What do you do if you get caught?

[monkey]

Phew. Thanks people. <br><br>So, let me get this straight; if you're bigger than your subject shoot away, if not it becomes an ethical matter!

[ray .]

I think people's reaction to a camera is often indicative of how they view life in general. In my experience, it's rare, but some people are just inherently angry. I didn't even see these people when I first framed the area for a potential shot, I was looking at the light. Suddenly they appeared and the one guy decided to make himself the issue. The most offended people are usually just in the general area, you aren't even pointing the camera their way, but they think it's all about them for some reason.

[ray .]

forgot the photo...<div></div>

[ray .]

I walked across the street to this woman and didn't converse with her until after I'd started photographing. She was very gracious. Some people are just natural and friendly. Isn't that what we live for?<div></div>

[ray .]

I'm aware of people's feelings, and I'm aware of the social climate today. Children are great subjects for those of us who appreciate their special character in a perfectly innocent way. Still, I take note of parents who are in the area, and if they seem the uptight kind, I move somewhere else. I never continue photographing someone's kids if they ask me to stop (happened once that I recall).

 

What were my motivations here? Decide for yourself.<div></div>

[ray .]

btw Trevor, the "wannabe HCB" comment you should know better. Leave that BS to Jay. Why do you make pretty colored pictures of boats? Because you're a wannabe? Or because you're interested in photography and the things you photograph?

[nesrani]

Well said, Ray.

[boris_chan1]

Jay: "I am a very large very angry guy.........."

 

Jon: "You.........lard ass. I'll take your picture whether you like it or

not and you wont do ANYTHING about it. Got it?"

 

I've suggested this before, but surely after their latest outbursts

it's time to stage a celebrity death match between Jay and Jon.

They're clearly both ready to rumble. B and H are more than

willing to promote it - Henry Posner has even made it clear he'd

like to personally referee the fight. Don King is eager to manage

the winner, and reckons he'll have no trouble getting a

subsequent bout against whoever triumphs in this weekends

Super Heavyweight contest between Mike Tyson and Jim

Nachtwey.

 

Come on people, let's make this happen. If not for ourselves,

let's do it for the children...........

[lee_shively]

There were numerous famous and respected photographers mentioned here. One of their common traits appears to be compassion for humanity. Many of their photographs testify to this compassion, even when they poke gentle fun at some of our human activities. If they were asked to stop taking pictures by one of these subjects, what do you think they would do? Many here obviously lack this degree of compassion and respect for their subjects. I expect that's why some photographers get to be respected in the profession and others do not. It's not always about the picture.

[jean_.]

Would you mind having your photo taken? And would the photographers

attitude matter for your decision?

<br><br>

Only theoretical thoughts, since I'm neither a brad pitt look-a-like

nor a celebrity, so it's quite improbable that someone would jump in

front of me blinding with a stroboscoping flashfire, but anyway:

<br><br>

In general, I don't mind to much being photographed, although I

somehow dislike not being in control of my image. Ever walked out in

a rush, with loose tie, two different socks and planning to shave

later in the car? Would make a funny pic for sure, but I'd get quite

angry about it. And who knows, tomorrow you see yourself, totally

out of context, in one of those funny emails.

<br><br>

Another thing I (and probably most people) would not appreciate is

to be regarded as a disposable "object". If you photograph people

like you would photograph a brick or a dog, be prepared for negative

reactions. This applies also to exotic natives in distant countries.

<br><br>

Being sneaky will be the worst. What would you think if someone took

a photo, and then tries to sneak out?! What is this, a private

investigator, someone gathering information, and visibly afraid to

get caught?!

<br><br>

Is it so difficult to respect other people, they simply are no

flowers

or sunsets at anybody's disposal to fill a frame. Smile, nod, if

they don't want - respect it and walk away.

<br><br>

Law was mentioned. Laws are completely irrelevant in this case,

since what we are talking about is behavior and manners. You behave

bad, and will have nothing to complain about when you trigger

corresponding fedback. If you show respect, as anyone should, you

still may meet

one of those people always looking for a fight, but in general you

will have a much happier life.

<br><br>

Laws are no excuse for anything. In germany it was perfectly legal

to kill innocent people 60 years ago. Brought to court years later,

those lowlifes shrugged their shoulders and said "it was legal, and

I was entitled to do it" and got away, humiliating the victims a

second time. Just to give a very extreme example, I hope you get the

point.

[socke]

If I ever get to Miami, I think I'll cary both my streetshooters in case I shoot Jay :-)<br>

<img src="http://www.photo.net/bboard/image.tcl?bboard_upload_id=18254984"><br>

<hr>

And back on topic, it's easy with a digital, you get your picture and show it to your subject to get permission. In germany you have to get permission to publish a picture if your subject is not:<br>

<li>a subject of contemporary interest

<li>a spectator at an event of contemporary interest

<li>part of a bigger picture<br>

<br>

 

 

So if you took a picture of a scene with one person standing out, you'll be better off with a <i>modell release</i> type of permission to publish the picture. If you'll just show a print to friends, you're probably fine but I've got a release for this one:<br>

<img src="http://www.trenz.de/bilder/8/IMG_1181(2).JPG">

<br>

<br>

[jay_.]

