What is appropriate in street photography?

Discussion in 'Casual Photo Conversations' started by John Peri, Nov 24, 2017.

  1. paul ron

    paul ron NYC


    If people are so worried about having their asses posted on the internet, perhaps they should be more conscience of how they look when out in public?

    It just comes down to opinions vs law. You cant tell someone what they are doing is wrong just because it goes against your beliefs... you are entitled to an opinion but you cant push that on someone else as if it were the law. The secret is mind your own business and if you find something offending, turn away... not dictate as if you have every right.

    Again, what this fellow was doing is not illegal here in the USA. There is no right to privacy when you are out in public and that applies to all ages, sex, race, n creed.

    Its getting so stupid lately, now banning statues because it offend someone? Judging based on present day norms is just ethnocentric and unjust. Lets go after George Washington for being part of a militia and the signers of the constitution for having slaves when it was a way of life. We cant be so self centered and use peer censorship as if it were the law. Stop making people feel guilty for everything you may not agree with. That has noting to do with respect or ethics. If you want to walk around with your ass hanging out.. feel free to do so, but stop bitching when you see how stupid you look when it gets posted on the internet.

    BTW the bar example is a different story.. that's on private property, you need permission and thats at the owners discretion. Now if the photographer were shooting from the street into the bar... he is within his rights to do so.... all teh owner can do is shut the door. Now if a woman is topless in public, you have every right to photographer her. Neither one is doing anything illegal and within their rights. You may feel its wrong as her boy friend or husband but too dam bad, then put your shirt back on!

    Anytime you feel you are right, call the cops n let them decide who is wrong.

    Perhaps reading the law may clear this nonsense... not political correctness bibles and more opinions.

    .



    .
     
    Vincent Peri likes this.
  2. Political correctness - the way it's currently going throughout the Western world and which in part is responsible for a certain type of reaction in the context of the OP - will lead to fascism. Political correctness is something from the far left. I don't affiliate with the far left any more than I would want to affiliate with the far right, or the central left and right for that matter. That's the problem with not seeing the dangers of it, when one associates or identifies too much with the left/right ideology and therefore thinks everything it does and propagates must be ok, or if it's not ok, at least it's not dangerous in terms of the social consequences. Now that's dangerous.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2017
  3. And by social consequences I don't mean necessarily as something caused directly by either one ideology but also caused indirectly as an action and reaction from one ideology to the other.
     
  4. Just the girls?

    And if he also comes on non-teen nights, and posts those, too?

    Or comes in every night, takes pictures about equally over all people, and doesn't post them?

    Seems to me that you need context, and with just one example you don't have enough.
     
  5. Which poses an interesting question. What if the photos were artistically interesting and beautiful (placing the images in a different context could already make them more interesting), and showed a truth about their subjects and beyond? What would have changed in terms of their perceived morality? Does something - a photograph or a work of art for example - needs to be aesthetically beautiful in order for it to be morally just?

    Was Miroslav Tichy who photographed women unaware of his photographing them less of an " old creepy voyeur" because the pictures he made of mostly unsuspecting women resonate more on an aesthetic level? What's the connection between morality and beauty if there is any and can something that's beautiful be (perceived as) immoral, or, can something that's not inherently beautiful be (perceived as) moral...

    LINK

    LINK

    LINK

    LINK

    LINK

    LINK
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2017
  6. If the pictures in the above links (which I think are great) didn't had a poetic pictorial sensibility about them and were taken straight from a digital camera, the reaction to them wouldn't be all that different than some of the reactions to the pictures discussed in the OP. But why? The intentions might be the same in the sense that the straight from the camera non-pictorial approach can also be an aesthetic, precisely because it foregoes the sentimental and poetic, which is also a kind of poetry, a way of seeing and being, either as the maker or as the viewer of the images.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2017
  7. I don't see this a left/right issue at all. You could say that feminists don't like women being objectified this way, therefore the left is against it. Or you could say that conservative people judge any perceived sexual deviancy more harshly so they'd be against it. Both left and right want to control other people's behavior while still being able to do the stuff they think is OK. They just don't agree on which behaviors should be controlled and which not.

