Public photography, privacy and changing attitudes

Lounge
1

So in an effort to broaden the type of content here I want to talk about some non-FLOSS but photography related topics. If this is out of scope please forgive and let me know! Also this is a long one so buckle up!

For a number of years now I’ve enjoyed carrying a camera around with me and taking daily life shots. I generally just look for interesting light and not any one subject in particular, 90% of these type of photos have no people in the frame whatsoever.

I’m American and here the law on photography in public spaces is pretty clear: if it’s in public it’s open to anyone to photograph. There’s no expectation of privacy on sidewalks, parks and roads. That’s not say there’s no rules in public, if you’re using say a 70-200mm to look into someone’s window from a public sidewalk that’s illegal. Unless you work for the government, however that’s another rant and generally you need a warrant. :slight_smile: But the gist is your subject has to be in a public space as well, being a peeping Tom is not only in bad taste but also illegal.

Some local towns and cities have specific ordinances about things like drones, IIRC there are some post 9/11 laws around not photographing certain infrastructure or federal buildings and on private property it’s up to the owner but by and large if you’re walking around with a small range finder taking photos of things on the street you’re in the clear legally.

As we know legal does not always equate to moral. Slavery was once legal for example but has always been amoral. There are also changing attitudes around public photography as smart phones and digital cameras have caused the practice to lose some of its novelty. We’re no longer Cartier-Bresson waiting for the perfect moment but now potential terrorists, perverts, child molesters and other ne’er-do-wells. Recently I’ve started to notice on local social media that there are more and more posts particularly from young women warning others about a guy they saw walking around taking photos, especially at night, even confronting the photographer/suspected pervert and forcing them to delete photos. Many of these are on public streets.

Honestly, the “guy with a camera” trope didn’t happen out of thin air, but it has me wondering. What if this is the latest Satanic panic like in the 80s? How many people just out enjoying their past time are getting hit with a broad brush because we’re all hyper vigilant of suspected deviant behavior these days? Well, at least in the States. Are actual evil doers walking around in public doing photography on any kind of scale? Details on the perpetrator’s behavior are also usually lacking from these posts. Clearly if someone is following these young women around or doing some other thing besides photography to tip them off then yes it’s an evil-doer. But as it stands now it seems like “man with a camera” is the indicator of suspicious just going by the information given.

I’ve had a negative encounter or two myself. Probably the worst one was years ago when I was in a public park with a macro lens. I happened to stop near a field where some children’s baseball practice was happening so my wife could use the restroom. While waiting on her I got confronted by an angry mother accusing me of all sorts of stuff. Despite trying to explain I was simply waiting on my wife and that despite being “big and scary” looking my lens was indeed poorly suited for taking “pedo shots” of her kids from a great distance things became tense. I was there more for the insect and plant life around the small creek nearby which is why I had a macro lens. I thought I was about to have an encounter with the police, but thankfully my wife hurried up and we left.

Due to these attitudes I’ve cut out a lot of my camera carrying in the last couple of years. Even with my decidedly non-threatening Fuji X100. I don’t want to end up the subject of a local Facebook post calling me a pervert for obvious reasons. Especially now that I’m sailing from youth to early middle age, have lost most of my hair and am a bit fat I fit that dirty old man look more than quirky hipster artist. There is a bit of sexism in this attitude too in my opinion. My wife doesn’t get near the sideways glances and while they have other concerns about being assaulted or mugged most other women photographers I know locally say they’ve never had anyone accuse them of untoward behavior if they take their camera out. Each gender seem to have unique issues with carrying gear public for sure! Nowadays I use this to my advantage and if I want to go out and shoot in public I make sure my wife is nearby and I use very loud verbal and body language to show she’s with me.

Now, does that mean these posts or caution are unwarranted? I cannot say one way or the other for sure, I have never been a woman in public and wasn’t present in any of the situations. I just have my own experience to learn from. Like I said, seedy men using photography to manipulate young women is not a new thing at all. But I feel like this attitude spilling over into public photography is a bit much. Most of those sleazy guys are “boudoir” photographers with garbage portfolios in my experience. It could also very well be the guy with a camera was following them around, using lewd language or did something else in addition to having a camera that set off justified alarm bells but I don’t know that either.

