willie_901
Veteran
Of course it is acceptable to publish any photograph that does not violate the law. This is an objective fact.
Each of us has different personal standards as to what should be published. I intentionally avoided the word ethics because ethics implies a code of conduct adhereed to voluntarily by a group of people. To me it doesn't make sense to think about millions of codes of ethics: one code for each photographer.
The photographers's personal standards have nothing to do with what camera they use.
In the US, the balance between privacy and first amendment rights is clearly defined. Except for Texas, state and local laws define an individual's right to privacy in a limited way. For instance in New York State the law says your right to privacy is limited to situations where a person could reasonably expect to be nude and unobserved. This legal precident gives great latitude to an individual's right to self expression.
I have read many arguments in threads like this one that just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right. This is correct because each photographer has a their own subjective view regarding when a photograph crosses the line from acceptable to unacceptable. I have a responsibility to make that decision for my work, but I am not responsible for the decision of others. We also have the right to strongly disagree and challenge where others draw that line.
You also discuss photographs that you feel are technically flawed. In my view this situation is purely subjective as well. People's work speaks for itself.
Each of us has different personal standards as to what should be published. I intentionally avoided the word ethics because ethics implies a code of conduct adhereed to voluntarily by a group of people. To me it doesn't make sense to think about millions of codes of ethics: one code for each photographer.
The photographers's personal standards have nothing to do with what camera they use.
In the US, the balance between privacy and first amendment rights is clearly defined. Except for Texas, state and local laws define an individual's right to privacy in a limited way. For instance in New York State the law says your right to privacy is limited to situations where a person could reasonably expect to be nude and unobserved. This legal precident gives great latitude to an individual's right to self expression.
I have read many arguments in threads like this one that just because it's legal doesn't mean it's right. This is correct because each photographer has a their own subjective view regarding when a photograph crosses the line from acceptable to unacceptable. I have a responsibility to make that decision for my work, but I am not responsible for the decision of others. We also have the right to strongly disagree and challenge where others draw that line.
You also discuss photographs that you feel are technically flawed. In my view this situation is purely subjective as well. People's work speaks for itself.
