Stopped on the streets.

kully said:
Why is he automatically an idiot? The morning after my grandfather died, I would have had an argument with anyone about anything, just because I was in that frame of mind...

By carrying your camera about, taking snaps, you are creating these interactions, you can't know what history the people who are nearby have - whether you do or do not actually include them in the frame. The onus is on you to defuse them.

Or is empathy something we don't do?
Click to expand...

Love this, Kully. Being understanding of others and giving their complaints the time of day will go a long way to giving everyone a little more breathing room on the street. I hate the "eff'em" attitude. As a teacher, I hate parent complaints. But most of the time, they just want to be heard. Usually I don't have anything that I need to change, but listening and trying to understand helps me be better, even when I'm not at fault.

I don't think caring about people will ever put a damper on most people's artistic vision. If it does for you, you're more dedicated to the craft than I will ever be.

I remember a few months ago a guy posting that he took a picture of a homeless woman and she threw a jar of her urine on him! I haven't worried about getting yelled at since then!
 
daveisbest said:
I've been stopped by security guards in places like shopping centres a bunch of times after I've taken a couple of photos. It's private property, so theres nothing to do but accept that if they ask you to stop taking photos, you stop taking photos.
Click to expand...

I had this happen to me. While the 16yo security guard was telling me how no photographs are allowed in the mall I noticed that there was a photo booth right behind him. He wasn't amused.
 
Fedia said:
Hey, B. Gilden isn't that rude and without any respect to people as one could get an impression from that one "famous" promotion clip on youtube... We - guys with cameras are responsible to form people's opinion about photographers. Being rude with a camera on the street won't take you very far, unless maybe if you are rude with elderly people or women only, very soon you will meet the same rude guys just without cameras but in a bad mood... I know quite a few examples when ignorance and thinking only about getting a good picture to your archive didn't work out, and then I have seen damaged cameras and "photographers'" faces... this is physics, Newton theory...
Click to expand...

That youtube clip is the one I've seen. But I remember now reading an interview with him about his Conney Island series. He spoke about his interaction with the people and how he engaged them in conversation and it seemed to me that he really cared.

So yeah, I wasn't fair to call someone rude just based on an edited 3 min video.

In any case whatever he is doing is right and working for him, because he is ... well, Bruce Gilden.
 
i had it once - also in the UK, in Edinburgh, actually. A couple dressed up traditionally, on the Royal Mile, in the middle of the august festivals...of course i took a shot, and of course they told me NOO don't do that! but it was too late. The NOOO ended up on the photo.
The print is hangin' on my wall.
 
OurManInTangier said:
(...) find a coping strategy or two and employ them when needed. (...)
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, my strategy is easy: be tall (ok, you cannot really do that), look strong, behave confidently, and if 'caught' just smile broadly and, if you can, a little sheepishly. Works perfectly for me, so far -- and I'm in one of those countries where street photography is actually forbidden.

I also carry some prints of my better images with me to show to someone while explaining what I do, but I never needed them so far. This is a tip I read here on RFF, by the way.
 
In this case, as in my case from today, the dude was an **** (I'd like to use much stronger language but will refrain). He came at me from behind, I had not taken his photo. I had a camera and that was enough for him to lose it.

I've never had an issue before, apart from when the other guy in Brixton showed me his knife collection, and that again was caused by some mysterious force, again no picture had been made.

Maybe Brixton is a bad place to photograph?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Step one is to move a thread to off-topic.

Step 2 is to close it.

Step 3 is to delete it.

We're at step 1, so calm it down and we will not require step 2.
 
@PCStudio - oh ye, Brixton has many places like that. If you know where to look, or not, depending upon how you look at it.

Rather than get into an argument, I'll agree that we all have different opinions on this. However, the question as a whole is an interesting one. Many of us choose to document the streets, how many of us question what we do ethically? I never had. But then again, I don't care if you take my picture.
 
PCStudio said:
On the streets on very close distance I'm shooting "hands-free"
**
Friend of mine had a Hole in his Jacket and 3' long release cable from camera to the pocket
worked fine with Russar
*********
btw - if crazy photographer trying to take a picture of me from 2-3 yards at front of my face 🙂
***
you gotta be nice with people - be respectful , - that's a main point .
Street is a Public Space
Click to expand...

Interesting combination of statements. Still, a lot of what I see getting called street photography is little more than people who get their kicks out of being rude in someone's face. Big deal. Grow up.

I also really don't understand all this sneaking around. Hidden cameras with release cables wired down a jacket arm, cameras pre-focused so they can be shot from the hip, etc. Stealth photography. No wonder so many street photographs I've seen are little more than snapshots. And not even good snapshots. And no wonder people are suspicious when they see this in action.

If you're going to shoot on public streets, be polite. Respect others as they should be -- not as you would respect yourself, as few of us respect ourselves enough to be a public standard. Be a part of your environment, don't go out there assuming that the world is just your plaything.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Please close this thread before people get banned. It is an interesting subject but it's not worth fighting over.

Better yet, simply delete it.
 
I just saw the request to delete the thread.

On RFF, this is an action that the Original Poster can do themselves on a thread that is still open,

Go to the first post in the thread, and choose "EDIT" as you would normally do for a post.

Choose the option to DELETE the original post.

The entire thread is deleted at that point.

A Moderator can close a thread. Post back if you want it simply closed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Almost forgot, was going to post some of the best advice on this situation that I have seen on RFF.

When asked to delete an image, very expertly hold your Leica M6 up to "Chimp" the ISO dial. Turn the ISO dial to the number closest to the one that you wish to delete. Simultaneously press the shutter release and put your thumb on the back of the ISO dial.

Then turn and apologize for the inconvenience, and tell them the image is deleted.
 
This strikes me as an interesting enough thread to put up with a certain degree of weirdness.

As I've said elsewhere, as far as I am concerned, anyone who wants both the right to take photographs in public, and the right not to be photographed, is being fundamentally dishonest.

It's also curious that extreme aggression -- grievous bodily harm -- seems to be widely offfered on the internet but (from the responses here) is far less generously distributed in the real world. How far does the internet influence the real world, and how far are the wannabee thugs on the internet wimps who are hiding behind silly names?

I have a few friends who really believe in violence as a last resort, but only as a last resort. To quote one of them, "All I need is for the other guy to be down long enough for me to leg it." He's an ex-Hell's Angel with convictions for assault, ABH (Actual Bodily Harm) and GBH (Grievous Bodily Harm). Or to quote another, "A friiend of mine was badly hurt. When I saw the state he was in, I decided never to hurt anyone again. Unless they insisted."

In other words, a smile and a degree of friendliness cover at least nine tenths of the problems, and a genuine willingness to stand up for yourself against crazies covers another 9.9% or more. How much do we need to worry about the remaining 0.1% or less? Especially if we have never personally encountered it? How much are we worrying about wild hypotheses and rumours of rumours? The OP's question, and others' replies, may help answer this.

Cheers,

R.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Your unexplained experiences
Replies
6
Views
543
valdas
V
A
Burning Kodachrome slides and erasing history
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
boojum
boojum
Godfrey
A pleasant few moments today ...
Replies
3
Views
531
chuckroast
C
Richard G
Mobile phone theft in use, then lockout and bank account drainage: some defences to note.
Replies
19
Views
1K
Richard G
Richard G
peterm1
Who is your favorite photographer in history - who has influenced you the most?
2 3
Replies
40
Views
1K
David Murphy
David Murphy
Back
Top Bottom