raid
Dad Photographer
Hi Dave,
I recall a case from some years ago in NYC. I read about it in a respectable photography magazine [Photo District News]. A female photographer took nude photos of her two children while bathing, and then was arrested by the police when the nude photos were printed at a local drug store. The authorities took away her two children for several months. It was a lengthy law suit against the parents.
Sparrow
Veteran
Well our "culture" is what we make it, no? and to date I haven't ruffled any proverbial feathers, but I do agree southern Europe is more child friendly than the north, I've been thanked by parents on more than one occasion in southern Italy and Greece ...
dave lackey
Veteran
Well, I had in mind the issue of taking photos of one's own kids at school or a sports event. As a former sports photographer, I find this ludicrous.
I remember the case you mentioned. Funny thing, two nights ago, the Disney film "Polyanna" was on TV. The opening title scene showed closeups of kids skinny-dipping into the river off a bridge. The world is completely screwed up.
As a parent and now grandparents, we take precautions. Always have. We don't set ourselves or kids up for crazy situations either. It is just getting more difficult to imagine how crazy things will be with each new year.
cambolt
Green Spotted Nose Turtle
That is terrible. Do you think one day we won't be able to take pictures of our children at all?
Or is it the drug store's fault for looking at the pictures in the first place
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
Is the sky falling yet?
Michael Markey
Veteran
That`s funny Chris ...is the cat saying something important
Nikkor AIS
Nikkor AIS
50 1.0 Noctilux
One thing that hasn't been brought up is the fact the other children might be holding the camera. Both of my teenagers have cameras on their cellphones. So do all their friends. Are we going to make laws about them taking pictures of their friends
? I personally have no problem taking pictures of children in public and often post them. The only problem I have ever had was photographing some teenagers at the local 7-Eleven. After I took a picture of them mulling around, a couple of the boys came over and told me to delete the image. When I told them I was using a film camera, they were confused. They went away
.
Nikkor 16 mm 2.8 AIS on Nikon D3
50 1.0 Noctilux on Leica M9
Last edited:
MIkhail
-
http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm
Permissible Subjects
Despite misconceptions to the contrary,
the following subjects can
almost always be photographed lawfully
from public places:
accident and fire scenes
children
celebrities
bridges and other infrastructure
residential and commercial buildings
industrial facilities and public utilities
transportation facilities (e.g., airports)
Superfund sites
criminal activities
law enforcement officers
The General Rule
The general rule in the United States
is that anyone may take photographs
of whatever they want when they are
in a public place or places where they
have permission to take photographs.
Absent a specific legal prohibition
such as a statute or ordinance, you are
legally entitled to take photographs.
Examples of places that are traditionally
considered public are streets,
sidewalks, and public parks.
Property owners may legally prohibit
photography on their premises
but have no right to prohibit others
from photographing their property
from other locations. Whether you
need permission from property ownersowners
to take photographs while on their
premises depends on the circumstances.
In most places, you may reasonably
assume that taking photographs
is allowed and that you do not
need explicit permission. However,
this is a judgment call and you should
request permission when the circumstances
suggest that the owner is likely
to object. In any case, when a property
owner tells you not to take photographs
while on the premises, you are
legally obligated to honor the request.
That's what law says. Everything else is bull**** and people's preferences, not rights.
I have the same right to take picture of unknown to me kids playing at fountain as some paparazzi taking picture of Paris Hilton swimming nude ON PUBLIC property or, more importantly, on PRIVATE property but picture taken FROM PUBLIC property. That's what law says.
What somebody's grandma thinks about it - less of my concern.
Last edited:
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
You guys don't understand the main point.
Me, a 34-year old nobody, has to explain it to you, -this is ridiculous.
The main point is, we are all weirdos. Not weirdos as pedofiles (whatever the English spelling would be), or any other illegal-acting dudes (and dudettes), BUT weirdos who are within those VERY few who enjoy taking pictures of somebody else's family and looking at those shots.
Trust me on this - MOST people, 99.99%, simply do not take pictures of other people and other people's kids, when they don't know them (except celebrities). They don't because simply they are NOT INTERESTED. They would not see the point why to do that. They do not understand your reasons.
Therefore, the vast majority of people think there must be something wrong with YOU if you take shots of their kids whom you don't even know: WHY are you INTERESTED???
