Taking pictures of those subjects who don't want their pictures taken

[Original katomi]

Here in the UK ideas on street photography are changing. What once would have gotten one into trouble or a punch on the nose is now encouraged eg the Brighton Gay parade one the other had you produce any kind of a camera and photograph kids even your own in public and people start to get upset. I don’t know if there is a correct way but I try and take a careful approach and if it feels slightly unsafe/threating I get out . Being disabled I can’t leg it lol more of a falling hobble. A baby crawling can overtake me .......

 

[Original katomi]

A new take on street photography. This caused quite a few raised eyebrows.

 

[Fujidave]

Here in the UK ideas on street photography are changing. What once would have gotten one into trouble or a punch on the nose is now encouraged eg the Brighton Gay parade one the other had you produce any kind of a camera and photograph kids even your own in public and people start to get upset. I don’t know if there is a correct way but I try and take a careful approach and if it feels slightly unsafe/threating I get out . Being disabled I can’t leg it lol more of a falling hobble. A baby crawling can overtake me .......

I love shooting Brighton Gay Pride.

 

[Dean_Gretsch]

Throws a little fodder to the masses...If fujidave's wonderful photo of the kissing couple won him a monetary prize, how many feel he should be obliged to share with the couple?

 

[Soocom1]

Its called couth.

It seems to be in very short supply these days.

I also think that the "everything is fair game" argument is demonstrated well in the passage in 1st. Corr. states this (no not being theological here, but it applies...) ""I have the right to do anything," you say--but not everything is beneficial. "I have the right to do anything"--but not everything is constructive."...

I have been on the receiving end of an unwanted photograph that caused me a great deal of harm. Circumstances were specific in my case and though nothing illicit, illegal or even questionable took place, it was a moment in life where that photo (one of the most innocent of anything btw) that caused a lot of consternation for me.

From that day forward I refuse to project the "everything goes" mentality onto anyone else.

 

[Derrel]

What about this guy's attitude? His name is Bruce Gilden...quite a character. Leica street shooter. B&W mostly. Famous or infamous.

 

[waday]

If you don't have the balls to ask permission then you don't have the right to shoot.

If you ask permission prior to taking the photo, you’re going to change the subject. If @Fujidave asked permission of the kissing couple, that photo would be different and wouldn’t have the impact that it does.

 

[Fujidave]

What about this guy's attitude? His name is Bruce Gilden...quite a character. Leica street shooter. B&W mostly. Famous or infamous.

That is so funny the first shot he took, but don`t think I`d do it like that.

 

[Fujidave]

If you don't have the balls to ask permission then you don't have the right to shoot.

If you ask permission prior to taking the photo, you’re going to change the subject. If @Fujidave asked permission of the kissing couple, that photo would be different and wouldn’t have the impact that it does.

How the story goes on that actual shot I took was, walking down that little road with the XF35mm f2 on the X-T2 and I spotted the couple right away. As they were all over each other I knew I had to get closer to tell the story so about so many feet from them I just pointed and shot, and must admit I was very happy with it too.

 

[Fujidave]

When I came out of a pub to catch the bus home, I did not ask again as I saw a story about Life on a Mobile. X100F and I was right in front of them just holding the camera up using the screen.

At the Bus Stop by Dave, on Flickr

Waiting for the Bus by Dave, on Flickr

 

[The_Traveler]

"The famous American cultural critic, H.L. Mencken, once said that, “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.”

My attitude on street pictures is:

• I don't want to be part of the photo, I want to influence what I capture as little as possible.
• Unless it will cause a significant problem for me, I ignore religious or cultural issues about privacy or photography.
• On the other hand, I will respect any individual's expressed wish not to be photographed unless they are committing an antisocial act that should be captured.
• I try to respect anyone I shoot, whether I contact them or not. I don't shoot recognizable people, usually street people, who are seem to be suffering, either from economic want or mental issues. I would be using their agony to add impact to a photo that might have no other point except capturing their misfortune.
• In that same vein, I won't use someone's misfortune or embarrassment as camera fodder, no matter their social or economic status. I was at a wedding when a young women tripped and fell flat, her dress sliding up over her bared butt. A photo might be marginally funny but at her expense. Not for me. I have no interest in humiliating, embarrassing or hurting people who are innocent.

As for that picture I posted. I didn't post it as an example of good/great/whatever street photography but just to show that interacting with subjects often destroys exactly what I want to catch. (I thought that the sign saying 'last stop' might add but evidently not enough)

For those who have firm stands on never shooting people without permission, perhaps you could point out which shots that you wouldn't have taken.

 

[pixmedic]

"The famous American cultural critic, H.L. Mencken, once said that, “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.”

My attitude on street pictures is:

• I don't want to be part of the photo, I want to influence what I capture as little as possible.
• Unless it will cause a significant problem for me, I ignore religious or cultural issues about privacy or photography.
• On the other hand, I will respect any individual's expressed wish not to be photographed unless they are committing an antisocial act that should be captured.
• I try to respect anyone I shoot, whether I contact them or not. I don't shoot recognizable people, usually street people, who are seem to be suffering, either from economic want or mental issues. I would be using their agony to add impact to a photo that might have no other point except capturing their misfortune.
• In that same vein, I won't use someone's misfortune or embarrassment as camera fodder, no matter their social or economic status. I was at a wedding when a young women tripped and fell flat, her dress sliding up over her bared butt. A photo might be marginally funny but at her expense. Not for me. I have no interest in humiliating, embarrassing or hurting people who are innocent.

As for that picture I posted. I didn't post it as an example of good/great/whatever street photography but just to show that interacting with subjects often destroys exactly what I want to catch. (I thought that the sign saying 'last stop' might add but evidently not enough)

For those who have firm stands on never shooting people without permission, perhaps you could point out which shots that you wouldn't have taken.

