street photography + harassment...

[cameosis]

Where are you from? In most of the world, you certainly can take a picture of anything or anyone in public wherever they have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

from germany. "most of the world?" hardly so, it's rather the opposite.

There's no such thing as personality rights.

thank god there is!

So, is this the Future of Street Photography!
I'm planing to use this as a project just to show the non-sense of these attitudes and Laws.

you are aware that this is exactly what google had to do with "google earth" in order to be able to pursue the project? microsoft scrapped it altogether after they faced similar law suits.

someone mentioned cartier-bresson ... those were very different times.

there was also a post in this thread where a forum member listed the reasons why somebody wouldn't want to be photographed -- and they were all in the vein of "only people who are mental and/or criminal will object" ... who tells me that the "photographer" isn't a criminal, a sociopath or the like? takes two to tango.

if you ask for permission first, everything should be fine. just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you are permitted to do it.

 

[colyn]

I don't know about other countries but here in the USA if you are in the public domain you can be photograhed without permission and the images can be posted on the photographers website without getting permission from the person photographed..

You have no reasonable expectation of privacy while in the public domain..

 

[starless]

In general I am opposed to the claims of privacy when one is in a public place. If someone doesn't want to be photographed or seen by other people, he should not go to a public place. A photograph wouldn't reveal more private details than what is already seen by hundreds of other passers-by.

I am also pretty sure the law in Germany applies to usage of the pictures, not the actual process of taking them. In other words, you are not forbidden to take them, but restricted as to how to use them.

 

[kkdanamatt]

Starless is correct. The act of photographing someone who is in a public place is not restricted in the USA. Legally, the photographer stands on the right side of the law. But that's not the problem and the gist of the OP.

The problem begins when the photographer is then approached by someone who doesn't like the fact that they have been photographed without their having given prior consent. I have been the photographer in that situation several times. I smile, sometimes nod, and continue shooting in another direction as I slowly walk away. In almost every instance, I have avoided the potential encounter.

However, on the few occasions when I have been encountered, I was pleasant but forceful. I believe it is the photographer's duty, even more than his right, to stand his ground, because that right can be easily lost by not exercising it.

 

[loquax ludens]

There's no such thing as personality rights.

thank god there is!

It is only a legislated right, not a natural right, despite attempts by some proponents to justify it on the basis of natural rights. Even if one were to grant for the sake of argument that such a right exists, it's only application in the context of photography is to the commercial use of one's image by someone seeking to profit from it. Because that is the only case in which someone could argue that harm was done to the one photographed.

In no sense could it be argued on the basis of natural rights that a person has a right to stop someone else from photographing them for non-commercial objectives in public. That would be tantamount to claiming that a person has a right not to be seen by others in public. You could legislate such a thing, but there is no natural right argument to support it, nor could you apply it or enforce it.

What you are talking about, denying others the right to photograph what they can see in public, is morally wrong.

if you ask for permission first, everything should be fine. just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you are permitted to do it.

The crux of the problem is that many people, like you, believe that others have a right to permit or deny them activities that do, in fact, fall within the realm of natural rights. I am permitted, by my own exercise of natural right, to photograph you in public without asking for your permission first, whether you or your State agree or not.

 

[migtex]

if you ask for permission first, everything should be fine. just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you are permitted to do it.

Fortunately in my country I can, and if I can I'll do it! That's why it's called "Public place"!
Now, can you imagine trying to obtain permission from everyone in the photo?

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

My question is to all you savvy street shooters, what should our stance be????

There are many different ways to handle the situation:

1) I Speaka No Englesh

2) I'm on a talent search and you were one of my top picks, Cowell won't be very happy with me when I get back to the office.

3) You know how expensive it is to develop this stuff? I'm doing this for free!

4) Hey, you can't just come and talk to me, you should ask permission. I guess we're even.


But I think the best is: 5) I'm sorry, it won't happen again.

