Consent in Street Photography

[rodeo_joe1]

The above was taken years ago, and I think just as the bus driver 'clocked' me taking a picture. He was probably saying something like "Aye, aye, we're on Candid Camera" to the conductor.

 

There was no open objection to my taking the picture, and now it's acquired some historical value in showing a small slice of life back in 1968.

[samstevens]

I think that a large degree of discretion and moral self-questioning should be used by photographers.

 

Such considerations as: Will the 'publication' (in a gallery, online or such) cause embarrassment or ridicule to fall on your subject? Will it discredit or financially harm your subject in any way?

It sounds simple enough but it may not be that easy.

 

Take Arbus. Many people, some very thoughtful, intelligent people, think Arbus was ridiculing many of her subjects. Many equally caring and intelligent people think Arbus was not ridiculing her subjects.

 

And take the woman in the photo in the article. Some think the photo ridicules her. Others do not.

 

The problem with rules of morality is that they have to be interpreted by widely divergent sensibilities and understandings. A rule like “don’t ridicule” sounds good in theory but, in practice, some people are going to see ridicule where others don’t.

 

The laws of speech and expression are intentionally and vitally liberal. While each of us is entitled to use whatever degree of discretion we’re comfortable with, the law doesn’t require it. And that’s as it should be. The fringe cases can be indiscreet and provocative, and they have a place in art, in photography, and in life. It’s where disagreements and arguments ensue. While discretion may protect us from some things, it will stifle others. It’s not always warranted or desirable.

 

“I cannot and do not live in the world of discretion, not as a writer, anyway. I would prefer to, I assure you - it would make life easier. But discretion is, unfortunately, not for novelists.” —Philip Roth

[Robin Smith]

I generally don’t ask permission, I take my chances, but I’m not obnoxious. I’m not looking for a fight. I’ve had a few object. One woman told me to contact her agent if I wanted to take a photo of her skateboarding in a public park. I still have it. It was a completely ridiculous suggestion in this case. I do sometimes get asked why I take the shot. I say I’m a photographer and like to take street images. Not been a problem yet. It’s much easier now, since everyone is snapping with phones. I do avoid taking people who I feel will object. Most times you can sense it. About a third are suspicious, a third are baffled as why people take photos like this at all, and the remaining third either don’t care at all or even like it.

[samstevens]

and the remaining third either don’t care at all or even like it.

Ahh, yes, the hams and exhibitionists are out there ...

 

[inoneeye]

^ a good variety of reactions…. love the child’s expression!

[AlanKlein]

Good article for serious street photographers. Everyone that does street work has to set their own limits as to what is acceptable and be willing to take a little heat if some viewers get negative. I think a good street shot should evoke some emotion in the viewer, positive or negative.

I agree that street shots that evoke no emotion or controversy have little point. Taking a shot of a bunch of people standing at a crosswalk is boring. Shooting the same picture with one guy's hand on the butt of another, even if embarrassing to someone, is what street photography is all about.

Snacktime by Alan Klein, on Flickr

[William Michael]

love the child’s expression

The child steals the moment: still rolling on the floor laughing at that expression.

 

WW

[William Michael]

Continuing the child theme . . .

 

I just came across an interesting article on street photography regarding permission.

 

Sometimes it can difficult to get permission, firstly it might be ill advised to wake the Subjects and secondly, the 'permission givers' might be absent . . .

 

 

WW

[royall_berndt]

I have noticed that, in a good number of my street shots involving people, there is a male person in the background giving me a nasty look. Usually he is a middle school or high school student. Anyone else seen this or able to explain this?

[royall_berndt]

I don't want to stand on the street arguing the law with someone, just delete.

 

I agree with you on this. If anyone is upset enough to confront me, I delete the shot as they watch. If I decide later that I simply must have the shot, I can restore it using free software.

 

I once shot a picture of a lady's dog. She came over and asked if I were shooting this for an advertisement!

[inoneeye]

Was it just the dogs tail end? Edited November 27, 2021 by inoneeye

[royall_berndt]

I have noticed that, in a good number of my street shots involving people, there is a male person in the background giving me a nasty look. Usually he is a middle school or high school student. Anyone else seen this or able to explain this?

 

[royall_berndt]

Was it just the dogs tail end?

 

No, I am into chickens, not dogs.

[samstevens]

there is a male person in the background giving me a nasty look. Anyone ... able to explain this?

It's self explanatory. They’re onto you.

[httpwww.photo.netbarry]

I liked the article. I think she ran down the issues quite well. I like her photography, and the photo that prompted her article I think is super good. I mean its so candid, captures such a gentle moment and is so well organized like a renascence painting, like a Pieta with 3 persons.

Also, I've been shooting long enough to get busted many times :)

[inoneeye]

The background? I assume it was cropped, What were you shooting?

Edited November 27, 2021 by inoneeye

[William Michael]

I have noticed that, in a good number of my street shots involving people, there is a male person in the background giving me a nasty look. Usually he is a middle school or high school student. Anyone else seen this or able to explain this?

 

I make no assumption the image was cropped. This image was the one cited and it was provided as an example.

