How Would You Handle The Situation?

[SoulfulRecover]

These 2 Street Photographers Deal with Angry People in Very Different Ways

Who's right? Who's wrong? What would you have done?

 

[480sparky]

There is no 'right' or 'wrong'. Each situation is different.

 

[Derrel]

Gotta play things by ear. The first guy's video was interesting. The way he told the angry fellow "F*** you!" was a good way to basically pop the all puffed up balloon of the dude he photographed. I dunno...the first guy was standing there, shooting pictures from very close, jamming the camera in the face of people, Bruce Gilden style...I find that kind of an asshole type of street shooting.

 

[otherprof]

These 2 Street Photographers Deal with Angry People in Very Different Ways

Who's right? Who's wrong? What would you have done?

Not bad. Only two of the people shown were idiots - Jines and the guard. Of the two, Jines is the dangerous one. The guard seemed just bluster, but who know? But Jines presents himself as a teacher and tells his students to escalate confrontations because the law is on their side. I suppose the law is on the side of every murder or assault victim.

 

[vintagesnaps]

Here's what I did... looked up both of these guys.

Second one first, because there's not much there - why is the camera upside down?? lol because he seems to just be carrying it around while something is beeping and backing up... we don't see what happened or what was going on. Not that the security guard should yell and cuss at someone - but if something like that happens then go in or contact the business in that building and report it to them. How else can they do something about their security guard's behavior if it isn't reported?

First one - here is the video that shows him prepping(?) for the recording on the street corner. Notice what's happening down the street while he's talking at the camera - and there goes the photo op! right past him. lol And there's interesting graffiti and brickwork etc. that would have made for some interesting photos if he would instruct people to look around and notice what's out there on the street.


Then I found his website - he has a place for donations? I don't think he's a charity... And has a disclaimer that he gets a commission from items he promotes. And he mentions his workshop at the end of the video.

(edit - And recommending to tell people to f- off might be a good way to get somebody hurt - he at least has someone else with him recording video, if you're out there by yourself you don't know anything about someone you encounter, they could be using drugs or involved in illegal activities etc. so maybe aren't going to be receptive to having their photos taken much less you telling them where to get off.)

What's the point of being out on that busy street corner?? Look across the street, a Starbucks and other shops, everybody's walking by with coffee (although not necessarily from that direction! so I suppose there are shops on this side of the street too) - how many of them are tourists??

This seems to be about self promotion as much as anything. More Youtube millionaires in the making! lol

 

[jcdeboever]

I would not back down to any one, knowing my rights, but at the same time he is getting pretty close, he may consider a zoom with his attitude. Do that in Detroit and you WILL get hurt. Additionally, he was being brave because a camera was filming. Go naked in Detroit and with that attitude, a prime, and you may end up in a dumpster in an alley. I'm just saying...

 

[dennybeall]

Unlike many of these younger people today I believe the other person "HAS RIGHTS ALSO" so would apologize and stop photographing that person. If I was on a job I'd suggest they move for a time as I need to do the job. If the job required, I'd apologize again and go back to work................

 

[480sparky]

Unlike many of these younger people today I believe the other person "HAS RIGHTS ALSO"............

Most certainly they have the right to be offended by being photographed.
They also have the right to ask the person to stop taking their photograph.
They have the right to walk away.
They have the right to ask the photographer why their photo was taken.
They have the right to label the photographer a nutcase, terrorist, pervert or voyeur.
They have the right to not engage with the photographer.
They have the right to cover their face.

But when they're on public property, they have no right to privacy.

 

[limr]

How would I handle it? Well, first of all, I doubt that I would ever be in the situation in the first place, because I don't do that kind of aggressive street photography. I never liked it, and I won't do it. If I were on the other side of the camera, I would be pissed. Yes, I'm in public and so privacy doesn't apply, so he does have the right to photograph me, but what about having some civility and respect? What about recognizing that you are using your rights to be an arsehole to other people? All for the sake of taking (likely) mediocre pictures in the quest to be a Bruce Gilden wannabe? I think he's a giant tool.

 

[gsgary]

Gotta play things by ear. The first guy's video was interesting. The way he told the angry fellow "F*** you!" was a good way to basically pop the all puffed up balloon of the dude he photographed. I dunno...the first guy was standing there, shooting pictures from very close, jamming the camera in the face of people, Bruce Gilden style...I find that kind of an asshole type of street shooting.

Just how I sometimes do street and had same situation and I did similar, I'm not having Joe public telling me what I can and can't do

 

[john.margetts]

I am pleased that here in the UK, we have a more mature attitude to individual rights. I have a right not to be harassed which trumps another person's right to action. If I am clear that I do not want to be photographed while in a public place, photographing me is harassment which is a criminal offence.

From Wikipedia on harassment: "Such actions can be:

Physical conduct;
Verbal conduct;
and
Non-verbal conduct.

In addition, while the conduct must be unwanted by the recipient, it does not necessarily have to be that the harasser has a motive or an intention to harass. So it is still harassment even if the harasser does not know there is harm caused by their actions."



Sent from my A1-840 using Tapatalk

 

[tirediron]

Gotta play things by ear. The first guy's video was interesting. The way he told the angry fellow "F*** you!" was a good way to basically pop the all puffed up balloon of the dude he photographed. I dunno...the first guy was standing there, shooting pictures from very close, jamming the camera in the face of people, Bruce Gilden style...I find that kind of an asshole type of street shooting.

Just how I sometimes do street and had same situation and I did similar, I'm not having Joe public telling me what I can and can't do

It's a good thing you have the skills to build yourself your own pine box!

 

[480sparky]

Sometimes, it's not an issue of who is right, but who is left.

 

[gsgary]

Gotta play things by ear. The first guy's video was interesting. The way he told the angry fellow "F*** you!" was a good way to basically pop the all puffed up balloon of the dude he photographed. I dunno...the first guy was standing there, shooting pictures from very close, jamming the camera in the face of people, Bruce Gilden style...I find that kind of an asshole type of street shooting.

Just how I sometimes do street and had same situation and I did similar, I'm not having Joe public telling me what I can and can't do

It's a good thing you have the skills to build yourself your own pine box! [emoji38]

People don't carry guns over here[emoji3]

 

[desertrattm2r12]

Having been a news photographer for many years I support the right to take photos in a public place big time. But you need to use your brain. It's perfectly legitimate to complain about some dude dressed like a bum sticking a camera in your face. It is perfectly okay to not to want some weirdo (or FBI agent or God-Knows-What) to take your photo. The amateur snapshooter in #1 is way out of line in escalating the encounter (for profit?) and making obscene remarks and gestures. His "subject" did nothing wrong, but he did. The guard in number two has a good point. How does he know the "photographer" is not in fact a sneak thief trying to get close to him to lift his wallet? A camera in your grubby little hands does not make you an Angel or a God.
There are laws against harassment -- the things the snapshooters did when they were not actually taking a photo. (The photos taken look to me to have been worthless wastes of pixels considering the subjects, the ambiance, the karma.)
I think this type of hooey hurts us all.