Check This Guy Out!

RMThompson · Sep 23, 2008

JerryPH said:
I'm surprised a lot of you guys aren't being hurt more... lol.

I mean, I consider myself a photographer, but if someone stuck a camera in my face like we saw in that youtube video, my first tendancy would be to push the lens into his face!

It's important to remember that in that video he also has a huge camera and probably a sound guy with him, and all those people are seeing this entourage of people walking down the street. I am positive he would get harrased more when he is alone!

That's not a bad idea. If I ever wanted to get some street shots, have a friend carry some big camera and another with a boom mic following me around. Then the public would assume I am important and let me do what I want! LOL

wchua24 · Sep 23, 2008

keep it up love the shots...black and white its really nice work.

craig · Sep 23, 2008

RMThompson said:
It's important to remember that in that video he also has a huge camera and probably a sound guy with him, and all those people are seeing this entourage of people walking down the street. I am positive he would get harrased more when he is alone!

That's not a bad idea. If I ever wanted to get some street shots, have a friend carry some big camera and another with a boom mic following me around. Then the public would assume I am important and let me do what I want! LOL

Do not kid yourself. In NYC people have been shooting street shots for decades. Most people shrug their shoulders and move on with or with out a film crew. I would not call it a great idea, but the concept is (arguably) what photojournalism is based on. As a matter of fact a guerilla attitude is mandatory in all aspects of photography.

Love & Bass

usayit · Sep 23, 2008

might be street shooting but is it really photojournalism?

IMO, photojournalism tells a story.... For those that might have a difficult time understand the difference, I submit an example from a photographer that doesn't get mentioned too often but should:

www.edkashi.com (see links under "Photo Essays" and "Published")

I find street shooting very enjoyable but telling a story with a series of photos is a whole different ball game.

craig · Sep 23, 2008

I am not so good with labels, but I can say that street shooting and photojournalism tell a story. In Gilden's work he illustrates the people and the characters of a city. Kashi's work digs deeper to illustrate a political or social climate. Both are very much intertwined.

Imo words tell a story. Photographs illustrate a feeling. Hopefully connecting us with a story and it's chararcters.

Love & Bass

Flur · Sep 24, 2008

toofpaste said:
If he wasn't so old and cute, he'd get knocked the f out.

I don't care if he's old and cute, if he (or anyone else) came up to me, stuffed a camera in my face and blinded me with a flash while I was minding my own business on the street, they'd be shopping for a new camera and quite possibly a new nose.

craig said:
Do not kid yourself. In NYC people have been shooting street shots for decades. Most people shrug their shoulders and move on with or with out a film crew.

I lived and worked in Manhattan for 10 years and this never happened to me. And like I said above, I wouldn't shrug my shoulders about it. It's one thing for a stranger to take my picture. It's another for someone to get in my face.

I have to say I'm not a fan of his work. That's mainly because most of the people in his photos look pissed off. And now I know why...

skieur · Sep 24, 2008

Samriel said:
Maybe a little controversial, but good. Probably only possible in the US and other countries with similar laws.

Actually he is borderline legally speaking in the US or elsewhere. A permit is usually required for any kind of activity that obstructs pedestrian traffic. The definition of assault involves more than touching a person. Some judges would consider that blocking someone's progress through the intimidation of sticking a camera in their face fits the definition of assault. A woman in Québec won a lawsuit after a camera was stuck in her face while she was eating in a public place, so being too aggressive and in your face with a camera is not to be recommended.

skieur

photographyaddict · Sep 24, 2008

that's really great thanks!

Solthar · Sep 24, 2008

skieur said:
Actually he is borderline legally speaking in the US or elsewhere. A permit is usually required for any kind of activity that obstructs pedestrian traffic. The definition of assault involves more than touching a person. Some judges would consider that blocking someone's progress through the intimidation of sticking a camera in their face fits the definition of assault. A woman in Québec won a lawsuit after a camera was stuck in her face while she was eating in a public place, so being too aggressive and in your face with a camera is not to be recommended.

skieur

Well, Quebec's photography laws are rather convoluted - but I totally agree with that ruling.

Taking pictures of people in public places is fine. Sticking a camera/flash six inches away while blocking their movement? Not so much.

Joe S · Sep 25, 2008

While some may consider him controversial there is really nothing legally objectionable. Maybe ethically, but in the posted video he even talks about this.

Personally I dont really care for his work, but he does get the result that he is ultimately looking for, so in that way you could say he is successful.

In order for anyone to sue him they would have to prove that he violated their privacy in a way that the average person would find objectionable. see Bert Crages Book for reference.

Bifurcator · Sep 25, 2008

Flur said:
I don't care if he's old and cute, if he (or anyone else) came up to me, stuffed a camera in my face and blinded me with a flash while I was minding my own business on the street, they'd be shopping for a new camera and quite possibly a new nose.

Oh, a tough guy huh?

Put'em up... Puuut'em up... I'll hit ya with my 5 thu 9... and they call it my 5 to 9 cuz there's 5 fingers and when I hit ya with it it'll knock ya thru 9 MFing states.

Why I'll hit ya so hard your grandchildren will be born with black eyes. :lol:

put'em up! Puut'em up see... :lmao:

someguy5 · Sep 26, 2008

Personally this doesn't seem as bad, although the guy is dressed like he's about to rob someone's house!

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dipTqJfiE4[/ame]

Bifurcator · Sep 26, 2008

LOL!!! At about 3:30 he says "It's important to be invisible... I can be invisible... Here, I'll show you." and then proceeds to take 5 pics all of which the subjects give him dirty looks or flip him off. Baahahahahaaa :lmao:

Of course that wasn't as bad as at about 6:00 when he makes one couple so nervous that they drop and break their one-of-a-kind chair. Hahahaha what a dolt.

youbetcha1018 · Sep 27, 2008

I love number 47. :lol:

I can see some big camera there and a sound guy. But he is definitely controversial.

skieur · Sep 29, 2008

Joe S said:
While some may consider him controversial there is really nothing legally objectionable. Maybe ethically, but in the posted video he even talks about this.

Personally I dont really care for his work, but he does get the result that he is ultimately looking for, so in that way you could say he is successful.

In order for anyone to sue him they would have to prove that he violated their privacy in a way that the average person would find objectionable. see Bert Crages Book for reference.

Oh, I would think that assault, harassment, loitering, obstructing pedestrian traffic are considered legally objectionable and hindering progress through actions that are seen as intimidating is one of the definitions of assault.

Privacy would not be an issue in this kind of lawsuit. When you get too close, assault, harassment or other laws can come into effect.

Tegan