And since we all are afraid of what we do not understand by our nature, they assume the worst for what your reasons could be.
Further: trust me on this too, MOST people never go to a photo exhibition (many don't even think that photography qualifies as art) and only consider photography as a record-keeping tool for own family, friends and places visited.
And street photography? Don't be ridiculous. 99.999% of the people never heard about it and if you tell them about it, they'd say it's a waste of film (erhh... of bits, then).
Really, it's this simple.
Me, a 34-year old nobody, has to explain it to you, -this is ridiculous.
The main point is, we are all weirdos. Not weirdos as pedofiles (whatever the English spelling would be), or any other illegal-acting dudes (and dudettes), BUT weirdos who are within those VERY few who enjoy taking pictures of somebody else's family and looking at those shots.
Trust me on this - MOST people, 99.99%, simply do not take pictures of other people and other people's kids, when they don't know them (except celebrities). They don't because simply they are NOT INTERESTED. They would not see the point why to do that. They do not understand your reasons.
Therefore, the vast majority of people think there must be something wrong with YOU if you take shots of their kids whom you don't even know: WHY are you INTERESTED???
And since we all are afraid of what we do not understand by our nature, they assume the worst for what your reasons could be.
Further: trust me on this too, MOST people never go to a photo exhibition (many don't even think that photography qualifies as art) and only consider photography as a record-keeping tool for own family, friends and places visited.
And street photography? Don't be ridiculous. 99.999% of the people never heard about it and if you tell them about it, they'd say it's a waste of film (erhh... of bits, then).
Really, it's this simple.
Michael Markey
Veteran
Spot on that`s most peoples perception in a nutshell.
Nikkor AIS
Nikkor AIS
Great post MIKkhail.
Last edited:
Sparrow
Veteran
You guys don't understand the main point.
Me, a 34-year old nobody, has to explain it to you, -this is ridiculous.
The main point is, we are all weirdos. Not weirdos as pedofiles (whatever the English spelling would be), or any other illegal-acting dudes (and dudettes), BUT weirdos who are within those VERY few who enjoy taking pictures of somebody else's family and looking at those shots.
Trust me on this - MOST people, 99.99%, simply do not take pictures of other people and other people's kids, when they don't know them (except celebrities). They don't because simply they are NOT INTERESTED. They would not see the point why to do that. They do not understand your reasons.
Therefore, the vast majority of people think there must be something wrong with YOU if you take shots of their kids whom you don't even know: WHY are you INTERESTED???
And since we all are afraid of what we do not understand by our nature, they assume the worst for what your reasons could be.
Further: trust me on this too, MOST people never go to a photo exhibition (many don't even think that photography qualifies as art) and only consider photography as a record-keeping tool for own family, friends and places visited.
And street photography? Don't be ridiculous. 99.999% of the people never heard about it and if you tell them about it, they'd say it's a waste of film (erhh... of bits, then).
Really, it's this simple.
so what, 99% of people are not interested in human physiology but next time you are ill you will be thankful that some of the remaining 1% went on to become doctors, I believe
Chriscrawfordphoto
Real Men Shoot Film.
That`s funny Chris ...is the cat saying something important
Nope, just watching. He loved staring at naked people, it fascinated him. Must have thought we were taking off our fur!
Bill58
Native Texan
Seoul, Korea
Seoul, Korea
Bundang Kids-2 by wrs111445, on Flickr
Seoul Color Scan 2012-1 099 by wrs111445, on Flickr
Seoul Color Scan 2012-1 085 by wrs111445, on Flickr
Incheon-42 by wrs111445, on Flickr
Incheon Pottery Festival Color Scan 2011-2 001 by wrs111445, on Flickr
Darling sisters, but not twins 2 by wrs111445, on Flickr
Seoul, Korea
Bundang Kids-2 by wrs111445, on Flickr
Seoul Color Scan 2012-1 099 by wrs111445, on Flickr
Seoul Color Scan 2012-1 085 by wrs111445, on Flickr
Incheon-42 by wrs111445, on Flickr
Incheon Pottery Festival Color Scan 2011-2 001 by wrs111445, on Flickr
Darling sisters, but not twins 2 by wrs111445, on Flickr