The world has changed Street Photography

[Big Ursus]

This past weekend I discovered Phil is absolutely right! “Explaining the legality of the situation” definitely doesn’t work!

I happened upon large groups of folks going to a high school Grad. The wonderful gowns and proud parents got me off my bicycle. I must admit, I was fairly conspicuous, openly standing there in my white helmet. Anyway, I started taking shots until one young woman and her male friend asked if I was a professional photographer, hired for the Grad.

Initially, I tried a tactic that’s worked perfectly when I was confronted about photographing children dancing in the street, and when I was shooting a street evangelist’s hecklers. I said I was taking pictures of people who live in our city. But it didn’t work this time.

She said she wanted to see my pictures. I didn’t want to, but since I had oodles of inoffensive shots on my card, I scrolled through them. That didn’t work either. Then, I made a mistake.

I told her it’s legal for me to take pictures in the street. At that point, she said she didn’t care what I said. I replied I was getting bored with this – about 15 minutes had passed – and that she should call the cops if she wanted to. Her friend did, and I said I’d wait another 30 minutes for them. Nothing happened, and I peddled away.

So Phil, yes again; “even attempting to explain a motive for taking a picture” is not a solution.

Maybe my other approach would have been better. In the past, I've said: “I’m still figuring out how this camera works, and I’m having problems.” Then, I could have gone into very extensive, extremely technical detail. The questioners just wander off, I suspect with glazed eyes.

But none of that would have been useful in this situation. How could I persuade her that I wasn’t taking pictures of pretty young women for unspeakably nasty reasons?😱

 

[Arbitrarium]

I think your demeanour is the deciding factor, as people have stated. If you act calm and with purpose of action, not sneaking, people are less bothered. Personally, it's more of a 'me' problem than a society problem. I like taking photos of people, but I also absolutely detest 99% of the population. So it's often difficult for me to engage or act like part of the scene.

Being 6' 3" with a big beard and tattoos really doesn't help either. I imagine street photography is significantly easier if you look "normal". I read through this whole thread and I'll definitely try some of the suggested techniques (for want of a better word).

I've asked permission to photograph people before, and always had a 'no' response. So I've given up on that option. The other day I took a shot of a building and a rough-looking Asian guy shouted "I'M NOT IN THAT PHOTO YEAH?" to which I assured him he wasn't, the precious, delicate snowflake.

I reckon I'll just try and be more open, less sneaky. I've had people eyeball me after shooting them and a smile tends to see them off. I just struggle sometimes to maintain that decorum when really I just want to tell them to stop looking at me, which would of course be hypocritical and counter-productive.

But yeah, I agree that people are more on edge now. Everyone's convinced that anyone acting slightly differently to what they expect must be a personal threat to them. It's pitiful.

 

[emraphoto]

I think your demeanour is the deciding factor, as people have stated. If you act calm and with purpose of action, not sneaking, people are less bothered. Personally, it's more of a 'me' problem than a society problem. I like taking photos of people, but I also absolutely detest 99% of the population. So it's often difficult for me to engage or act like part of the scene.

Being 6' 3" with a big beard and tattoos really doesn't help either. I imagine street photography is significantly easier if you look "normal". I read through this whole thread and I'll definitely try some of the suggested techniques (for want of a better word).

I've asked permission to photograph people before, and always had a 'no' response. So I've given up on that option. The other day I took a shot of a building and a rough-looking Asian guy shouted "I'M NOT IN THAT PHOTO YEAH?" to which I assured him he wasn't, the precious, delicate snowflake.

I reckon I'll just try and be more open, less sneaky. I've had people eyeball me after shooting them and a smile tends to see them off. I just struggle sometimes to maintain that decorum when really I just want to tell them to stop looking at me, which would of course be hypocritical and counter-productive.

But yeah, I agree that people are more on edge now. Everyone's convinced that anyone acting slightly differently to what they expect must be a personal threat to them. It's pitiful.

