It's a sorry day when you realise the spammers are better at writing than you are. But I can resist no longer - this weekend begins the week of the spam post titles.
Anyway, what I really wanted to talk about was Photography, specifically Photography and Ethics. My flickr account is mainly full of pictures of inanimate objects, yet I prefer looking at pictures of people, and love taking pictures of people more than anything.
But I have issues with taking pictures of people without their permission or knowledge then posting them online. Many of my favourites on Flickr - like Stpiduko - put 'Ask' projects online, which seems reasonable enough (though I'm curious what they tell people it's for when they ask.)
But the internets are full of people snapped clandestinely on the tube, clearly without knowing someone is taking a photo of them - some of them are beautiful and amazing photographs, but if I came across a photo of me on the internet on my early morning commute, I'd be totally fucking furious, I can tell you.
What do you think?
* This post title brought to you courtesy of Addie Vatina
About teaching and crying
23 hours ago
11 comments:
I think if someone is the main focus of a photograph you should really ask their permission.
That said, I do prefer "natural" as opposed to "posed" pictures.
I think it's a really difficult thing to do, to take a picture of someone without them posing. It takes guts to just snap away, but it can be worth it. What's the worst that can happen? They notice and give you some jip? Just tell them you're sorry but you thought they looked so beautiful and you work for the Observer. They'll soon forgive you.
I was going to say just take the picture if you want a natural pose, and then tell them you've done it and why and ask their permission to post, giving details of where it may be, but this is a plan that could have drawbacks ("hello, you don't know me but I just took a photo of you when you thought you were anonymous and unobserved") so you should probably just ignore it and listen to annie r... Though if you're using a digital camera and they kick off you could demonstrate that you're deleting the photo to pacify them. Er, I'll be quiet.
Annie, if I chanced upon a picture of you on the internet, with your sleepy eyes and Rachel hair, it would brighten my day.
You could always threaten them over infringing your rights if they put a photo of you online without permission. Grief, some schools won't allow sports days to be photographed in case little Sammy's rights are infringed.
I'd be more worried about late night photos. In the morning I'm really perky.
I'd be furious if I found pictures of my on the internet without permission, but that may be a self-image thing as much as anything else.
Definitely people should have the right not to have images of them published without their consent though.
I do it all the time and probably shouldn't and hope that I never get caught out. If someone tracked me down and said 'How very dare you" I'd say sorry - and withdraw the photo from my blog/flickr. Mind you - in saying that - fat lot of use that would be seeing as it could have been up for a considerable length of time!
I'm hopeless as a reporter but my father has great approach for such a photography. He's no problems with asking nor taking photos of people without permission. I think there's nothing immoral unless you want to do something bad. As long as it is a 'good photography' (yeah, we can discuss what it means) it should be ok. I live in Poland and it is like this here: if you don't make money on someone's image and if picture is not insulting then the worst thing you can get is request to delete the picture from the public access. Personally I think it sounds reasonable.
I think this is an interesting dilemma. For example, while I was on the tube on Tuesday, I saw a man with a pyramid on his head http://alissaclare.typepad.com/photos/random/img_2302.html
(not the exact man, but that sort of thing, and in gold... )
Anyway, this guy was in his 40s, in a suit, travelling to Canary Wharf. My only thought was, I wish I'd had a camera phone.
me too Billy - it's not so much the taking, it's the posting on the interweb afterwards that bothers me.
Annie, good tactic - I need to get myself a proper digital camera with a huge great enormous telephoto lens first though, my little point-and-shoot is not too convincing.
Good plan Violet - Stpiduko puts up a white sheet and a sign, and tempts people with sweeties. I'd like to try this sometime.
Awwwww, Tim... trust me, it's not a pretty sight.
Llewtrah, tell me about it. (Our parents have to sign consent forms to allow the kids' pictures to go up on our website.)
QE - right - when I went to a blogmeet with Adrian etc the photobloggers were non-stop snapping, they didn't bother to say hello or ask. Then they posted highly flattering photos of us with our eyes closed, mouths open etc. Nice.
RoMo, I know, you naughty thing. I do like your photos though, this is the dilemma...
Shyha - I still think it is a tricky area. It is fine to say 'delete it' but what if the person never sees it? What if you have taken a picture of someone when they are somewhere they shouldn't be, or with someone they shouldn't be with? The consequences could be far-reaching. Quick, someone write a film script!
Claire - that rings a bell, I'm sure I've heard of pyramid man elsewhere on the internets...
This is an interesting debate, and goes a lot to the what rights do you have when in public. It's an issue I've wondered about since I have had in the past taken pictures of people without permission (my Ibiza picture sets for example)
I came across this guy yesterday. Not sure if he is taking the pictures (I doubt it) or collecting other peoples pictures.
I think it's probably easier to slip into grey areas that are more wrong than right now on the internet, and it will be interesting over the next XX years to see how socially we adjust to this.
Post a Comment