<<I'll take your picture whether you like it or not and you won't do ANYTHING about it. >>

 

Jon, even that defenseless little bookseller wasn't afraid to shove your camera in your face...you remember, the one you bragged about kicking him in the face? If you saw a guy like me, or even someone you thought remotely capable of cleaning your clock, you'd sh*t yourself running away like the obvious little cowardly bully you are.

 

Unlike you I've never claimed to have attacked anyone in the course of civilian life, only that I would not hesitate to use force if necessary to protect my children from perceived harm. Would anyone here who is a parent not sacrifice whatever it took to do that?

[monkey]

Do Lugers come in a chrome finish?

[andrew_lee2]

<i>I think people's reaction to a camera is often indicative of how they view life in general. In my experience, it's rare, but some people are just inherently angry</i> <p>

Oh I wouldn't know about that Ray. I certainly wouldn't say that that applies to all people. At the risk of making this thread political (if it isn't already), which I don't want to do, I'll just vaguely volunteer that with some people---given their background, their place in society, or the way they have been viewed or treated by society---anger, suspiciousness, mistrust, any kind of hostility, latent or otherwise---may very well be anything if not entirely appropriate responses to the type of photographic encounters that you and I have out on the street.

[socke]

Matt, thats not a Luger! It's a "Pistole 08" made in 1918 by Deutsch Waffen Manufaktur.

I'd consider it a "user" in good condition. It's got some corosion marks, there are some scratches in the finish under the safety latch. All parts have matching serial numbers and it had a CLA three years ago.

 

I can get 6 out of 9 shots into the inner two rings of a duell target at 15 meters, not worse than with my FN Browning HP and much better than the Walter PPK.

 

<extremly big grin>

[ray .]

<i>may very well be

anything if not entirely appropriate responses</i><p>I imagine we share some agreement on this Andrew, though I think "understandable" might be a better word than "appropriate".

[bob haight]

I have gone out strictly street shooting only a few times. I take a 28 and hyperfocus and shoot holding the camera firmly from my chest or waist. This way no one knows I am releasing the camera. However, I have often included folks in my shots which is a tad different from street shooting as they seem to know they are not the primary subjects but just passing through a scene and don't seem to care about the camera. I don't think many people enjoy being photographed straight on by a stranger so he or she can use the photo for who knows what.

[leica ron]

Ray:

 

The Girl and her Shadow shot is awesome ...

[matt_m__toronto_]

i'm wondering if you're playing the devils advocate here. would you not allow ANYONE to photograph your children? ever? or would you make your decision to stop them (or not) based on your perception(idea) of who the shooter was as a person? (you can base this on appearance, personality, aura, whatever)

 

not sure about UK (trevor) but the USA is very paranoid and people are scared. maybe a bit side tracked, but it seems that everybody is on the lookout for a lawsuit these days. i'm very careful about shooting children as i'm aware of these social situation here in N. america. i don't like it one bit. we are getting to be a very hypocrytical people.

[mondiani]

As a photographer class means to take stuning photos. Shoot first then ask. If they say no, say fine and move away.<p>

 

If you ask first it will not be street photography but portraits.

[jay_.]

A separate definition of class just for photographers? What you've described is selfish ambition, and your attempt to conceal it with a preposterous semantic fiction only serves to prove exactly what you are pathetically trying to deny.

 

<<

jay and trevor...

matt m (toronto) , jul 29, 2004; 09:35 p.m.

i'm wondering if you're playing the devils advocate here. would you not allow ANYONE to photograph your children? ever?>>

 

I can't speak for Trevor. I am an advocate of my children's safety from the devils in our midst. I allow my children to be photographed in the sane, normal contexts that any responsible parent would... by other parents and local news media at school and extra-curricular activites, by a pro hired by the school, by a pro I hire, by other parents and kids at parties and events, just to name only a few. None of these are even remotely close to letting them be photographed by a stranger on the street, and only a fool or an idiot arguing for argument's sake alone would propose that it is.

[ray .]

You might not even know if they were photographed by a street photographer Jay.

[boris_chan1]

If I was a fishtank then I'd definitely respond with violence if Jay

attempted to take my picture in the street.........

[jsbc]

Jay, but what if people take photos of you say, in a rally. Would you beat the person up?

[nesrani]

"What you've described is selfish ambition, and your attempt to conceal it with a preposterous semantic fiction only serves to prove exactly what you are pathetically trying to deny. "

 

What he's described is the reality of taking a particular kind of picture which has proved its value over many decades and hopefully will continue to do so.

 

If you really believe that everyone with a camera is a "devil", then your reaction is understandable - although your presence on a photography list is mystifying. But as someone else pointed out above, most devils are in the family.