Street Photography

[Colin Southern]

Might be of interest to some ...

http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/fa...-re-from-Palmy

[wmoore]

Strange people in palmy. ;-) Wouldn't he need to get a model release if they were going into a gallery ? Not sure about NZ laws.

[kdoc856]

That does NOT make me feel less shy about shooting candids of strangers . At least not without a longer lense and a dfferent vantage than this guy employed

[revi]

Strange people in palmy. ;-) Wouldn't he need to get a model release if they were going into a gallery ? Not sure about NZ laws.

well, points in his favour:
- public area
- non-commercial use
- not posed
Not sure what happens if he wants to publish (and sell) the book

[Bobobird]

What I do not understand is how uppity people can get with taking pics of kids.

In ALL BUT the "western" world parents and kids alike have no problem with that.

So what is it?

[praphul]

instead of doing this , i would rather go to a very much crowded place . instead of standing at a same spot for 3 or more days. i would love to switch positions in various busy places in the locality wherein people will have less chances of noticing me. i do love to shoot candid and if i need something as a posed i would ask them in a humble and simple manner.. most of the time it does work. also when some people come towards me asking what i do i say i am a photography student and its my project for this month and can i take a photo of urs... some give their address too so that the photo can be mailed to them.. i also shoot in groups that can infact get me some mind muscles while shooting

[Colin Southern]

Wouldn't he need to get a model release if they were going into a gallery ? Not sure about NZ laws.

Probably not.

[Colin Southern]

What I do not understand is how uppity people can get with taking pics of kids.

In ALL BUT the "western" world parents and kids alike have no problem with that.

So what is it?

Easy -- don't you know that every photographer who takes a photo of a child is a paedophile, and every photographer who takes a photo at an airport or of a government building is a terrorist.

Is PC gone mad for sure, but sadly, the perception is very real. I'm at the point now where I'm not going to shoot ANY female in my studio without a "female on my side" present -- I've had a couple of incidents now where it's left me feeling vulnerable to malicious intent, even though ZERO unprofessional conduct has ever occurred (or will ever occur).

[Bobobird]

Right Colin. You actually need both a male and female as a witness. Men can be asses too. Better still setup cctv inside the studio and run it whenever a client shows up. Post a notice that premises are monitored so...

Regarding street photography - that is one reason many street photographers have turned to telezooms. Easier that way without having to poke a camera up someone's nose.

That said I admire the way one famous New York guy (dont recall name) does it. He walks around the streets with a Leica and a corded flash. Points the flash from any angle he finds fit and just shoots his subjects close up. I suppose his outward appearance helps - long frizzy hair and scruffy clothes.

[Colin Southern]

Right Colin. You actually need both a male and female as a witness. Men can be asses too. Better still setup cctv inside the studio and run it whenever a client shows up. Post a notice that premises are monitored so...

Regarding street photography - that is one reason many street photographers have turned to telezooms. Easier that way without having to poke a camera up someone's nose.

That said I admire the way one famous New York guy (dont recall name) does it. He walks around the streets with a Leica and a corded flash. Points the flash from any angle he finds fit and just shoots his subjects close up. I suppose his outward appearance helps - long frizzy hair and scruffy clothes.

I would, but 99% of my shoots are females

Jay Maisel shoots a lot of NY street photography -- he says he likes it when people get angry as he gets more emotion in the shot ... just so long as they don't hit him.

[William W]

It's all nuts . . .



The story plays out . . .

The guy will get fined - FOR A PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC INFRINGEMENT – ‘Nuisance and dangerous activity by Standing on Traffic Island”.

He'll take a moral stance and refuse to pay the fine opting to have it heard in Court.

He’ll get a caning for being stupid and wasting the time of the Courts.

The fine will be four times greater – which he will again refuse to pay and the Magistrate will immediately find him in contempt - and lock him up - on the charge of CONTEMPT of COURT.

Social Media will be alive within minutes . . .
“Man gaoled for taking pictures of children at pedestrian crossing”

This will take three nanoseconds to become:
“Street Paedophile found in Palmy – now in gaol”

Meanwhile . . . other blokes are just being careful about watching where they are seated on planes:



Actually all the media now seems to write “jailed” - but that’s another rant. . .

WW

[Colin Southern]

It's all nuts . . .



The story plays out . . .

The guy will get fined - FOR A PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC INFRINGEMENT – ‘Nuisance and dangerous activity by Standing on Traffic Island”.

He'll take a moral stance and refuse to pay the fine opting to have it heard in Court.

He’ll get a caning for being stupid and wasting the time of the Courts.

The fine will be four times greater – which he will again refuse to pay and the Magistrate will immediately find him in contempt - and lock him up - on the charge of CONTEMPT of COURT.

Social Media will be alive within minutes . . .
“Man gaoled for taking pictures of children at pedestrian crossing”

This will take three nanoseconds to become:
“Street Paedophile found in Palmy – now in gaol”

Meanwhile . . . other blokes are just being careful about watching where they are seated on planes:



Actually all the media now seems to write “jailed” - but that’s another rant. . .