I’m also filled with a bit of irony here as most of the young people posting about how privacy violating public photography is also upload their photos and life stories to Instagram or TikTok without a second thought. But I digress.

The flip side of this I feel is that public officials could use this panic to pass anti-photography laws that block exposure of their nefarious deeds by journalists or citizens. Anything from police using inappropriate levels of force to a politician engaging in bad behavior would be something they’d probably like to see not photographed or video taped.

Anyway I’d like to hear thoughts on this. I know laws are different in other countries with respect to public photography and in some places you can’t photograph people at all without their consent even in a public space. I’d also like to hear from any women (I know you’re out there) here about their thoughts on this, I could be missing something about that side of the coin.

I think there’s also a question of privacy here with respect to the digital age. Back when most of our public photography laws were written facial identification and all the tracking we have today didn’t exist. Digital photography didn’t even exist. It was quite a different can of worms when that snapshot might be seen by the photographer, their friends or a gallery if they were having a show. Nowadays a photo of you in public could mean non-consensual submission to all sorts of social media big data and algorithms. Maybe our laws need to updated? Of course the governments are already using a lot of these technologies themselves in public but some cities have banned the use of facial recognition tech by law enforcement here in the states already. Have we moved into a “legal but amoral” space if it’s a non-public figure we’re photographing?

Anyway, if you made it this far thanks for reading! I don’t mean this to be a flame war just a thoughtful discussion that’s not too much Linux nerd.

9 Likes
2

Browsing through reddit I see a huge amount of video and pictures recorded in public, and posted without anyone complaining. This makes me think that, at least for the younger crowd, the concept of privacy is unknown, or at least old-fashioned and irrelevant.

In other words, the pervasive use of smartphones to take pictures and video would lead me to think that people were OK with being filmed, and with the film being shared and posted.

Having said that, I tend to use a small camera with small wide-angle lenses when I go to crowded places or parks. Part of it is the knowledge that a big camera with a big lens will attract attention (including from thieves). So, maybe the problem is that a guy carrying a camera (not a smartphone) is different and in consequence is perceived as having nefarious purposes?

2 Likes
3

Yes I think that is the crux of the problem. Smartphone gets a pass despite the extreme non-private implications of being photographed by such a device. Meanwhile people dodge or side eye me if I have my antique M645 out because it sticks out despite probably producing objectively less detailed (ergo less perv potential) photos than a flagship smartphone these days.

I found my small Fuji X100 generates less attention as well.

3 Likes
4

and many of those photos/videos might violate things like GDPR in Europe.

Which we discussed at least once or twice already on the forum.

5

And yet, the young people are always carrying their cameras (smartphones) everywhere and taking pictures of everything.

6

UK law on this topic is similar to US law. I have heard that France is different.

My favourite place for street photography is Cambridge, England, because it is fairly local and usually thronging with camera-toting tourists. (Not for the last couple of years, obviously.) So half the people are constantly taking photos, and the other half don’t bat an eyelid.

In less-photographed places I have had problems similar to the OP. I won’t go into details, and they were quickly resolved, but they left a nasty taste.

1 Like
7

Unfortunately people watch far too much television, and read far too many newspapers, and women are now walking scared that every man is out to get them. This is no accident, it is medias job done successfully, they want men and women hating each other. Divide and conquer. With the feminist empowerment of women some of them may even feel they are doing a righteous deed by speaking out, no matter how unfounded the accusation! Don’t let a confrontation bother you. If anyone is proclaiming you guilty before proven innocent, it is not your problem. Treat em kindly and move on is all you can do. Carrying a camera in public is no crime.

1 Like
8

Yeah sorry I don’t mean to rehash old topics. I may delete this one if it gets out hand. My new take here was the younger generations’ perception of public photography.

9

I’d also hazard a guess that the age of ubiquitous cameras has certainly changed this perception, as you’ve seen. Through some of the golden age of (street) photography a camera was likely not nearly as common and seen as more novel.

I think the documentary/candid role of photography is super important from a historical and cultural perspective. Sure, we could pose for all of our photos but I don’t feel like it captures the essence or behind-the-facade view of actual life nearly as well.

