframes the whole thing in a way I'd never considered.
Hm, as to your other points, as you probably know, ethical philosophy considers all sorts of problems and somewhere in the vast literature I would not be surprised to find some or maybe even all of the scenarios you mention under consideration --by anthropologists as well as ethicists. I take it from the :bang: that you regard such ruminations as beside the point to the actual practice of street photography and to a point I agree, I suppose --I mean if you are going to do the thing at all you have to at some point stop analyzing it and do it.
On the other hand I also think it's true (and I suspect you won't agree) that there is something about using someone's likeness without securing explicit consent that raises some ethical issues (in addition to the way it brings to our attention how we negotiate personal space and expectations of privacy in public.) We haven't talked about the possibility that, for instance, someone's likeness could be commercially exploited without their consent or benefit. Look at how people behave in a crowded subway car or elevator --eyes mostly averted, as if to look too much at those around you would be intrusive. I find all that stuff interesting to think about --the process of taking pictures is just another magnifying glass. Obviously if you feel differently, well, that's OK too
.Jack
JackForster
Established
"Quasi-Jainist"? In what sense? The only thing I know about Jainism (or at least, that I think I remember) is its radical pacificsm and committment to doing no harm. I can't remember anything about its precepts enjoining people not to use the photographic likeness of others without their consent, but then I'm a little shaky on comparative theology
.Jack
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Jack,Hi Frank, Roger,
Well, I agree on both your points obviously --in a cynical mood I could wonder whether some of the people I see wandering around have souls to steal
Jack
No, I'm saying there are times when one might reasonably object to having one's picture taken, but that if there is no real reason not to be photographed, then an objection to being photographed is both unreasonable and irrational. Reasons may range from fear of arrest and torture if one is recognized by the agents of a repressive regime to common standards of modesty (few would wish to be photographed in a toilet), but generalized paranoia and hysterical overreaction is another matter.
I use the word 'paranoia' in the loose, slang sense: in some ways it's closer to schizophrenia, which I understand to be a lack of balance between different emotional and intellectual states, apparently occupied simultaneously.
Cheers,
R.
furcafe
Veteran
Perhaps "photo-Jainist" would have been a better choice of words.
I was drawing an analogy between the Jainist who, for example, will not build a fire because insects may be drawn to the flames & the photographer who will not photograph strangers without permission because it might hurt the subject's feelings.
Basically, I agree with your statement in the last response to Mr. Conrad, i.e.,: "uch [ethical] ruminations as beside the point to the actual practice of street photography and to a point I agree, I suppose --I mean if you are going to do the thing at all you have to at some point stop analyzing it and do it."
Which brings me back to Neare's (I think) original point, which was that if you truly believe that photographing strangers without their permission amounts to "existential exploitation, almost a form of involuntary enslavement," then maybe street photography, @ least the candid sort, isn't for you.
I was drawing an analogy between the Jainist who, for example, will not build a fire because insects may be drawn to the flames & the photographer who will not photograph strangers without permission because it might hurt the subject's feelings.
Basically, I agree with your statement in the last response to Mr. Conrad, i.e.,: "
Which brings me back to Neare's (I think) original point, which was that if you truly believe that photographing strangers without their permission amounts to "existential exploitation, almost a form of involuntary enslavement," then maybe street photography, @ least the candid sort, isn't for you.
"Quasi-Jainist"? In what sense? The only thing I know about Jainism (or at least, that I think I remember) is its radical pacificsm and committment to doing no harm. I can't remember anything about its precepts enjoining people not to use the photographic likeness of others without their consent, but then I'm a little shaky on comparative theology
Jack
Last edited:
Jamie123
Veteran
I feel very uncomfortable taking pictures of strangers without their consent which is one of the reasons I don't really do 'street photography'. Do I think it is exploitative? Certainly. But I think the kind of consentual portrait photography I do is also exploitative. No matter how much I care for the person I'm photographing, I always am using them in order to get a good picture, to take something that's theirs and make it mine. So it's not an ethical concern that keeps me from photographing strangers. I also don't have a problem personally with being photographed even though I hate seeing myself in pictures.
What I think really bothers me are the kind of contemptuous looks of disapproval (i.e. the 'stink eye') one gets every now and then when someone notices you taking their picture without consent. It makes me feel very uncomfortable and I don't like it.
What I think really bothers me are the kind of contemptuous looks of disapproval (i.e. the 'stink eye') one gets every now and then when someone notices you taking their picture without consent. It makes me feel very uncomfortable and I don't like it.
zauhar
Veteran
You can always say something like "mind if I include you in a shot?"
if they say 'no', then don't take the photo. Of course if you do that, you will never capture a spontaneous moment, just semi-posed portraits.
Randy