I always found being a rather thick, tattooed and scary looking man allowed me a whole lot of breathing room 😉

 

[airfrogusmc]

I'm a 250 6'2" former Marine and I have some ink but what is normal? I think if you act like you belong there and treat others with respect you should be OK. I only have problems once in a while. And I actually get noticed less now than I did in the 70s and 80s when I was the only one wit ha camera on the streets. Leica Ms also help some especially when everyone else has big DSLRs. They seem to be getting most of the attention.

 

[kshapero]

As the OP from 2 years ago, we all see the problem still exists. It has really dampened my spirits. BTW God forbid, you should accidentally or not, photograph a child. I was once on a trail in a city park with my grandchildren. Of course, I was photographing them for the pure joy of just being with them. While shooting I actually got violent looks and verbal harassment from other hikers because I was photographing children!! Telling them that they were my grandchildren did not calm them. I actually think they did not believe me. What the he&& is the world coming to?

 

[ptpdprinter]

Personally, it's more of a 'me' problem than a society problem...

The other day I took a shot of a building and a rough-looking Asian guy shouted "I'M NOT IN THAT PHOTO YEAH?" to which I assured him he wasn't, the precious, delicate snowflake.

Asian guy? Snowflake? I think you are right. It is a 'me' problem.

 

[jsrockit]

While shooting I actually got violent looks and verbal harassment from other hikers because I was photographing children!! Telling them that they were my grandchildren did not calm them. I actually think they did not believe me. What the he&& is the world coming to?

Yeah, that's crazy. I've heard a similar situation about an older gentleman photographing his grandkid's swimming lesson and the other parents had him barred from the pool. He swore that he was only photographing his own grandchildren and none of the other kids.

 

[benlees]

I imagine the best street photography tool would be a smartphone with a selfie stick. People will think you're a tourist or just a run-of-the-mill post modern narcissist. Either way, it's like having an invisibility cloak!

 

[ptpdprinter]

I imagine the best street photography tool would be a smartphone with a selfie stick. People will think you're a tourist or just a run-of-the-mill post modern narcissist. Either way, it's like having an invisibility cloak!

Great idea. To maintain its supremacy in street shooting, Leica should develop a selfie stick for its M series.

 

[cz23]

....I only have problems once in a while....

Maybe because you're a 6'2" 250 lb. Marine with ink? 🙂

 

[benlees]

Great idea. To maintain its supremacy in street shooting, Leica should develop a selfie stick for its M series.

Excellent idea. Could be the new K series ("Klebest" for sticks like glue). Or have a Leica code name: the OMG

 

[PhotoGog]

If people are so full of suspicion, fear and concern for privacy, why not make your street photography about that. Maybe it's more of an opportunity than a problem.

Glad someone is thinking. All I hear from everyone else is poor excuses for using other people's children as subjects for the most banal photographs possibly ever taken.

 

[PhotoGog]

Not surprisingly, you have missed the point. There are also far more important things in life than satisfying a desire to as a hobby, obtain photographs of people that one does not know in a manner of approach and thinking that is clearly becoming outdated. I wrote what I did because without those procedures, there is no way in hell I would engage in "Street" photography, my gut tells me it is just not right anymore, especially children.

The world, the whole of it has changed. And because of the onslaught of a "Social Moore's Law" of sorts, it will change even faster.
My opinion, based on the how's and whys of why or how I engage with people I don't know with my camera is wholly unique to me, what I have seen arrive and what I think is coming....and going.

Until laws are more rigorously enforced, if at all, I feel that it is the reasoning of the individual with the camera who will make or break his or her ability to successfully obtain the desired photograph on the streets, not just a press pass or letter of assignment. But in my experience, combined with a deep sense of always putting my subjects or potential subjects first, those credentials sure do help and I feel they will help even more into the future as more people refuse to allow the image maker to have a say in the recording and possible publication of their likeness. In this day and age, people have a right to know why and how a photo of them is to be used, you are engaging in a fool's errand to think otherwise.

Let's always remember that when regarded in it's most evocative result, street photography often contains the likeness of people. Put the people in your photographs first, because it is not about you anymore, it is about them and *clearly* the world is showing us that more and more each day.