I mean, if all of my historical figures were viewed like this, it would rob future generations of a better feeling or understanding of what daily lives might have been like or the true personality of the subject:

image
image774×957 124 KB

Versus:

image

image
image1200×690 281 KB

One of my favorite examples of this is The Americans by Jack Kerouac and Robert Frank.
There’s a fun article talking about the inimitable Robert Frank over at the New Yorker.

image
image1200×720 259 KB

image

image

I love seeing people living life and being humans.

It also helps to provide materials for younger generations to see the type of art we think about when we consider street/candid photography and hopefully get them to critically think about why it might be appealing or aesthetically pleasing to them. Why does this image resonate with me?

image

Young JF Kennedy Jr. saluting his father at his funeral

As for handling confrontation - I wouldn’t. If pressed, explain simply what you’re doing (if you want to) and move on. If it continues, don’t be afraid to call the police. You’re not breaking the law (I hope) and someone harassing you might be.

If you wanted to try and defuse the situation, try a sideways approach rather than a direct confrontation. Call the person near you to look at something you find interesting to photograph and tell them why it’s fascinating or would make a good subject. “Hey, check out this light falling through the trees here and the way it lights up a person/dog/bench/pigeon as they pass through it - isn’t it wonderful?” Get them outside of the confrontation and possibly looking at something they haven’t looked at before. Sometimes your enthusiasm might be enough to defuse them or at least disarm them into realizing you’re not a threat or concern.

5 Likes
10

I think this is unfair to women, they are human beings capable of rational thought and I would say many are not easily manipulated. Sure, there are always the ones too tied into media but I’d say that issue knows no gender. My father in law spouts crazy talking points from the news all the time for example, but generally I think the younger generation isn’t tied into mainstream news as much. Social media however is another story.

From my own personal anecdotes working as a photographer with performing arts students and other women in my life I’ve heard some terrible stories and dealt with the aftermath of attempted sexual assaults. They are not uncommon at all so I don’t think the fear is unfounded. IMO we’ve either got a small but persistent group of guys who try this stuff repeatedly and are never brought in or it’s a far more common behavior among men than most of us understand. I’ve never assaulted anyone, nor do I plan on it, plus I don’t have a lot of regular guy friends so I don’t know either way for sure. But the more I experience the more I think it’s a common man behavior thing and those who don’t engage in that behavior are outliers. The real wake up call for me was hearing stories from homosexual men about this stuff. It’s not just women experiencing a lot of violence at the hands of men.

But we’re getting off topic here! I just wanted to interject because I didn’t think this was a fair take on women. I do think painting public photographers with a bit of an unfair shake out but I don’t think it’s because women are being heavily manipulated. I just think a of this is bubbling to the surface recently.

I do appreciate your contribution to the topic as it gave me the chance to talk about this a bit more! I agree that carrying a camera is not a crime, as does the US judicial system. I just wonder if the world is changing a bit with respect to public opinion on this.

5 Likes
11

It is not just women targeted or too heavily tied into media, it is everyone. Culture everywhere is screwed, men and women. Just on this topic it is the women who will act out of turn because the man with the camera is the perceived threat.

12

I completely agree your points here. The novelty is gone, instead of “oh wow what’s the box with a piece of glass in front of it this young whipper snapper has” from the past it’s “oh lord another “artist” trying to get Instagram famous” reaction of today. There are millions of photos taken everyday now we are living in on of the most heavily documented times in history. When everyone’s a photographer no one is a photographer. Although there is talk from historians about a “digital dark age.” There is just too much data to reasonably make sense of or keep track of long term.

Candid photography is obviously important and we really won’t know what was important until future generations make their judgement. Unless your the White House photographer or someone similarly important we’re all just kind of shooting and scooting.

My concern WRT diffusing confrontations is now it’s not uncommon for someone to take to a local Facebook group and make a scene afterwards. Especially if they get your name or photo (the irony) it’s really hard to refute claims after the mob mentality kicks in. Just watching our local groups here it’s a few posts like that a month. Unlike in the past the talking down the hostilities isn’t just “calm them down, assure them you’re on the straight and narrow, extricate yourself physically from the situation and you’re good” it’s “trying to level with this person so they don’t take it to the mob later.” There’s also changing ideas of what constitutes appropriate photographer in public these days too. Some people are under the impression it’s wrong or illegal to take photos of others in public at all and will get very defensive of that point. Granted I’ve not had any encounter go that sideways myself and have had very few of them but it’s becoming a chorus in the back of my head lately.

