Taboo's in Photography?

[Battou]

It's not a taboo in photography. It's a taboo in society. What used to be ok before the advent of camera phones and cheap digicams is considered today wrongfully often to be perverted. Just look at the Time Life Photography book "Photographing Children"

The images: Krissy - Melissa Shook (1972), Child Light - Elisabeth Wackman (1979), or even a full group nudity of children: Children at Home - John Benson (1969), were not only acceptable then, but they were also publishable.

No doubt photographing a young girl while she's asleep on the beach these days is more likely to end you up in hospital rather than in Time Life magazines.

Like I said there are exceptions, but never the less modern society is going to be the driving factor, as taboo by dictionary definition means "proscribed by society as improper or unacceptable". Unfortunatly society is not composed by photographers and artisans. xfloggingkylex said it best, A picture ment to be cute can end up getting CPS called. It's consitered perverted today due to perverted use by the few truely perverted who use this type of imagery for sexual gratification. It is truely sad but there is not a whole hell of a lot that can be done.

 

[JimmyJaceyMom]

Other people's kids, except when you are shooting someone's family event of course and it's known that you are there for that reason.

And the Amish.
"When we are gone, let us be remembered not by how broad were our noses, the height of our brows, or the angle of our cheekbones, but by what truly matters --- the lives we have lived and the examples we have left. Dust we are, to dust we shall return. Why frame and embellish and hang on the wall the pictures of this house of clay in which we live? Let us beware lest we permit Self to be exalted becoming unto us a graven image."

 

[Mesoam]

i'm pretty sure common sense takes care of this...

 

[Alex_B]

I am glad that people are more relaxed when it comes to pictures of children here in Europe. (Although I personally think children photography too exhausting )

But what I avoid at all costs usually is to invade people's privacy. I would not take images of couples arguing, or of some family on their day out having fun or no fun (well, I would ask for permission at least), and I would not take images of personal grief which is not related to any agenda, politics or war.
If grief however has an intrinsic message and documents things wrong on this world, then I would not hesitate to capture it on film or sensor. Same with poverty, hunger or violence.

I would not take images (or if taken at least not use them) which depict a situation which would falsely discredit a person or which is simply seriously embarrassing.

 

[SteveEllis]

In our current times of easy access to satellite imagery such as google earth I find it amusing that we are not allowed to take photos of certain buildings and locations!

 

[Alex_B]

In our current times of easy access to satellite imagery such as google earth I find it amusing that we are not allowed to take photos of certain buildings and locations!

google earth is not very up to date in all areas. in some areas are VERY old.