Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Picture Taking in the Neighborhood: Does it meet community standards.
#1
You should know that when I took this picture, a "concerned citizen" called the police on me. They banged on my door and demanded to know why I was taking pictures.

[Image: funinsunSM.jpg]
Nikon D3100 with Tokina 28-70mm f3.5, (I like to use a Vivitar .43x aux on the 28-70mm Tokina), Nikkor 10.5 mm fisheye, Quanteray 70-300mm f4.5, ProOptic 500 mm f6.3 mirror lens. http://donschaefferphoto.blogspot.com/
Reply

#2
I it likely because some people have no happiness in their life and are always looking for conflict.
Sit, stay, ok, hold it! Awww, no drooling! :O
My flickr images
Reply
#3
Wow... hope they didnt' cause you trouble... what did the cops say?
Reply
#4
They were ok. They wanted me to open the door so they could see "who I am." I told them it was my hobby. They confirmed that by looking at the walls of my living room.

I just wonder what would have happened had I been in my underwear and had no photos on the wall.

--Don
Nikon D3100 with Tokina 28-70mm f3.5, (I like to use a Vivitar .43x aux on the 28-70mm Tokina), Nikkor 10.5 mm fisheye, Quanteray 70-300mm f4.5, ProOptic 500 mm f6.3 mirror lens. http://donschaefferphoto.blogspot.com/
Reply
#5
Don Schaeffer Wrote:They banged on my door and demanded to know why I was taking pictures.

Did you tell them that they were trespassing?

I really like the treatment of the photo. (Not so fond of the treatment of the photog.) I hope this joins the prints in your living room.
matthewpiers.com • @matthewpiers | robertsonphoto.blogspot.com | @thewsreviews • thewsreviews.com
Reply
#6
Thanks Matt. You may know that I am a troublemaker. A year or so ago I was nearly thrown off a city bus for taking pictures of passengers. But I reformed. People are deathly afraid of cameras.
Nikon D3100 with Tokina 28-70mm f3.5, (I like to use a Vivitar .43x aux on the 28-70mm Tokina), Nikkor 10.5 mm fisheye, Quanteray 70-300mm f4.5, ProOptic 500 mm f6.3 mirror lens. http://donschaefferphoto.blogspot.com/
Reply

#7
Well Don,

Judging by the photo, I expect it was because you were taking pictures close to a park. With a park there are kids, and generally people are VERY leary of "men without kids" taking pictures, especially smaller cameras that look concealing. Unless you look like a photographer (and this generally means big bulky cameras with unhidden gear etc etc) with a photographers purpose, people are bound to question it. Its unfortunate that a few scum of the earth deadbeats (molesters etc) in society have created a mistrustful atmosphere when it comes to our kids and the areas they play in.

Can't say I wouldn't wonder what you were doing as well and likely have kept a pretty close eye on what you were doing and where you were at the time.
Nos an modica tantum nostri somnium
"We are limited only by our imagination"
Reply
#8
The two days I spent shooting schools for the commercial my pictures are in I was twice stopped and asked what I was doing, and that was with the schools closed for the summer! Once by a school caretaker and anothertime by a passing police car.

I guess teh fact the car I was driving has a year and banner across the windshield, and a large price sticker in the side rear window, and I was wearing a poloshirt with Honda North on it backed up my story LOL.

Most of the local schools won't even let parents take pictures at baseball and football games.
Reply
#9
jericho Wrote:<snip>

With a park there are kids, and generally people are VERY leary of "men without kids" taking pictures, especially smaller cameras that look concealing. Unless you look like a photographer (and this generally means big bulky cameras with unhidden gear etc etc) with a photographers purpose, people are bound to question it. Its unfortunate that a few scum of the earth deadbeats (molesters etc) in society have created a mistrustful atmosphere when it comes to our kids and the areas they play in.

<snip>

This is something we are very careful about... We always try not to take pictures of kids directly... sometimes we get a picture of the kid because they come to our way, and you simply can't avoid that, but we don't take picture in parks or play ground areas... We haven't got any problem until now... because when the kids arrive to the place we are taking picture we normally leave the area...

I have a contact in flickr, he is a teacher working in educational programs around the world... He was working for a long time in China but few months ago he was moved to India... He explains that in China people is a bit cautious about having their photo taken... while in India people actually come up to you and ask you to take a picture of them...

One photographer commented that once a family of Turks asked him to take their picture on Akdamar island in the middle of lake Van. He did a lovely portrait, but he was a bit perplexed as they didn't ask him to send them a copy. Simply having their photo taken was thrill enough for them...