 

My observation of this image is the fellow in the brown sweatshirt is bemused as to why you would be taking a photo of the woman's back.

 

The image's story could be easily interpreted as this fellow in brown being the Main Subject, and the Photographer is the (unseen) Secondary Subject. If there were to be a caption, then a suitable one would be a dialogue from Main Subject to the Secondary Subject "What is this guy up to?"

 

I expect that most folk would understand that dialogue: probably most people would think the same dialogue themselves, if they observed a male Photographer making one, or especially series photos, only of the back sides of women.

 

Addressing your question directly - you could sort your street images into two sets.

 

One set where you note "a male person in the background giving me a nasty look". The other set where there is no such observation. Then you could count, in each set, how many photos there are of the backsides of women.

 

Doing that, at the least, will be the beginning of one quantifiable experiment on the road to attaining the explanation you seek.

 

WW

Edited November 27, 2021 by William Michael

[inoneeye]

Notice how many people are watching Sam take his photo. People in the background often are checking on a street shooter.

 

"I make no assumption the image was cropped." right. But based on unusual format dimensions, context and past format postings....

[William Michael]

Notice how many people are watching Sam take his photo. People in the background often are checking on a street shooter.

 

Agree. However in samstevens' image it is difficult to nail down a "male person giving [sam] nasty looks". Similarly, in the image I posted, the woman, OoF background extreme camera right, was looking at me for a moment; the man didn't, the boy didn''t either. I do not recall a "nasty look" what I do recall is when the woman got closer to the kids, she giggled. My take was she saw humour, as did I, and she understood why I wanted to capture that humour.

 

Similarly in samstevens' image, I see a few people looking toward the Photographer; my take is that they are simply checking out the scene, of which samstevens was part, but not necessarily singling out samstevens, and certainly I cannot depict "a nasty look".

 

My point being, royall_berndt is specifically concerned about "nasty looks" that he receives from "male persons", "a good number of times" , when he is shooting street photography: with that in mind, my suggestion stands as one way that he might reach his answer.

 

"I make no assumption the image was cropped." right. But based on unusual format dimensions, context and past format postings....

 

If the image was cropped, then perhaps royall_berndt will post the whole frame. And doing so, he might also answer your question "What were you shooting?"

Additionally, if the image was cropped and then used as an example, then that totally defeats the purpose of asking the question and seeking assistance to find out why so many people give this Photographer so many "nasty looks".

 

For that question to be addressed, it behoves the questioner to post the whole image, (if it was cropped).

WW

Edited November 27, 2021 by William Michael

[rodeo_joe1]

The laws of speech and expression are intentionally and vitally liberal.

(Snip)

“I cannot and do not live in the world of discretion, not as a writer, anyway. I would prefer to, I assure you - it would make life easier. But discretion is, unfortunately, not for novelists.” —Philip Roth

Unfortunately, I perceive a trend for 'liberalism' to have become (not so passively) aggressive, and the "you can't say that!" brigade are eroding the right to free speech and perverting language at an increasing rate.

 

For example the simple word 'gender' which, with a tiny few exceptions, was once accepted to be fixed at birth, has become confused with sexual-preference and lifestyle-choice. Sorry, but I simply refuse to accept that there are more than 3 genders. Dress, behave and copulate in whatever fashion you wish, but don't expect other people to create a special name and category for what you choose to do. And don't berate otherwise Liberal people for not going along with that Orwellian Newspeak. Policing language is effectively policing thought - and we know from history where that leads.

Edited November 27, 2021 by rodeo_joe|1

[samstevens]

Yes. And the word awful once meant inspiring wonder. Language, and culture, evolve. That’s hard for some people, welcome by others.

 

[httpwww.photo.netbarry]

"Dress, behave and copulate in whatever fashion you wish, but don't expect other people to create a special name and category for what you choose to do."

 

We had the gender naming discussion at TG dinner as one of the guests' daughter had gone trans and is now a "they" or a "them". One thing I would say is that other people didn't create the new pronoun's trans people use. These folks chose the name for themselves. Personally I think it's a clumsy locution for a pronoun, but it's their choice on what they want to be called. I know the language gets a little tortured, but think of it as if someone insisted on calling you a girl in conversation, you might not like it.

 

I had, but couldn't find a photograph of this trans person I took a year later with the beard more fully grown in and a mustache I think.

 

[Allen Herbert]

"The 1 out of 100 of yours that might not, though put in the context of your body of work, I wouldn't necessarily think you innocent of sexualizing her as you do the other young women you photograph" Sam

 

Harsh statement, Sam. I do not think this photo was sexually explicative... Indeed, one could come to a conclusion, that many of your set up photos are sexually explicate of gay folk. Particularly, looking at your past portfolios. The above photo?

 

Me, I prefer pure candid photos; there's for me, a honesty of the moment...a special capture.

 

[Allen Herbert]

[Allen Herbert]

Sam, your past portfolio of folks dicks, just hanging there.

 

Sort of making me feel somewhat lesser, looking at the size of them;)))

 

I've had feelings of inadequacy since.

Edited November 27, 2021 by Allen Herbert