    To be honest in this case it seems like you're using the term fascism because of its bad connotation rather than something that really fits. Fascism is usually associated with the far right and communism with the far left, but to me it's almost a circle. The far left and far right have a lot in common.

    And no, I don't see how having an opinion about how people should conduct themselves puts you on a path to fascism.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2017
  8. Just curious, who is dictating anything? I'm not.

    And was the original question about what was legal or what was appropriate? I don't think there's any legal problem with what he's doing and I never said there was. One can do lots of legal things that are still rude, creepy, and inappropriate.
     
  9. Hamster, or if you prefer Gerbil Wheel discussion. Pretty much everything has been said, all positions occupied.
    Going nowhere IMO.
     
  10. Leaving the analogies out for a minute, I did want to address this last point. Of course this is about morals. If you're asking about what's appropriate behavior, which the OP did, at some point that goes back to morals and values. Politics? I think that has been dragged to the discussion in manor that doesn't really fit. Pick a right leaning conservative Dad and place him on the beach watching this guy take pictures of his 15 year old daughter. Is he less likely to have words with this guy or more likely than a left leaning Dad?

    Don't think it matters.
     
  11. You don't see it in this thread? Women are reduced to a group identity, a collective, that needs to be spoken for and protected. The self-righteous moralists criticize exactly that which they're guilty of themselves, only from the other direction. And not all feminists agree with the "women are objectified" or "men are oppressors" meme, these are usually the feminists who can actually think critically beyond such superficial stereotypes.
     
  12. It's by the pushing of their respective ideologies that will give the justification to either one to come out of the shadows. These things don't happen in a vacuum. Either way what you end up with is an authoritarian nightmare that presents itself as the solution.
     
  13. I understand the point you're trying to make, and that you are trying really hard to say that by labeling this activity as bad we are oppressing women, - I just think it's quite a stretch.

    I don't know how you can talk about the appropriateness of this behavior in the general sense without reducing it to groups. Those groups being photographers and subjects, women and men, - and teenage girls.

    Besides, not only laws, but norms of behavior are developed for exactly the purpose of protecting groups, - of all sorts. You may not like it, but there are pragmatic and sound reasons for why that's the case.
     
  14. E
    Every society has norms of behavior. Having an opinion about how people should act and even creating laws doesn't make anyone a fascist anymore than deciding you don't want laws for every little thing makes you an anarchist.
     
  15. I guess as dads they will be equally likely to have words, regardless if they're left or right and neither would be wrong. Which still doesn't mean that I think a negative reaction to the photos and the taking of the photos as discussed in this thread is valid from a moral and/or political perspective, even - and perhaps especially so - if it's a reaction that's borne from good intentions towards the subjects involved.
     
  16. Yes, when 'people' comes down to the individual and to the individual's moral responsibility. When it becomes all about collectives and groups and of how group A should behave to group B and how both group A and B should behave to group C, etc...then it becomes problematic and polarized and turns into extremism on either side.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2017
  17. That's not what I'm saying. It's more nuanced than that. I'm saying that it isn't necessarily any less oppressive, to both genders.
     
  18. The problem with that is that the same argument can be made by and for all groups then, including the ones on both the extreme right and left that you really don't want to give such "pragmatic" power to. The group by necessity forsakes the individual in favor of its dogma and moral responsibility, norms of behavior, begins and ends with the individual.
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2017
  19. As for the pictures in the links above, they look like they are from years ago.

    Maybe they are new, and just make to look old, but I think for actual old pictures, many people will treat them differently.

    Things were different years ago, or we imagine that they were. We don't use the standards of today on them.

    I don't know if that is good or bad, though.
     
  20. He photographed with self-made cameras and lenses and the pictures were intentionally printed with defects.

    "Tichy has photographed people in the park and on the balconies of the tower blocks all around. that requires a powerful telescopic lens with a focal length of between 300 and 500 mm. He made one himself out of materials he found lying around."

    http://www.americansuburbx.com/2010/04/theory-miroslav-tichy-tarzan-retired.html
     

Share This Page