It seems to me... that the more a country is in contact with modernity and it is aware of what sick people can do with kid pictures, the more mistrustful it is...
A work of art which did not begin in emotion is not art.
Paul Cezanne
Reply
#10
mmmm, interesting.
I find it surprising that they got upset even though you weren't even pointing the camera at kids.
At the photography class I'm doing, he told us specifically not to take photos of kids (I assume that if I take in ones of my OWN kid that it should be okay) but he also told us how to take photos of people on the street without being caught *LOL*
It is so sad that this is even an issue for us :x
Canon 350D with Speedlight 580EX flash
EFS 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 II, EF 90-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM, EF 50mm f/1.8

http://www.inspired-images.com.au
Reply
#11
Schellamo Wrote:<snip>
he also told us how to take photos of people on the street without being caught *LOL*
<snip>

Would you share the tip? Smile
A work of art which did not begin in emotion is not art.
Paul Cezanne
Reply

#12
My camera may have started out small but it looks pretty big with my black lens extension, my viewing hood and my big objective lens. I live catty corner to the school. I am no stranger. My kids went to that school. I am often seen wandering through the neighborhood taking photos. Why would the police spend their time getting to see what I looked like. It looks like witch hunt to me. I can't bear a tightened restriction of my dwindling freedom to do as I like.

We have talked about irrational security concerns that limit the rights of photographers. This tops it off for me.

Unfortunately I have to swallow it, as we all do.

--Don
Nikon D3100 with Tokina 28-70mm f3.5, (I like to use a Vivitar .43x aux on the 28-70mm Tokina), Nikkor 10.5 mm fisheye, Quanteray 70-300mm f4.5, ProOptic 500 mm f6.3 mirror lens. http://donschaefferphoto.blogspot.com/
Reply
#13
jericho Wrote:Judging by the photo, I expect it was because you were taking pictures close to a park. With a park there are kids, and generally people are VERY leary of "men without kids" taking pictures, especially smaller cameras that look concealing. [...] Its unfortunate that a few scum of the earth deadbeats (molesters etc) in society have created a mistrustful atmosphere when it comes to our kids and the areas they play in.


The park near me used to have a sign reading "No adults without children allowed". It was hung just below the No Trespassing sign, which referenced the appropriate by-law. The sign was removed -- presumably because it was illegal, hopefully because the city was sued, but almost certainly not because it was redundant. (No Trespassing covers any use of the property that the police or owner doesn't like.)

I'm not arguing with you, Jericho. It's the world at large that frustrates me.

I'm arguing with the woman I work with who frequently tells me that she's glad she doesn't live in Toronto, because she doesn't feel the need to watch her daughter in the small town she lives in. The danger to children isn't some unknown boogyman, it's bad parents who spend all of their effort worrying about some unknown boogyman.

Most children are abused by people that are known to them and/or THEIR PARENTS trust.
http://nccafv.org/child.htm
http://www.nbc6.net/family/4389948/detail.html
http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/~jjf/aaas04/LyonAAAS.pdf

I'm seriously bothered by laws and enforcement that are specifically used to target People We Don't Like. I'm bothered no matter who those people may be -- photographers or otherwise.
matthewpiers.com • @matthewpiers | robertsonphoto.blogspot.com | @thewsreviews • thewsreviews.com
Reply
#14
I'm sure it's not targeted at you personally, Don , but rather at the sick individuals who give us all a bad name..

But everyone's right - we just have to be more aware when taking photos around kids...
Reply
#15
Irma Wrote:
Schellamo Wrote:<snip>
he also told us how to take photos of people on the street without being caught *LOL*
<snip>

Would you share the tip? Smile

Sit at a table in a cafe, or on a park bench or somewhere where you want to take the photo, have your camera lying on the table or your lap and pretend to read a photography book or camera manual. When someone you want to shoot walks past, pretend to be fiddling with the 'settings' as refrenced by your book and hit the shutter. After sitting there for awhile 'fiddling' with your camera, people won't take much notice of you. I guess the trick is not to look through the view finder, because that's a dead giveaway that your taking a photo Big Grin
Canon 350D with Speedlight 580EX flash
EFS 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 II, EF 90-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM, EF 50mm f/1.8

http://www.inspired-images.com.au
Reply
#16
A Cable release would make this even easier Smile
Reply

#17
That works. I used to keep the camera on my lap and pretend to fiddle with it. Smart people soon get wise. They used to see mirror devices that fit in front of your lens. They looked like long telephotos but the picture would actually be shot through a hole in the side of the cylinder.

Shuttertalk, I know it's not directed at me. But a person would have to pretty sick or wierd to take criminal advantage of snapping children in a playground. What criminal use could these photos have? I realize that there is a zero tolerence for it but that seems like mass hysteria to me.

--Don
Nikon D3100 with Tokina 28-70mm f3.5, (I like to use a Vivitar .43x aux on the 28-70mm Tokina), Nikkor 10.5 mm fisheye, Quanteray 70-300mm f4.5, ProOptic 500 mm f6.3 mirror lens. http://donschaefferphoto.blogspot.com/
Reply
#18
Don Schaeffer Wrote:a person would have to pretty sick or wierd to take criminal advantage of snapping children in a playground. What criminal use could these photos have? I realize that there is a zero tolerence for it but that seems like mass hysteria to me.

--Don

Its almost as if you are egging a debate on with this statement Don. In a previous response you mentioned. "I wonder how bad it would have looked it I opened my door in my underwear with no pictures on the wall." Which leads me to believe you know exactly what criminal intent some people have, or would have with such pictures.

