![]() We have to allow for the dynamic and allow for the unposed and unprepared. Sometimes you go with the scene as it unfolds. Street/documentary photography has many facets. Other people may have different levels of comfort, and that’s OK. I’d care if someone were stalking me, but that’s not likely either. With the exception of POTD, the likelihood of me seeing it is minimal and if I did, the likelihood of me caring is infinitesimal to say the least. ![]() I personally don’t care if I end up in POTD or Facebook or Insta. I’m sure I’m in people’s photographs multiple times per week, just by walking down the street or going into a restaurant or bar (or grocery store/big box store). This is usually reserved for “celebrities” but obviously it can extend to other people. There are others who have no concerns about using bazooka zooms to photograph people in their “private spaces”. I reasonably expect privacy in my home, I suppose. It’s really a question of where we can “reasonably expect privacy”, I guess. I don’t disagree with that position, it’s just interesting in passing. It’s interesting that we can take our bazooka zooms and photograph people from our homes and that’s “documentary photography” but if we take those same lenses and photograph people in their homes, that’s not OK. I’m also glad the mods moved it to its own thread and “ethics / street photography” is really the right categorization of it (or documentary photography). That said, it’s always an interesting topic. Clearly this is not a commercial photograph, no model releases are needed, from my perspective anyway. I would have no ethical challenges taking such a photograph. It seems somewhat odd that the subject even came up, but that’s just me. There’s nothing unethical nor is there anything mollyc should have done differently, in my mind. The two aspects needed each other, clearly, but that’s part of the art. In other words, the people and the aisle+products in the store crossed paths to make the final image, at least to me. The subject in this case was the shopping experience and not the people specifically. I also assume that anyone who is, for whatever reason, upset at having their photograph taken is comfortable enough to speak to the photographer and let them know. I think most of us have been around the block enough to know the actual laws (generally, anyway) and we all know how to “read the room”, when to ask permission or strike up a conversation, or when it’s OK to go with the scene in front of us. Costco - or wherever it was - is pretty public. I’ll state at the outset that I’m not clear even slightly why mollyc’s photograph was specifically a point of contention over any other photographs here of recent note containing people in public places that didn’t garner this scrutiny.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |