Another Confrontation Anecdote - comments appreciated

I am a novice in street photography. Today, while I was walking downtown with

my camera I stopped on the sidewalk and photographed a middle-aged female

jogger as she was passing by in the opposite direction. She came to a stop a

few feet after passing me and said I had no right to take photos of her. I

replied that I did have the right to take photos of her as she was in a public

place and explained that what I was doing was perfectly legal. She asked me

what the photos were for. I told her, “nothing--it's just documentary

photography.” She continued on to say that her husband was a “cop” (her

wording), insinuating a threat, I assume. She asked for my name. I told her

my first name and suggested that she should tell her husband and have him look

into the legality of my photographing her. She did not respond to this. I

added that if she did not like my photographing her I would not take any

further photos. She then asked for my last name. I told her my last name and

spelled it out to her. She continued with an ultimatum in a nervous, shaken

voice, “don’t take pictures of me!” repeated it once or twice more, turned

around, and continued on her jog. I did not take any more photos of her and

continued on my way in the opposite direction, feeling a bit disheartened by

the experience.

<br><br>

I know I was not legally obligated to tell her what the photos were for or what

my name was, but I was trying to make it apparent that I had no ill

intentions. Where did I go wrong and how might situations like this be avoided

while taking candid photos in public places? Should I set my 50mm aside and

purchase a big telephoto lens or should I just work on my approach?

<br><br>

Notes: I was using a Nikon D50 with a neck strap and a 50mm lens attached. It

was about 9AM, Sunday.

"Where did I go wrong" -- taking a picture of a total stranger doing nothing particularly interesting. Not illegal, as you say, but perceived by some as odd and suspicious.

 

"How might situations like this be avoided..." -- Find another aspect of photography pother than 'street'. Alternatively, refine your pitch when you are confronted by the next unwilling subject.

 

Your willingness to give her your name and promise not to take any further photographs was a very decent thing to do.

Lesson #1: Never, ever take pictures of females when they feel ugly. Which is, like 95% of the time. Even if they're beautuful, they're still very fragile. If they're ugly, fuggedaboudit.

 

Lesson #2: Don't give your personal details to people you don't know.

 

Lesson #3: Shit happens.

Was the picture really worth the distress it caused to both parties? From your description her experience with you has left her clearly shaken.

 

I'd have apologized. As you were shooting digital you should have showed her the shot on the back of the screen, if she liked it offer to forward her a print. If she didn't like it then show her clearly that you have deleted the file. Was the picture really worth the trouble for you? I'm sure there are plenty more models on the street for your jogger project.

 

Everyone has a right to object to their picture being taken - even if it's a legal pastime. Life's just to short to get worked up with those that have an objection in being an object of your passion. Move on...

<i>said I had no right to take photos of her. I replied that I did have the right to take photos

of her as she was in a public </i><p>

Never respond with an argumentative assertion. She was jogging, not preparing for an

argument. Tell her you will erase the image if she likes, or skip the frame. Apologize, give

your name, move on and stop being such a friggin embarrasement to the rest of us.<p>

I'd have told her

 

a.) My name is John Doe"

 

b.) "they aren't your pictures , they're mine" (an old Garry Winogrand line).

 

c.) Let her watch me delete them. There are other fish in the sea.

<p>Did you get her name? You did nothing wrong and you had every right to take the

photos and walk on. If she persisted, she's violating the law, and if as she says her

husband is a cop, then say, "Ok, who is he?", and then say, "Have you asked him about the

laws governing photography?" You don't have to give a reason other than personal use. I

think I would have simply said have a nice day and then took some more photographs and

walked on. These situations can't be avoided, some people have the wrong idea of right to

privacy in public spaces.

 

<p>And I've set my 300mm f2.8 lens on the tripod on sidewalks and no one has bothered

me, including in front of a federal court house. It's how I got <a href="http://

www.wsrphoto.com/about.html">this photo</a> with a security guard watching.

Scott, would you have argued with her? Look, the lady was running! She's pumped, in her

space and you want to argue with her? That's just silly.

 

Such a thing won't go to court. If you whined to a cop that she was insisting upon

something that wasn't "legal", he would probably ID you, check you for wants and warrants

and then just walk away. He has sensibility and a life, too.

 

You people who think you are going to inform a member of the public right then and there

are the problem. You are all ego. No smarts. And you mess it up for the rest of us.

Ask her how long has she's been working out.

Judging from some of the keyboard flexing posts here, we can tell who makes good pictures

of people in the environment and those who should stick to photographing mountains,

flowers and other postcard material - it doesn't talk back... but it would if it could, and it

would probably b*ch slap ya silly.

Shooting people is not that difficult - just be direct. Sneak around and/or act guilty like

you've been "caught," and you'll have problems.

Joggers are usually a boring bunch anyway...don't sweat it.

And what is wrong, Pico, with photographing mountains, flowers and other postcard material? ;)

Thank you all for the feedback.

 

Pico, I agree that I should not have been so argumentative. Thanks for the advice.

 

Guy, of course it was not worth it (especially since the photo turned out to be nothing special), but I had no idea she would object so strongly to being photographed.

Justin, you've gotten some static on whether the picture was 'worth it' (it being, variously, the hassle for you, the emotional distress for the subject, &c.). Judging from your description of the scene, it would have been hard to know ahead of time that your pressing a button (the shutter release) would have triggered major emotional distress in your passerby subject.

 

Moreover, though it may or may not have ended up as a banal shot (certainly you might have captured some compelling emotion if you shot another during the discussion!), but anyone who has ever wasted frame one should understand that not every shot is a keeper, and that by such a criterion most of us should be fraught with contrition for >90% of our button-pressings.