It is not mass hysteria. One person called to report suspicious activity. The police rightly investigated it and determined that everything was as it should be. I expect when they left they were quite courteous as well. Or did they leave with suspicions, with a promise to keep their eye on you....

As a society, we would scream bloody murder if something seemed out of sorts and we turned a blind eye, only to find out it was being used for criminal activities.

Yes, Don.... had you shown up at the door in your underwear with no pictures on the wall, and were asked about taking picutres of "scenes in the kids park" I fully expect they would want to ensure that there was no ill intent involved.

As far as your bus photos go. I too would have been pissed off if you were taking pictures of me on a bus. I don't know you, so don't take my picture. You don't like it when your privacy and civil liberties are constrained. Yet, don't seem to mind pushing the envelope on others.

There is a time and place for everything. If you, and all of us.... expect to take candid street photos, then expect the wrath of someone who doesn't like it. Would you like someone invading your privacy? It appears not......

Let the debate continue......
Nos an modica tantum nostri somnium
"We are limited only by our imagination"
Reply
#19
I still say the camera is just an extension of the eye. If you are visible in the public, you can be the subject of a photo proiding it is not used for a commercial purpose and there is no slander.

But this is old hat. We have been through this discussion.
Nikon D3100 with Tokina 28-70mm f3.5, (I like to use a Vivitar .43x aux on the 28-70mm Tokina), Nikkor 10.5 mm fisheye, Quanteray 70-300mm f4.5, ProOptic 500 mm f6.3 mirror lens. http://donschaefferphoto.blogspot.com/
Reply
#20
I've been avoiding this thread, but don't feel I can do so any longer.

I don't like the restrictions placed on photographers these days, particulary by shopping centre owners and their ilk. I'd love to take photos of kids playing in the park, but I don't have children so that's one area of photography I have to miss out on. While my intent in photographing other people's kids would be entirely innocent there are those who intend other things...not just the use they may put the photos to, but using the camera to interest and entice children. I know those creeps are in reality few and far between, but I accept and understand that parents are concerned for their children's welfare and that takes precedence. I know full well that in today's climate, had I been fortunate enough to have children, I would be deeply concerned if I found strangers hanging around play areas and photographing my kids. That concern would be far greater if the photographer was taking his pictures surreptitiously by keeping the camera on his lap, under a coat or using gizmos with peep-holes. I'd automatically assume a sinister motive in someone who was trying to hide the fact that he's taking photos.

As regards people in public being visible to the eye and therefore having no reason to object to being made the subject of someone else's photograph, well, I have to disagree with you there too, I'm afraid. Generally, yes, in a street scene the inclusion of people present in a photo is acceptable, even making them the subject is acceptable UNTIL the person concerned objects. In that situation they have every right to tell you, or me, NOT to take their photograph. I think if they just happen to be in the frame of a larger photo and are not the suject then maybe their objection is unreasonable, but still has to be respected. On a bus, the situation is even worse as the poor folks on there are confined and are specifically the subject and I think they are quite justified in complaining if one of the other passengers is sitting there shooting away at them.

At the end of the day I'd rather NOT take photos of anyone who's made it clear they're uncomfortable about it and would never play "hide the camera" to get round it. The more combative we become about these things the more official restrictions will be placed upon us. I don't want to see that, so in my opinion the best policy is to respect people's right not to be photographed and to avoid obviously difficult situations such as children's playgrounds.

--NN
Reply
#21
Don,

And therein lies the key peice of this debate. Its always about what you think is appropriate. Happens everytime.

You are also correct in that, we have been through this discussion before.
Nos an modica tantum nostri somnium
"We are limited only by our imagination"
Reply

#22
I think the main argument is protection of privacy - no one wants to be photographed against their will for people to drool over later. And I certainly would't want my kids to be either...


Come to think of it... even if I started taking photos of my friends in the wrong context would make them feel a bit uncomfortable (e.g. party = no problem, doing an interesting activity = ok, sitting around having tea = hmmmm, washing the dishes = you wierdo). Strangers would definitely feel more awkward...


If your name was StudioJ and you have models on bikes though, feel free to go right ahead... Big Grin
Reply
#23
[Image: DNE.jpg]
matthewpiers.com • @matthewpiers | robertsonphoto.blogspot.com | @thewsreviews • thewsreviews.com
Reply
#24
It's coming to that Matt.

--Don
Nikon D3100 with Tokina 28-70mm f3.5, (I like to use a Vivitar .43x aux on the 28-70mm Tokina), Nikkor 10.5 mm fisheye, Quanteray 70-300mm f4.5, ProOptic 500 mm f6.3 mirror lens. http://donschaefferphoto.blogspot.com/
Reply
#25
[Image: lead032405.jpg]
Nos an modica tantum nostri somnium
"We are limited only by our imagination"
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  somebody stole a picture; not sure what to do GerbenG 16 4,023 Apr 25, 2017, 06:53
Last Post: WDHewson
  taking peopleless shots in crowded places cuilin 6 3,271 Jul 25, 2015, 18:16
Last Post: Phil J
  Taking flight Freeman 3 2,237 Jun 27, 2015, 15:00
Last Post: Freeman

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)