WW

Pretty darn close I reckon ... except it would be very politically incorrect for a court to suggest that he was wasting courts time. Goes towards bias your honor -- grounds for appeal (on legal aid of course!).

[Colin Southern]

other blokes are just being careful about watching where they are seated on planes:

I remember reading that at the time. Scary that it's a policy and scary that it's a policy they think they need.

In all seriousness though, I've had to change my views over the past year; a year ago I took more of an attitude of "to hell with political correctness -- it results in a lose/lose for both parties -- and I'm just not going to play that game". Fast forward a year and I've come to realise that being pedantic about PC and being professional at all times aren't necessarily a robust defense against malicious allegations/innuendo from immature people that I may have had a falling out with. Frankly, I hate it - I feel like PC has won the day over common sense, truth, and common decency, but I'm none-the-less not prepared to put the public perception of my integrity (and worse) on the line. Little to be gained, a lot to lose.

We have insurance against fire, theft, and natural disaster ... seems like we now need "insurance" (in the form of a credible witness) to protect us against "whatever it is that they can come up with".

[Bobobird]

When I suggested cctv'ing your premises it was not meant as a joke. Lawyers for complainants cannot try to discredit video evidence though they will badger a human witness to death.

Actually you do not even need to install a system - just some large cctv like enclosures clearly visible to everyone are sometimes enough to cut any crap before it even buds. When someone gets uptight just point to one of the enclosures and smile.

Just make sure "premises monitored by cctv" is boldly displayed. Perhaps even add that into the client acceptance piece of paper.

[nimitzbenedicto]

Montreal seems a little different. When I was taking pictures of kids playing @ Beaver park, Mont Royal, their monitor or nanny came over and spoke to me in french. Although I could not understand her, I assumed she wanted me to stop. To avoid any hassles, I stopped.

Another time at McDonald park, I was photographing squirrels, when I noticed some elderly ladies pointing to me. They did not approach, but later I saw a police car going around the park and could see them observing what I was doing.

Was it because I am Asian? I know I wasn't breaking any laws, so why their interest in my picture taking?

[Shadowman]

What I do not understand is how uppity people can get with taking pics of kids.

In ALL BUT the "western" world parents and kids alike have no problem with that.

So what is it?

It's not just the western world and it does not always involve kids. When I was in India a few years ago a little boy got upset with me for trying to photograph his goat. And on another occasion a woman had the same reaction; I guess I should choose another subject.

[Shadowman]

It's all nuts . . .



The story plays out . . .

The guy will get fined - FOR A PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC INFRINGEMENT – ‘Nuisance and dangerous activity by Standing on Traffic Island”.

He'll take a moral stance and refuse to pay the fine opting to have it heard in Court.

He’ll get a caning for being stupid and wasting the time of the Courts.

The fine will be four times greater – which he will again refuse to pay and the Magistrate will immediately find him in contempt - and lock him up - on the charge of CONTEMPT of COURT.

Social Media will be alive within minutes . . .
“Man gaoled for taking pictures of children at pedestrian crossing”

This will take three nanoseconds to become:
“Street Paedophile found in Palmy – now in gaol”

Meanwhile . . . other blokes are just being careful about watching where they are seated on planes:



Actually all the media now seems to write “jailed” - but that’s another rant. . .

WW

I'd welcome the seat change and would overlook the implied slight to my character. I don't want to sit near young relatives when traveling, why would I want to sit next to a fidgeting, snot machine.

[nimitzbenedicto]

I guess Richard can say dog-owners really love it when people take pictures of their dogs. Almost anywhere I go, dog-owners even go out of their way to pose their dogs.

Goats?

[William W]

It's not just the western world and it does not always involve kids. When I was in India a few years ago a little boy got upset with me for trying to photograph his goat. And on another occasion a woman had the same reaction; I guess I should choose another subject.

Goats have feelings . . . and they get camera shy –
As we are sharing stories . . .

I got "told" by other pedestrians on the (public) street to: "move along, stop taking photos or we will call the police" . . . as I was collecting another addition my series of 'Hi-Drants' - I was using a Powershot S5 IS:


"Important Urban Hydrant" © WMW, AJ Group Pty Ltd, 2007


***

If one carries a camera around - it pays to know the law and it also pays to have a reasonable idea about picking personalities and be adept at people management.

***

On the other hand there are . . . Children. . .

I stepped up to this little girl with a 5D and 24 to 105 and snapped off four frames before either of her parents knew that I was there. I smiled and showed them this one on the screen . . . they asked me if I could make some photos of the whole family . . .


“Little Girl in Venice” © WMW, AJ Group Pty Ltd 2012


And I could have taken a truck load of pictures of these two and not been questioned - I was using a BIG WHITE lens:


“Honey - Where did you Park the Kids?” © WMW, AJ Group Pty Ltd 2008


. . . as I wrote ealier: "it's all nuts"


WW

[Colin Southern]

I wasn't breaking any laws, so why their interest in my picture taking?

I'd be willing to be that although YOU knew you weren't breaking any laws, they probably didn't.

I've even seen a copy of a letter on the web written by Briton's "head policeman" to all other policemen pointing out that street photography is not illegal and that they can't use the terrorism act to stop them without "just cause".