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

I don't know about other countries but here in the USA if you are in the public domain you can be photograhed without permission and the images can be posted on the photographers website without getting permission from the person photographed.

The same is true in the UK, apart from the vicinity of law courts and certain other designated areas.

For the definitive view of the police, see this.

 

[FrankS]

Years ago, I had a whole crowd turn into a lynch mob when I tried to photograph a "street preacher" in Knoxville. My attempt to explain my right to make photographs in a public place didn't make much way with ten or twelve true believers.

You should have stood your ground and become martyred for photograhers' rights.


😉

 

[zauhar]

Today I was trying to shoot in the Musee d'Orsay in Paris . I understood that photography was not allowed of the exhibits, but I was aiming my M3 at architecture, and was far from any art. A museum worker came to tell me off. I replied "keep an eye on anyone with a cell phone" -he ignored me.

Cell phones? The place was crawling with big DSLR's with flash, P&S's and iPads!

I went back and took the photo I was after, and more along the way. I didn't see anyone with any of those devices being questioned.

Randy

 

[ChrisN]

Just for general information, the situation with regard to photographer's rights in Australia is discussed at length in this article by Andrew Nemeth at 4020.net.

 

[dubtom]

On my first outing with my richo 500 G last weekend,I saw a nice picture,two guys leaning against a bin chatting,overlooking a bridge. I was behind them trying to focus (I'm new to rangefinders) when one of them turned around and saw me,said something about me to his pal,well the scene was gone,so I moved on. 10 minutes later he appeared in front of me and demanded to know why I was taking his picture. I could have spent the the rest of the day trying to explain why I take pictures but i said just because I enjoy printing them. He didn't get it but I suppose he was convinced i wasn't a special agent of some kind intent on spying on him. I don't often do street photography or candid's of strangers and if I'm honest the scene above made me feel a little uncomfortable, not uncomfortable enough to stop though. I'm still sorry I missed the picture though.

 

[alienmeatsack]

This harassment and guilt from taking photos of others is why I have mostly shot photos of things, not people, for most of my photographic life. The few shots of people are family or friends, and even some of the "friends" act like I am pointing a gun at them.

I have pretty bad anxiety, so even reading this thread was tough for me. But, it also helped me to know others have been harassed for trying to take candid moments as well. So in a way it has helped me in that regard.

I would never lie to someone who confronted me or act like I wasn't shooting them, I just would not shoot in their direction at all. And that is why my photography lacks people most of the time.

Part of the issue here too is that I live in a city without a huge crowded downtown area or shopping area with lots of people. I find in that in places with a tourist area or crowded areas, people tend to not pay so much attention to the photographer since there are usually so many folks doing their thing.

I have noticed that what gear I am using does make a difference in how I am perceived. When I have my DSLR and a big lens, I get a lot of "Don't take my photo!" and "Why are you taking my picture!?" and lots of folks who will go out of their way to avoid me.

Yet with my TLRs, no one says a thing. I think maybe it's because I am pointing the camera in the same direction for several minutes not moving as I try to aim and focus. I am pretty slow in that regard, so it always takes me forever.

When I use my phone's camera, no one says a single thing to me as with many of my smaller film cameras.

It's really a shame this is how our world is, as there are so many wonderful people out there who, when not posing or aware of their being captured in that moment, are such rich and wonderful subjects.

I'm working on my anxiety. And trying to learn how to talk to people I don't know so I can ask to take photos. I also have cards printed I carry and will hand to folks to reach me for copies of the photos.

Until I can find a better way to deal with the people side, I will stick to my nature, texture and architectural photos. I want to take more shots of people, but that will just have to come in time I guess.

 

[tunalegs]

If I am photographing a person, which is rare, I ask them "can I have a photo?", if they say yes I take one. If I am photographing a group, I just take the photo.