To more and more people, telling them you want to or did take their photograph for "fun" is not a good enough reason for doing so, hence the backlash. It's not snobbery on my part, it is what I witness, what I hear from the people **I** photograph. I'm in the minority here and I always will be and that is fine by me, go ahead and beat the crap out of me, hate me, piss on my grave, what ever makes you feel good.

But crapping all over me and my insight does not and will not change the increase in challenges or reaction those with a camera will experience if they can not give a damn good reason for photographing people they do not know. You can count on it getting harder to do because clearly, that is where it is headed.

I couldn't agree with you more. Wise words. Individuals have a reasonable expectation to the use of their visage which precludes whatever a douchebag "streetog" wants as a trophy for their artless "documents". Why photographers want to make images under such circumstances is beyond me. Angled wide views of bankers marching past a Starbucks in stark light, or a zoomed in invasion of some poor chap in Hanoi trying to make a living selling banh mi - these aren't revelatory images fit for the ceiling of a cathedral in Assisi. Get a life. Or, more to the point, get to grips with the difference between SUBJECT and CONTENT, for when it comes to the latter the apologists in this thread are exactly like Ken Wheeler: ye doth protest too much as compensation for lives defined by narrow, self- involved interests.

 

[emraphoto]

"But crapping all over me and my insight does not and will not change the increase in challenges or reaction those with a camera will experience if they can not give a damn good reason for photographing people they do not know"

seems like sound logic

 

[jsrockit]

Why photographers want to make images under such circumstances is beyond me. Angled wide views of bankers marching past a Starbucks in stark light, or a zoomed in invasion of some poor chap in Hanoi trying to make a living selling banh mi - these aren't revelatory images fit for the ceiling of a cathedral in Assisi. Get a life. Or, more to the point, get to grips with the difference between SUBJECT and CONTENT, for when it comes to the latter the apologists in this thread are exactly like Ken Wheeler: ye doth protest too much as compensation for lives defined by narrow, self- involved interests.

Please show us the way to photographic salvation sir... preferably in images.

 

[PhotoGog]

Please show us the way to photographic salvation sir... preferably in images.

What makes you think I'm a photographer? This is a discussion concerning ethics, not some competitive I'll show you mine if you show me yours trap. But alas, you photo boys never do understand the fact that non photographers might have views more valid than yours.

 

[PhotoGog]

What makes you think I'm a photographer? This is a discussion concerning ethics, not some competitive I'll show you mine if you show me yours trap. But alas, you photo boys never do understand the fact that non photographers might have views more valid than yours.

OK, OK, here's a photo of a wall. No one's feelings we hurt.

 

[Alberti]

Sometimes we should just listen to our gut feeling that a photo will not be appreciated

 

[jsrockit]

What makes you think I'm a photographer? This is a discussion concerning ethics, not some competitive I'll show you mine if you show me yours trap. But alas, you photo boys never do understand the fact that non photographers might have views more valid than yours.

I guess my point is that it is easy to be critical, but hard to make something meaningful.

 

[airfrogusmc]

I couldn't agree with you more. Wise words. Individuals have a reasonable expectation to the use of their visage which precludes whatever a douchebag "streetog" wants as a trophy for their artless "documents". Why photographers want to make images under such circumstances is beyond me. Angled wide views of bankers marching past a Starbucks in stark light, or a zoomed in invasion of some poor chap in Hanoi trying to make a living selling banh mi - these aren't revelatory images fit for the ceiling of a cathedral in Assisi. Get a life. Or, more to the point, get to grips with the difference between SUBJECT and CONTENT, for when it comes to the latter the apologists in this thread are exactly like Ken Wheeler: ye doth protest too much as compensation for lives defined by narrow, self- involved interests.

Yep with this mentality there would be no The Americans by Robert Frank, none of Winogrands wonderful images. Diane Arbus, forget about a lot of her work. Bresson is another. No Subway by Bruce Davidson. Glad none of those were in agreement with your ethics.

I always think it's better just not to participate if you don't like something instead of pushing ones morals or ethics on others.