 

Overall, I think you handled the situation graciously, and the jogger may have actually learned something (namely, that public photography is legal). Maybe she'll even think more deeply on how any street photographs (in coffee-table books &c.) that she enjoys were actually made. And, though there may be no way to slice such an all-too-familiar occasion into a really pleasant one, hopefully you'll get more comfortable in both avoiding and enduring such confrontations.

I empathise and sympathise. I have been shooting more and more street photographs and have faced some extremely aggressive reactions, even though I try to stay invisible. (Paris has been the worst place for this so far, incidentally.) I've talked it all through with a number of close friends - some who thinking I am stealing souls and some who love the way I present what I see of the world to them - and I still am not entirely sure how I feel about it all.

 

A good zoom/telephoto helps - of course, and having a lot of time so you can wait until your subject is not looking and I am working on a vague "Oh, I am just going to point my camera at everything within 180 degrees for the next ten minutes" look when I have been spotted. I pretend to be trying to capture everything I can see and then the original victim feels less convinced that they have been singled out.

 

I took a series of this guy in a dodgy part of town and I was shaking so much because I thought he had seen me - this was the only one passable shot:

http://www.helen.phanfare.com/show/external/187754/242590/11050135/file.jpg

 

 

Is it all worth it? I dunno but I am hooked.

Do SP long enough and it's bound to happen, so congrats to you Justin. The first time is always the most difficult, but at least now you have some experience and your confidence should grow as a result of this, your (un)official initiation. You could have been a smart-ass and asked her if she raises the same stink with her bank, the stores she shops in and even perhaps the intersections she is currently jogging across but it probably wouldn't have helped any.

Also, at risk of fanning the flames here, I think ad hominems like 'a friggin embarrassment'/'all ego'/'no smarts' are more hostile and needlessly argumentative than it is to tell a misinformed stranger that public photography is legal.

 

At any rate, I dispute the claim that doing the latter tends to 'mess it up for the rest of us' -- on the contrary, I think calmly engaging with people to briefly chat about the benign intent, art-historical precedent, personal passion, and, yes, legality of taking pictures in public can, in the long run, reduce the frequency of such angry confrontations. In such cases, people often leave with a better understanding of why the erstwhile blank slate behind the lens is doing what they're doing, and may be less suspicious next time.

That's a good shot Helen, I like it. For doing shots like this where your subject is still, nothing beats a camera with a waist level finder. Anytime one brings a camera to their face it's a dead give away. A WLF though allows one to craddle the camera in their lap as they sit across from others. I spent the better part of last summer on Santa Monicas 3rd Street Promade doing just that and not once did anyone say anything even as they watched me looking down into the viewfinder as I focused. Oh wait, I take that back...one man and his wife said to me as I got up after taking a few pics of them "Nice camera".

 

Come to think of it, the only time I've had someone object to my presence was the lady on the subway who I wrote here about last year. Oddly enough I wasn't even pointing my camera at her, she was sitting at the other end of the car! Go figure.

 

So anyways, look into a waist level finder for your camera. Otherwise medium format gear is dirt cheap these days and a nice TLR might make getting in close easier.<div></div>

<And what is wrong, Pico, with photographing mountains, flowers and other postcard

material? ;)>

 

Nothing, cept their boring...just look at Ansel Adams work!:)

<i>Also, at risk of fanning the flames here, I think ad hominems like 'a friggin embarrassment'/'all ego'/'no smarts' are more hostile and needlessly argumentative than it is to tell a misinformed stranger that public photography is legal.</i><p>

My, what a nice speech. Sir, you are not going to convert a person who is pumped, prejudiced and aggressive about his/her feeling about being photographed. It's not about logic. It's about feeling. Sitting at a keyboard in a relaxed atmosphere is detached, an unrealistic platform for preaching, not for practicing street diplomacy. If you can inform and convert someone in such a case, get it on tape and I guarantee you that there is a place in door-to-door vacuum cleaner sales in your future.<p>

Be kind, brief and apologetic and move on.<p>

If your feelings are hurt here, then imagine being in the persons place in real life... as I say, pumped.<p>

Justin - no problem. The ability did not come to me naturally, and frankly I've heard it all and am rather unimpressed with indignant emotions, but still sensitive. And I'm too old to get angry. I just get tired. :)

Street photography is like anything else involving interaction with other people- there's

usually a risk involved on some level. That's part of what makes it fun, and it can be a rush.

More often than not, the greater the risk, the bigger the reward. Unless there is a child

involved, people who react like she did have issues. As long as you're in one piece, it's easy

to forget things enough to go for it next time.

 

Then again, street photography isn't for everyone. You have to be motivated and confident

to some degree about what you're doing.

You kinda have to thicken your skin if you're going to do street. People will get upset.

They'll call you names. You can either deal with it or you can't. It gets easier, but it doesn't

get easy.

 

Don't give your full name to anyone who isn't a real cop. You can never tell when some

psycho is going to decide to "do something" about the "insult" they've received. If her

husband really is a cop that makes her especially dangerous. Even good departments have

instances of officers using their position to settle personal scores.

Roger's right. I read sometime ago that there is always a small percentage of the population that are downright insane but are not under any treatment or supervision. I'm not talking run of the mill common stuff like phobias but hardcore mental issues like psychosis. I can't recall the exact number but even if it's only like 1% or 2% look back at the last 100 images you took of strangers.

Odds are good that one or two of those people might be better off weaving baskets in a padded room someplace.

 

Nevertheless, most advice here is sound. If despite your best efforts a situation looks like it's escalating just bail outta there. No point in suffering for ones art at the hands of some lunitic whose soul you just stole.

>Notes: I was using a Nikon D50 with a neck strap and a 50mm lens attached. It was about 9AM, Sunday.

 

That's your problem then. If you'd been using a Canon it would have been fine.