a "real" story...

A REAL CASE...

I read a lot of opinions on the subject of street

photography/candid shots/capturing on film people' tragedies etc...

and here is a real case :

I was commissionned to photograph homeless people by a

reporter that will write a story on -the situation of theatres in a

big city-

theatres that don't have a "home" and the consequences on the

artistic community etc...

I did accept a fee for this commission.

I started the assignment with the confidence that I would

know/feel when and when NOT to click. It is always more complicated

than that.

Unless people I would photograph could be asked, I generally

stayed away. I did exchange words and in most cases spoke to the

people that accepted to be shot. Replies like "...go ahead, I have

nothing to hide..."

I paid something sometimes, I gave cigarettes other times. I

even got asked by a homeless woman if I wanted a picture of her !

...for a fee of course. She posed, without knowing what I could be

doing with the photo, yet she gave me a fantastic "dignified" human

moment and the results are stunning !

When these people said YES to a picture (where I rarely show

anything but a part of their body and context), can it be considered

as a consent on their part ?

I thought that for any "faces" the editor would be interested

in showing, I would go back and try and find the person and tell them

that their picture could be published if they agree. But in the

homelessness situation, that could also be tricky...

The publication is an "art magazine" and yes, the reporter has

a good idea of the story wanting to make a parallel with the situation

of homelessness of people...and theatres...

But a person is not a theatre, yet symbols are sometimes, in

my humble view, useful to tell a story aren't they ?

It should be noted that I agreed to this knowing that the

people I have met on the street would be mentionned properly in

caption, not misrepresented. Since I spent time with most of them, I

know their name and know some of their specific predicament.

Now, I noticed that a lot of the discussions I read about this

"sticky" subject (street photography, shooting towards a published

photo...)and it seems to me that this sensitive issue came down to a

few things :

- if one was a photojournalist, a semi-amateur or whatever

else...or NOT

- if one would get financial gain with his/her pictures

- if one's personal conscience was at peace with the usage of

the photos...

Well, I am at peace with having met wonderful people that

spoke and shared of themselves with me (an that beyond the camera !).

But I am unsure about my legal responsability since this

article is not "news" per say...

I agree to my responsability as a human being, yet, when I send my

chosen pictures through the channels of internet to the editor I will

lose control over certain croppings and whatever specific directions I

may transmit to the editor, who knows if they will respect them. (?)

What are your thoughts on this ?

Many thanks ahead,

MC

Martine, sounds like you've been agonising over this issue. Good! it's a huge part of

being a concerned photographer. You're right to be nervous of what happens when

you send the pictures to the editor, especially if (as seems to be the case here) you do

not fully trust them. You own (unless you signed it away?) the copyright to your

photos, this allows you to be firm about the representation of your work in the

publication. Your responsibility, therefore (legally & morally), is to make sure your

subjects are not misrepresented in that article. If you feel they will be then you should

pull story. You are legally allowed to publish pictures taken of people in a public

place, so long as the pictures (and accompanying article) are not considered

defamatory. Also, you could not use the pictures for any kind of advertising without a

model release. It is good to see a photographer showing so much thought,

consideration and respect to a 'touchy' subject. Remember though, the reason it is

'touchy' is because homeless people are rarely in a position to fight the misuse of

thier own image. That's where you come in... Good luck with your project, I really

hope it goes well. Ivan

I would say as a rule of thumb. When taking the pictures you should agree thing there & then rather than leaving yourself in the situation of having to try & re-locate individuals. The best thing would be to pay a fee (however large or small as this gesture can make a difference legally) and then to havea simple model release form with you (keep a handful in your camera bag anyway, just in case). This way you would have been able to explain why you were taking them & agree useage there & then. Yourself & the subject are clear & happy on what's going on & you are personally covered by the release that you have kept from the encounter.

Secondly, publishing. Without knowing the details of your deal with the editor it's hard to comment. Unless you've signed over the rights to the images to a third party or directly to the magazine then they remain yours & are bound by whatever restrictions you place upon their useage. If your deal is such that you have been paid to provide a selection of your own work for publication then you own these images & you may insist that they are not cropped or manipulated in a way that would change the mood, perception of your original work. You may also ask to them to inform you of any changes that they wish to make for your approval before publication.

Alternatively, if you were paid to shoot these images to brief by the magazine & your contract states that the magazine retains the copyright then the images will not be yours & the IP rights become a contentious issue as whilst you actually created them, the initial brief or creative idea was not actually yours. The magazine can in effect do as they please with their images that they have paid you to produce on their behalf.

The best thing, if you konw which one of these applies to you, is to call the editor & clarify your retraints & the picture useage.

I sit on both sides of thhe fence as a photographer & a corporate buyer so I can see & understand the issues & needs of all parties here.

If you would like to discuss this further then please feel free to email me.

regards

Gavin

www.urban-landscapes.co.uk

I think this whole issue has caused paranoia more than clarification. Unless your photos are being used to promote a product or service, you were, in effect, acting as a photojournalist to provide photojournalistic photos to accompany a piece of journalism. Editorial use. Does that prevent anyone from suing you? Probably not, if you're in the USA. We sue each other for anything here. But, if taken to it's most absurd extent, ANY photo you take and show to someone could presumably be interpreted as promoting yourself.

I am not a lawyer. I take pictures and give opinions. Probably worth less than two cents. Both the pictures and opinions.