|
Well?
Dec 23, 2013 4:53:37 GMT
Post by chrisc on Dec 23, 2013 4:53:37 GMT
|
|
|
Well?
Dec 23, 2013 8:19:12 GMT
Post by clactonian on Dec 23, 2013 8:19:12 GMT
I like this Chris, but I'm particularly interested in your view of the 'ethics' involved in taking this type of photograph. I posted a similar shot on another forum and was criticised by several members for intruding on a private moment between two people having not obtained their permission for the shot.
My argument was that I had been shooting in and around the two for some minutes and they were well aware that they were in shot, had not objected and basically just ignored me. Does that make it right?
|
|
|
Well?
Dec 23, 2013 9:52:25 GMT
Post by mariehass on Dec 23, 2013 9:52:25 GMT
Dear Mike,
Isn't there is a fine line with street photography to begin with? Another factor may be cultural? I feel that Americans may be more used to having their privacies invaded. Now, that is a sad commentary!!!! What unspoken rules are being broken with this picture? Is it too close?
Marie
|
|
|
Well?
Dec 23, 2013 13:03:43 GMT
Post by clactonian on Dec 23, 2013 13:03:43 GMT
Chris has stripped the EXIF info Marie, so we are unable to tell if he is using his favourite 300mm zoom at full range. If he had then we could argue that it is intrusion, but then, if they are sitting outside a restaurant they are in full public view anyway and suffering from a general public intrusion. If inside, then surely must be aware of a photographer not that far away taking photos. I suppose a lot depends on what use we have for the photograph. If it was to be published commercially there might be an issue, and similarly if used on a social media site. As an example of Chris's 'art' on a specialist forum I see no problem, and certainly didn't think twice when taking the photograph I referred to in my post. It is as you say a fine line with any form of street photography. I have aways drawn the distinction between acting openly when taking photographs and acting in a clandestine manner hidden from the subject's view whilst using a long telephoto, which in my view is not acceptable for photographs used in the public domain. It will be interesting to read Chris's viewpoint.
Mike
|
|
|
Well?
Dec 23, 2013 13:32:06 GMT
Post by chrisc on Dec 23, 2013 13:32:06 GMT
Admittedly, while they were aware the camera was in the room, because I had the shutter release set to silent and the remote on, they had no clue I was shooting. I look at shots like this being fair game shots. The camera was aimed right at them and not more than 10 feet away. They even remarked about what a nice camera when I did two lighting shots and I was aiming in their direction when I made the shots. Street photography does impose on private moments, It is a given that in some instances you are going to be asked not to shoot, a request I almost always honor - until I can get into super telephoto range if the shot still works there, I'll take it. My argument is, and by British standards who have more watch cameras than any other country in the world, no matter where you are, someone is watching you and photographing your daily movements. What is clandestine? It is merely the act of awaiting a natural moment to occur rather than a posed shot when someone knows the camera is on them. I love restaurant shots especially after people get used to the background music, the other people around them, no food yet but perhaps a glass of wine, a cold beer at their fingertips...and then the quiet talk begins. Maybe there is a touch of voyeuristic behavior hiding in me but I promise to stay away from windows at night.
|
|
|
Well?
Jan 1, 2014 16:38:29 GMT
Post by georgem on Jan 1, 2014 16:38:29 GMT
If you're out in public, what are your privacy expectations... If you're in a restaurant, sitting at a table in plain view rather than in a booth in the corner...
|
|
|
Well?
Jan 12, 2014 20:15:04 GMT
Post by Kay on Jan 12, 2014 20:15:04 GMT
An interesting image and indeed discussion! Amazing what responses you get when you wave a 'big' relatively anyway lens around. I was taking netball photos for a friends club, she was he president, she had asked the opposition president prior to the day if I could be there! the images to be used for the club yearbook and website all explained. On the day our team was winning, the coach of the opposition then comes over to tell me that it is illegal to photograph children .... Really? So to avoid unpleasantness I stopped the game action pics and went back to setting up for the next team group photo.... The interesting thing, I did go and show her after the game ... Several 'Dads' with small cameras could be seen snapping away in the background of my 200mm images... So a big lens is apparently illegal but only if your team is losing?
|
|
|
Well?
Jan 12, 2014 21:56:58 GMT
Post by clactonian on Jan 12, 2014 21:56:58 GMT
Admittedly, while they were aware the camera was in the room, because I had the shutter release set to silent and the remote on, they had no clue I was shooting. I look at shots like this being fair game shots. The camera was aimed right at them and not more than 10 feet away. They even remarked about what a nice camera when I did two lighting shots and I was aiming in their direction when I made the shots. Street photography does impose on private moments, It is a given that in some instances you are going to be asked not to shoot, a request I almost always honor - until I can get into super telephoto range if the shot still works there, I'll take it. My argument is, and by British standards who have more watch cameras than any other country in the world, no matter where you are, someone is watching you and photographing your daily movements. What is clandestine? It is merely the act of awaiting a natural moment to occur rather than a posed shot when someone knows the camera is on them. I love restaurant shots especially after people get used to the background music, the other people around them, no food yet but perhaps a glass of wine, a cold beer at their fingertips...and then the quiet talk begins. Maybe there is a touch of voyeuristic behavior hiding in me but I promise to stay away from windows at night. I'll not argue with that point of view, and suspect that there's a touch of the voyeur in all of us.
|
|