Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 32

Thread: Street Photography - Right or Wrong and When Does it Cross the Line?

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,900
    Denise

    I think dumpster diving hobo pictures seem very harmless in comparison.

    It would be assault to touch a photog who is in the right.

    My thoughts are this, in Tulsa assault and battery carries a $1,500 fine, no fine if I can convince the judge the guy was fighting as well.
    I would pay the fee and consider it a small price if this photog (if you can call him that) was doing this to my daughter.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Kenosha, WI
    Posts
    3,863
    Quote Originally Posted by Busted Knuckles View Post
    1st. Denise "spark" is something you definitely did
    Just call me sparky!

    This thread and all the comments above definitely has me searching the web for info on laws, etc. Apparently the guy that I mentioned above was completely within his legal rights to take those photos at the beach and plaster his house with them ...it's everything else they found in his home that sent him away for quite awhile!

    I was reading this article ...

    http://www.webdesignshock.com/photog...release-forms/

    and I found these statements interesting (yet confusing to some extent) ...

    "You can photograph anybody who’s is in public view and doing anything not considered private. People on sidewalks, parks, beaches and other public spaces are considered subject of legal photography."

    "Yes you can take pictures of children without their parents permission, but as long as you are not invading the child’s privacy. And as long as your photos are for private use only."

    "You are ok to sell your photographs of people without any release forms if your photographs features unrecognizable subjects, (crowds for example) or your photographs have editorial, factual, and newsworthy purposes."

    To make sure I have this straight from a legal standpoint, for personal use anything is fair game as long as it is an "in public" shot.

    Recognizable shots of people can be sold as long as it is as stated above "newsworthy" etc. EXCEPT when it comes to children, then you need a parents release? What about all those shots posted of Suri Cruise?

    What about photos that you take and post on the web ...on flickr, facebook, TDP, etc just for public viewing but not for commercial profit? They are obviously more than for personal use but you are not selling them. For instance, I have a photo on flickr of a cute little girl that I took on kite day down by the lake, it is just a cropped photo of her looking upward but nothing else is in the photo, no other people, no kites. She is recognizable except for the sunglasses she is wearing covering her eyes. It's a public event but you couldn't tell that from the photo because it is cropped. So, this photo is illegal? People are posting photos all the time of recognizable people on subways, at a bus stop walking down the street. Are they all illegal once they hit the internet for public viewing but not for sale? Yet the guy that takes a shot up the 16 year olds dress in Target for his "personal use" is not illegal?

    Either I am really confused or the laws are really messed up!

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Terra Firma
    Posts
    158
    I read somewhere, can't remember exactly where, that if you're in public, you give up your "right" to privacy. You are in the public view, and pictures can be taken. If you used a long zoom, and took a shot through someone's window, you are invading their privacy. But, other than that (and, of course, such examples of shooting up a skirt), then anything that you can see, can be photographed. I thought it became an issue when you published pictures, for profit.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Kenosha, WI
    Posts
    3,863
    Quote Originally Posted by shutterdown View Post
    I read somewhere, can't remember exactly where, that if you're in public, you give up your "right" to privacy. You are in the public view, and pictures can be taken. If you used a long zoom, and took a shot through someone's window, you are invading their privacy. But, other than that (and, of course, such examples of shooting up a skirt), then anything that you can see, can be photographed. I thought it became an issue when you published pictures, for profit.
    That is what I have gotten out of what I have read so far. Except most that I have read states "for private use" and "for commercial use". What category does posting on the internet just for public viewing for comments and opinions fall into?

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    759
    Quote Originally Posted by ddt0725 View Post
    That is what I have gotten out of what I have read so far. Except most that I have read states "for private use" and "for commercial use". What category does posting on the internet just for public viewing for comments and opinions fall into?
    That's the 'grey area' where lawyers make their money I presume. If I post a picture of someone else for you guys to comment on, I would consider your comments as 'my private use', because the only benefit that I'm gaining is your guys' help and (presumably) critique to improving my photo skills. The subject may argue back that even if i'm not making any money off it, by posting on the internet it's not longer for 'my private use'.
    An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.
    Gear Photos

  6. #26
    Senior Member ham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    384

    Re: Street Photography - Right or Wrong and When Does it Cross the Line?

    In the UK there's not even an issue with commercial use, unless of course, you're causing defamation of character by showing someone doing something they wouldn't want public. At least that's my understanding. You have no right to your own image in the uk. But in places like Germany you do. And can sue if you are the subject of a photograph that you didn't give permission for. (the subject bit covers crowd shots)

  7. #27
    Senior Member Raid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    337
    Just as this subject appeared here, a US documentary was shows on Aus TV and it looks as though its still showing in the US. I would recommend it to others, although there are some disturbing images.

    http://www.deadlineeverysecond.com/
    Canon EOS 7D, EF-S 10-22, EF 24-105L, EF 50 f1.2L, EF 70-300L, 430EX.

    "Criticism is something you can easily avoid, by saying nothing, doing nothing and being nothing." -
    Tara Moss

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Kenosha, WI
    Posts
    3,863
    Wow! I most definitely could not be a photojournalist and put my life on the line like that every day!

    Here is another video that I found very interesting to watch regarding photographers in general but and is definitely a must see for anyone considering photojournalism.

    http://laughingsquid.com/chimping-a-...tojournalists/

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    2,900
    We touched on the somber aspects of this type of photography.

    Now something different, at the Rush Springs annual watermelon festival they had a Elvis impersonator.
    It was amazing, he came out and all the 60 and 70ish grandmas started screaming like 16 year old girls. Two granny's got up on the benches and started dancing and screaming. I tried to take there picture but they caught me and sat down. I felt guilty because they kept looking back at me to make sure I wasn't trying to take their picture.

    I felt guilty, should I have tried to take their picture. I can see the benefits of the point and shoot. What to do in this situation?

    FYI he was the fat version of Elvis.

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    1,311
    Get a P&S? Do you have a secret cure for L-disease or something?!? No, you need a longer telephoto!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •