Aug 24, 2005, 10:55
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
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