View attachment 171147

View attachment 171144

View attachment 171145

View attachment 171146

none of them. because none of them have anything interesting or compelling about them other than touristy snapshots.
I dont have any issues with street photography in general. i just find it odd for someone to put rules based on personal preferences on it and then criticize others for not following said rules.

 

[limr]

What about this guy's attitude? His name is Bruce Gilden...quite a character. Leica street shooter. B&W mostly. Famous or infamous.

I think Bruce Gilden is an overrated jackass.

 

[Original katomi]

"The famous American cultural critic, H.L. Mencken, once said that, “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.”

My attitude on street pictures is:

• I don't want to be part of the photo, I want to influence what I capture as little as possible.
• Unless it will cause a significant problem for me, I ignore religious or cultural issues about privacy or photography.
• On the other hand, I will respect any individual's expressed wish not to be photographed unless they are committing an antisocial act that should be captured.
• I try to respect anyone I shoot, whether I contact them or not. I don't shoot recognizable people, usually street people, who are seem to be suffering, either from economic want or mental issues. I would be using their agony to add impact to a photo that might have no other point except capturing their misfortune.
• In that same vein, I won't use someone's misfortune or embarrassment as camera fodder, no matter their social or economic status. I was at a wedding when a young women tripped and fell flat, her dress sliding up over her bared butt. A photo might be marginally funny but at her expense. Not for me. I have no interest in humiliating, embarrassing or hurting people who are innocent.

As for that picture I posted. I didn't post it as an example of good/great/whatever street photography but just to show that interacting with subjects often destroys exactly what I want to catch. (I thought that the sign saying 'last stop' might add but evidently not enough)

For those who have firm stands on never shooting people without permission, perhaps you could point out which shots that you wouldn't have taken.

View attachment 171147

View attachment 171144

View attachment 171145

View attachment 171146

none of them. because none of them have anything interesting or compelling about them other than touristy snapshots.
I dont have any issues with street photography in general. i just find it odd for someone to put rules based on personal preferences on it and then criticize others for not following said rules.

Sorry the “rules” I posted were my own and don’t expect others to follow. If I. Ame accross as you have to do it my way that was not what was intended. As a parent if I see someone pointing a camera in the direction of my kids I will indicate that I don’t want the kids photos taken however if I am sat with my feet in the fountain at postsmouth and someone photos me ,,, well
I am in public and if I don’t want to get cought cooling me feet then I should not do it lol
Again sorry if peeps thought I was saying “Do it my way”

 

[The_Traveler]

I missed responding to some direct questions so let me fill these in now while I hav e a few minutes

.. I never take pictures of the homeless or destitute who live on the street.
They are vulnerable and I won't steal their problems to inject some emotion into a photo that would otherwise be devoid.

do you check with everyone to see what their socio-economic status is before you photograph them?
Or can you tell just by looking at someone?

In case you missed the operative sentence here in your gleeful haste to say something unpleasant, I made it bold.

Lew, I have great respect for you as a photographer; over the years, you have posted some absolutely stellar documentary images, and I KNOW that you can create really great work. HOWEVER... your quoted statement above, "...if I can make a good shot..." implies that the image you have posted is a good one. Really? An under-exposed, almost detail-less image of people on a commuter train/subway doing nothing of interest is a good image? I don't "shoot street" myself, but I can definitely appreciate the genre when it's done well, and as I've said, you have done it well, but using this to try and bolster your position? Come on... if Billy-Bob Brandnewmember posted that and asked for C&C, it would get the gong in two seconds flat!

You say you "honor personal commitments to individuals but don't respect cultural or religious traditions" WTF? You know as well as I that in many parts of the world, particularly in those which you have travelled a lot cultural & religious traditions transcend the individual. It is a complete contradiction to say that you honour ANY commitment to an individual without respecting their cultural/religious traditions.

You also say you " never take pictures of the homeless or destitute who live on the street" - I can take it from that you verified that everyone in the image mentioned above has a good job and a home to which to return?

I don't know if you're bored and just hoping to stir up a little action on the forum, but to be honest, it really feels like you were hoping for someone to take a really strong stand one way or the other so that you could tell them how wrong they were... As you are doubtless aware, I am a HUGE proponent of ethics in our craft and to hear someone, for whom I have great respect for as a craftsman, say that he doesn't respect the cultural or religious traditions of others... WOW! I may not understand or agree with other's beliefs, but they are just as viable as my lack of belief. I am truly disappointed!

If someone indicates to me either by word, gesture or expression that they don't want their photograph taken, I don't.
I have made some contact with them as a person and I honor that.
Except for startling exceptions, like the Amish or the Jains, every religion or culture I have come across has done enough unpleasant things to disqualify them as a group from my consideration.
So, not having the capability to read people's minds, failing a human to human interaction, I go with what I think.

Art, and artists, have a long tradition of speaking truth to power and all art is not flowers and birds and doggies.
I think of myself as an artist, not necessarily a good artist, but at least someone who is trying to capture life as it is.
Sanitizing what I make into art because some cultural or religious group doesn't like it is censorship of the worst kind, supposedly in the name of good behavior.

Street photography is hard technically but also difficult in that the shooter is trying to capture, without words, something with meaning, something that resonates with the sensibilities of viewers.
If I page through the catalogue from Garry Winogrand's show at the Smithsonian, all 420 pages, there are a great many that I just plain don't get, but every once in a while there are just wonderful memorable show stoppers.

I don't expect that everyone likes everything I shoot but my failures don't mean anything about street photography as a craft and an art or even about me as an artist.
Some pictures are easy to understand, some pictures are not.