Winogrand, Evans, et al, and the legalities of street shooting...

[back alley]

so, flamingo, this work that you do in tv journalism, is it volunteer work or do you get paid?

your statements confuse me as they seem contradictory. it's ok for the public's best interest (as determined by who?) to outweigh privacy rights but not for me the casual shooter who might put a book together and sell it?
and i'm sure all those editors are thinking only of the best interest of us all and not ratings or selling soap.
balderdash my friend!
joe

 

[RayPA]

In the case of those particular photographers, what was served other than to put money in the photographer's pocket as well as to feed their own ego and create fame for themselves ?

The work of Winogrand and Evans are not only invaluable record of the times, but monumental works of art in photography. In the case of Walker Evans' subway shots, his work is an advancement in the argument/discussion of portraiture. The hidden camera was integral to his concept and pursuit of real, honest portraiture, the type diameterically opposite of say Penn or Avedon (who came much later, I know). That concept was fairly unique for the time. He set out with this premise in mind when he tucked his camera into his coat (for anyone interested get the Evans book, The Hungry Eye—excellent and inspiring).

I understand your argument. However, when I look at the photo on the cover of the Winongrand book "The Man in the Crowd" (IIRC) and think that Winogrand would have had to chase down every person in that image to get permission, I groan, and thank someone/something for the fact that there is some practicality and commonsense that allows such images to be published.

I think Karen Nakamura at Photoethnography(.com) advocates asking permission intially, prior to snapping a picture, for her academic work. That's her approach. You should check out her site.

 

[gns]

Well Flamingo, you asked. But I agree with you that's not really the point. Whether it is good art or bad art or not art does not matter.

The bottom line is that I think we should all have the right to do what we please in public as long as it does not harm others. I guess that's the can of worms... defining harm to others,
but I don't think taking a picture of someone and publishing it in a book does any real harm to them. Now maybe you can come up with some special circumstances that I would concede on, but for the most part I don't see any problem.

 

[flamingo]

so, flamingo, this work that you do in tv journalism, is it volunteer work or do you get paid?

I did say, "joe", that I make my LIVING in the television news business, as I have for the past 23 years. What does that tell you ? For some reason I detect a very thinly veiled attempt at a character assassination here in your past 2 comments directed at me from you.

You wouldn't happen to be a registered Republican now, would you ?(double rimshot). Ohhh.. Geez I forgot. You're the moderator here, so you hold the power to cut me off. Forgive me.. Please.

 

[kiev4a]

Probably time to let this thread lie for awhile.

This should put to rest and claims that the Rangefinder forum is made up of folks who never disagree. Life would be pretty dull if nobody had an opinion.

 

[back alley]

flamingo,

i'd never cut you off for engaging in a reasonable discussion.
no assination attempt either, just really bad sarcasm.

i was talking about profiting from photography and how in art/news/hobby there can be profit made.

and living in canada i no longer belong to any american based political parties.
i can tell you this, i vote every election and watch as many talking heads as possible on both sides of the border.

i like this discussion, i just happen to think i'm right and you are wrong.
likely you feel the same in reverse.

joe

 

[flamingo]

flamingo,

i'd never cut you off for engaging in a reasonable discussion.
no assination attempt either, just really bad sarcasm.

i was talking about profiting from photography and how in art/news/hobby there can be profit made.

and living in canada i no longer belong to any american based political parties.
i can tell you this, i vote every election and watch as many talking heads as possible on both sides of the border.

i like this discussion, i just happen to think i'm right and you are wrong.
likely you feel the same in reverse.

joe

Well thanks, no hard feelings.
Yes it was interesting and I agree once again with Kiev4a that maybe we should let sleeping dogs lie. Fortunately, someone else shares my viewpoint !

 

[kiev4a]

Let's not get into dogs. I could give you soome real biased opinions on beagles and why they should be genetically modified so they can't live past age 10🙂

 

[back alley]

i love my border collie!

joe

 

[kiev4a]

Obviously off topic but the best dog we ever had was a border collie. Our daughters considered her a sister when they were growing up. No other dog we have had has come close -- especially the beagle!!

 

[back alley]

my only problem is it's kind of embarassing having a dog that's smarter than i am...

joe

 

[gns]

I too had a beagle (as a kid). That thing was always running off.
Now happy with a GSP.

 

[Little Prince]

You have a Border Collie? That's very 😎. A friend of mine has a German Shepherd that I'm on great terms with. Manhandle her all the time (for that fur) and she's totally cool with it. When I do get that scanner and fix that camera, I will make sure to post a pic.

 

[hinius]

In 18 months I've taken hundreds, if not thousands of photos of people in the street. And never once have I asked someone for permission (while I've had maybe half a dozen people ask me to take their photograph). With regard to Walker Evans in the subway, have the "chest thumpers" considered that he might have wanted to capture people in the moment, and avoid another one of those genteel, dull, posed and self-concious portraits that infest the world of photography as it is? That he might have, god forbid, wanted to take a good photograph?

I'm sorry if I come off sounding rather strong and indignant, but the act of asking anyone and everyone in public for permission before taking their photograph is at an artistic level, patently absurd. You can see some of my better photographs here , you can argue about the legailty, invasiveness and voyeuristic nature of them, but there's one thing I can almost certainly guarantee, they're a hell of a lot better than you could ever do. And if you end up living in a society where permission must be asked for and granted in every case, that's as good a reason as any to pick up sticks and move to a better country!

 

[aizan]

kiev4a:

I also believe you should have to get that permission before taking the photo.

flamingo:

Thank you Kiev4a. I agree with your view of things. Nitpicking the legalities aside, I believe that the decent, moral and ethical way to approach street shooting WITH THE INTENT TO PUBLISH OR PRINT FOR PERSONAL PROFIT is to get the subject's signed permission to use their image.

[...]

And that is, out of common courtesy to a fellow human, ask for their signed permission to use their photo in the future, AFTER the moment has been seized.

Although I don't see the need to get permission either way for artistic purposes, I'm glad that you have some appreciation for candid photography by asking for a release afterwards. What I don't get, then, is why you don't like Evan's "Many Are Called", for example. That's candid portraiture at its best, documenting people and their emotions without bias, the likes of which had never been seen before. His delaying publication for 20 years (to avoid being sued is an allegation I'm not sure about to begin with) means he preserved their anonymity and privacy for a good long while, doesn't it? And he didn't make any money until then. Slow bucks...very, very slow.

Don't forget his work for the FSA, either. He's always worked to reveal human nature and the landscape of American society.

I'd guess you much prefer the approach David Alan Harvey uses. Roughly paraphrasing, he creates a life somewhere, then photographs that life. Everyone he photographs is basically his friend, or part of the community he has temporarily joined. Just understand that it's not the only social, ethical way to photograph people.

 

[Pherdinand]

Hinius, you are some real good photos in the gallery you've linked.

If somebody's interested, also the in=public gallery is great (www.in-public.com) .

I don't think one has to ask for permission when doing street photography. Common sense should tell people when NOT to take a photo. It happened to me at a large gathering that I did not take a photo of a certain person in a certain environment because of the sign she made to me when i pointed the camera on her. Pity, for sure, but i don't like to push things.

 

[flamingo]

Something of interest I came across as a footnote to this long and tiring thread, regarding Winogrand's shooting style. Written by a former student of one of his workshops:
http://www.photogs.com/bwworld/xtol1.html