Laws in different parts of the world are different, but here in the U.S. if you are on public property you may be photographed without permission. However I find some photographers confuse a public space with public property. It's worth it to remember that just because there are a lot of people around, doesn't make it public property. As a matter of manners I ask permission to photograph when I want a photograph of a particular person, and not just people as part of a composition.

 

[giellaleafapmu]

My stand is: ask, ask, ask and ask, if the answer is not show them some pictures, if the answer is still no just handle to them your business card and go. I understand your passion, I have the same, and I assume you are honest and have good intentions but if you revert the roles you must admit that there are many questionable reasons to want a picture of someone and that the chap was indeed right. You won't lost the "street photography look" just because you asked, the fact you just stopped someone who didn't expect to be stopped and you talked, and insisted, and showed him your portfolio if anything make him kind of proud of himself and let you get an even more interesting pictures.

GLF

 

[Jamie Pillers]

... if you revert the roles you must admit that there are many questionable reasons to want a picture of someone...
GLF

I'm curious what you and others here think these "questionable reasons" might be. I'm wondering what people out on the street would think I'm going to do with their picture that would cause any harm. I suppose they might think I'm going to photoshop them into some sort of compromising tableau, but then they could sue me for all I have. So where's the risk here?

If street photographers had been asking for permission since the beginning of 'street photography', we wouldn't have much to look at these days. People like Winogrand, Moriyama, Meyerowitz, Levitt, etc. would have had to do something else for a living.

My opinion is that I have the right to photograph anything and anyone in what I call the public domain. And, by the way, that includes people that are on private property but could reasonably expect to be seen from the public property (people inside a building with picture windows for example). I want to make images of the world I have to live in and that includes all the other people in it. It'll be a sad day when that right is taken away. Our children and their children will never have a very clear picture of what it was like to live today.

 

[68degrees]

And, I've taken to carrying those little mini-business cards (even though I'm nobody - LOL) just for these types of occasions. It diffuses the situation usually when a person feels like you're somehow legitimate and willing to share the resulting photo with them. I get them super cheap and it's like carrying a pack of gum in your pocket.

what do these cards say?

 

[68degrees]

I'm working on my anxiety. And trying to learn how to talk to people I don't know so I can ask to take photos. I also have cards printed I carry and will hand to folks to reach me for copies of the photos.

Until I can find a better way to deal with the people side, I will stick to my nature, texture and architectural photos. I want to take more shots of people, but that will just have to come in time I guess.

I like this approach a lot. I ve thought about it as well and thought that if I took photos of strangers, I would do it this way.

 

[68degrees]

If I am photographing a person, which is rare, I ask them "can I have a photo?", if they say yes I take one. If I am photographing a group, I just take the photo.

Laws in different parts of the world are different, but here in the U.S. if you are on public property you may be photographed without permission. However I find some photographers confuse a public space with public property. It's worth it to remember that just because there are a lot of people around, doesn't make it public property. As a matter of manners I ask permission to photograph when I want a photograph of a particular person, and not just people as part of a composition.

can you explain the difference between public place and public property and examples?

 

[x-ray]

Certainly it's within our right to shoot whatever we want but if you annoy people you give the photo world a black eye. I've personally seen people with cameras drive people nuts to the point his camera should have been kicked up his a$$. On the other hand I was harassed by a cop simply because I was photographing at a carnival. I was accused by two young girls of photographing them which I was not and showed the cop on my LCD that I had not. The cop continued his aggressive behavior an threatened to take my camera and have me removed from the carnival. He was simply being an a$$ and knew the consequences if he did. I had four witnesses.

It works two ways and I respect personal space whether it's inside the law or not. It reflects on all of us.

A fellow I worked with in college wound up spending a couple of weeks in the hospital because of harassing a couple of prostitutes with his camera. Their pimp came up behind him and grabbed him beating him severely breaking several ribs and broke his jaw while trying to shove the photographers Nikon Ftn into his mouth.

The moral to the story is this could have been any one of us. Inside the law or not doesn't matter. You don't know what kind if nutcase you're dealing with.