Dickensian Doorman in Vienna

[otherprof86 28]

The restaurant , the Central Cafe, was very nice. He looked like he just ealked out of a Dickens novel.

 

[Jeff1547 47]

Looks just like Hardy..........

 

[Fujidave]

Well spotted and taken, he does look like Hardy like Jeff says.

 

[The_Traveler]

I bet this looks fantastic bigger.
Color treatment adds a lot.
Terrific

 

[otherprof86 28]

I bet this looks fantastic bigger.
Color treatment adds a lot.
Terrific

Thank you so much!

 

[goooner]

Great shot prof. Just be careful when taking shots like that in Germany. With the new laws just taking that shot without the gentleman's permission is illegal, it might actually be a 'new' european law.

Previously it was permitted to take the photo without consent, but not publish it (including uploading to the internet), without permission.

 

[smoke665]

The restaurant , the Central Cafe, was very nice. He looked like he just ealked out of a Dickens novel

Wow, I'm so envious of your travel. Just great, and if this were a B&W conversion with a little aging applied it would definitely look right out of a Dickens novel. And yes, there is a strong resemblance to Hardy

Great shot prof. Just be careful when taking shots like that in Germany

Not sure about Germany, but if he's in Vienna then he's in Austria, which have their own use laws which are confusing but in some cases allow it.
"According to the Austrian Copyright Law it is illegal to publish or distribute any picture taken of a person without permission if their legitimate interests are affected. Although you may be legally entitled to publish the picture if the person is not shown in a private situation and the picture is not used in a misleading or derogatory context or for publicity purposes, this would be illegal if the person successfully claims violation of their legitimate interests. Therefore it is strongly recommended to obtain permission from the person depicted in the photograph, unless their appearance is merely accidental and not incriminating or it is a (public figure). It is not allowed to publish or distribute pictures which could reveal intimate life details or private information without interest for the public even if the photo was taken in a public space and shows people well known in the public sphere (e. g. Minister kissing a lady at the airport.
In 2013, the Supreme Court (Oberster Gerichtshof) ruled that under certain circumstances, even just taking the photo of people can violate their general personality rights. In that case, a person took a photo of a lawyer visiting their house and, when asked to explain the reason, responded that they took the photo "for amusement" (zur Belustigung). The court ruling did however affirm that cases where a person's presence on the photo is merely incidental can be considered differently." - Wikipedia Commons
The likelihood that someone would prosecute a claim on this seems doubtful, but you are correct that it is important as travelers to another country we need to remember that we are guests, and to be aware of the laws of those countries so that we may act accordingly.

 

[goooner]

I know he is in Austria, that is why I warned him of taking shots like that in Germany. It is actiually a relatively new European law, of which Austria is part of. The man in the photograph is recognizable, and his location is known, and one could argue that he is the main subject in this photo. As I'm not a lawyer I will not get into the nitty gritty, but here is an informative üpiece on petapixel:

https://petapixel.com/2018/05/30/how-bad-is-gdpr-for-photographers/

 

[smoke665]

I know he is in Austria, that is why I warned him of taking shots like that in Germany.

I thought you were implying that Austria was a part of Germany, when in fact it is a country which borders Germany. If I misunderstood then please accept my apologies. The Austrian laws I believe are more restrictive then the German laws, but maybe someone more familiar with the countries will chime in her.

 

[goooner]

Being in Germany I was well aware of that-no offense taken. If you read the link I posted in my previous post you will see that the european law superceeds the national laws. It really has become quite difficult to do street phorography here, if you are not a pro. We have a couple of europeans on here (Germany, Belgian, Italy and Austria). Maybe they could weigh in with more specific knowledge.

 

[smoke665]

It really has become quite difficult to do street phorography here, if you are not a pro

As I understand it the these are all civil rather then criminal laws, as such, I have to wonder if it is somewhat like it is here in the states. You can bring suit, but collecting against someone who has nothing is wasted effort.

 

[otherprof86 28]

Just wondering how one takes pictures of places of interest without having people in the image? Most places we visited on our tour were just full of people, mostly tourists, some from outside the country we were in - France, Germany, Austria and Hungary - and some natives, judging by their language. Would it be illegal to take a photo of the front entrance to the Central Cafe because there was a person there? Or Chartres Cathedral? Or the Benedictine Abbey in Melk? etc. I did spend a lot of time waiting for some scenes to clear of people, but that was for aesthetic reasons. At least there were no intimate life details or private information shown in this photo. But I refuse to ask any of the couples I see checking out a chateau if they are cheating on their spouses and spending an illicit weekend together before taking a picture of the chateau. How do photographers feel about these laws?

 

[goooner]

My subjects normally just flutter off without comment. On a serious note, it is a minefield that was created by a bunch of bureaucrats without thinking. If the person(s) are not the main subject (greay zone) you were fine under the old laws, not sure how it is now. Groups of people (greay zone) in a public place also have different rules. I've not had the energy to study the law.

 

[Fujidave]

Just wondering how one takes pictures of places of interest without having people in the image? Most places we visited on our tour were just full of people, mostly tourists, some from outside the country we were in - France, Germany, Austria and Hungary - and some natives, judging by their language. Would it be illegal to take a photo of the front entrance to the Central Cafe because there was a person there? Or Chartres Cathedral? Or the Benedictine Abbey in Melk? etc. I did spend a lot of time waiting for some scenes to clear of people, but that was for aesthetic reasons. At least there were no intimate life details or private information show in this photo. But I refuse to ask any of the couples I see checking out a chateau if they are cheating on their spouses and spending an illicit weekend together before taking a picture of the chateau. How do photographers feel about these laws?

I think they tried to make it against the law in the UK here, photographers were up in arms about it so it got pushed back. IMO it should be left well alone as if I see someone on the street and I like it then 100% I will carry on taking a photo if it is on Public ground.

 

[smoke665]

If the person(s) are not the main subject (greay zone) you were fine under the old laws, not sure how it is now.

Again, I'm no expert, but the subject piqued my interest causing me to do a little reading. As I understand it in Germany if the people are incidental to scene, and it doesn't compromise their personal well being, then its okay. From what I read on Austria, even the act of photographing someone is illegal, regardless. Gooner you brought up a point earlier that EU law superseded individual country law. Does that mean if the countries laws are more strict then the EU, are they also superseded by the less strict? Man you'd have to have a degree in international law to stay compliant over there.