13

Don’t be so sure those “impromptu” shots of politicians aren’t just as staged as the studio portrait :wink:

1 Like
14

I think you make a good point about people who then upload the pictures to the internet and they might be used to train models, facial recognition etc. I think this is an issue that should be dealt with legislation, like banning crawlers and things of the sort, and it’s not the fault of the photographer.

In the end, without taking creeps, paparazzi etc, into consideration, I think this is a non issue overall. People’s privacy and freedoms are infringed daily by social media, data collection etc, and they overall don’t give a damn (maybe for not knowing any better?) why would they care that a photographer takes a shot of a building and they appear in the background crossing walking along the crosswalk? Which is also almost never the case as the people complaining in those facebook(ironic) groups likely were not the ones on the photographs.

In my opinion it’s a little different when taking candid shots of people where they are the subject, without prior consent, politicians and other high key people, while working or in public, excluded as they give up their right by taking such a public job.

This is a great point, it’s worth preserving those moments.

15

This is the changing attitude I’m noticing. Back when street photography was more novel the candid shot of the common person was not seen as inappropriate and as @patdavid pointed it out is often enlightening to future generations about how those folks lived. Vivian Maier comes to mind on that front. Even as recently as 10-15 years ago with photoblogs like The Sartoilist (is he still around, last I remember was 2009 or 2010 he had a Blogspot site) it wasn’t seen as threatening.

Granted this is probably also about how the photographer presents themselves. The Sartoilist was a well groomed, well dressed and a conventionally attractive dude. He also had a lot of self confidence. If you look like I do and tend to be shy it’s going to come off as creepy. Even if I dress up it’s still obvious I have no hair, am fat and nerdy. I wonder if that’s part of the “tip off” on these social media complaints about these photographers and how much is ill intent vs just awkwardness.

1 Like
16

Definitely the presentation part plays a big role in how the photographers are interpreted. I think the internet also “ruined” people’s idea of why someone is taking pictures. We have no way of letting people know that we have no ill intent and won’t use their personal image in a degrading way if we can call it that.

I saw a video about Vivian a while ago, she had a few boxes full of pictures never released to the public right? In a way it’s a bit sad but motivating at the same time, we could all learn a bit from her and take pictures for our own enjoyment and not that of others or their validation.

I 100% agree about preserving all those ‘human’ moments across time, specially the casual and mundane ones that we give no thought of today but will in the future.

1 Like
17

IIRC she had shopped around her photos during her life but for a few reasons deals for shows or books fell through. There were some letters found in her stuff that indicated intentions to get published, it just never panned out.

1 Like
18

Interesting topic, Leander.

I’m personally unlikely to run into one of these situations, since humans are just about the last thing I want to photograph. Gimme a landscape, a seascape or an animal, and I’m much happier. Having said that, I don’t know whether a subconscious concern about this topic has contributed to the direction I’ve chosen to go.

I think targeting of journalists by police is a separate topic, but a very important one. Here in Canada, there have been several recent cases where police have arrested journalists who have been present to document activities, including activities of police. Here are a couple of examples:

Situations like these are not unique to Canada, and are deeply concerning. Police are increasingly trying to blindfold the media whenever their actions slip into a grey area.

Sorry to take your “side observation” and run with it. It just hit on something that has been concerning me. Back to the topic of how some members of the general public choose to treat photographers as unsavory.

2 Likes
19

I processed this yesterday, and this thread came to mind. A good thing about phones is that people are so engrossed they tend not to notice my big DSLR.

Stonehenge-vistors-with-phones
Stonehenge-vistors-with-phones2000×1136 1.28 MB

2 Likes
20

I think to be polite you should be pretty far back using 300mm for people and wider lenses for abstract buildings and architecture. To be up on someone taking a 24mm is obnoxious and darn near fighting’ words in some areas of this land.