And yet, the young people are always carrying their cameras (smartphones) everywhere and taking pictures of everything.
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
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
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.
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:
Versus:
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.
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?
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
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
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.
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.
Don’t be so sure those “impromptu” shots of politicians aren’t just as staged as the studio portrait 
1 Like
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.
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
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
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
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:
- Amber Bracken, winner of the World Press Photo of the Year: A journalist’s view of being arrested by the RCMP | The Narwhal
- Well known photojournalist Ian Willms: https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2021/06/22/internationally-recognized-photojournalist-arrested-as-encampments-cleared-in-tense-standoff-at-trinity-bellwoods-park.html
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
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.
2 Likes
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.
I photograph mostly urban scenes and over the cause of many years I do feel that a camera is more and more noticed. It’s never been invisible but people pay even more attention. My subjects are not the people but they may have a prominent or critical role in to the image or composition non the less. I’ve photographed across all continents but never had any serious issue or confrontation.
The contradiction with smartphone and social media usage is obvious but in many ways I understand why people are becoming more sensitive. There’s a general awareness that images have value, that they will never disappear and that how people are represented may affect future jobs,friends and partners .
This is an interesting and controversial subject.
- Basically I think the amount of people taking photographs has a negative influence, specifically if those people show bad habits. Some of those people are really respect-less.
- Personally I agree that every individual should have a right do deny being photographed, but that can be difficult to realize where masses are (e.g. common hot spots). But I think it’s important to respect that right.
- Also I’d like to do portraits of people while they “behave naturally”, but due to the reasons stated above, I rarely ever do it. Aksing for permission destroys the situation, and photographing first is considered impolite by myself. Also taking out a “real camera” makes people aware that you are going to take a photo graph, and most people don’t like that (I understand)
- That man-and-women thing: I think it’ a fact of nature that men have a tendency to prefer photographing women. Unfortunately there’s a “over-mimosity” (maybe name it “me-too paranoia”) recently. Usually I try to make a “silent agreement” before taking a photo, like this: Take out the camera, point at the target, and if the target looks as if it does not mind, it’s most likely OK to take a shot. Doesn’t happen to often, though.
- Then most people will “make a photo face” once they are aware you want to take a photo. Maybe it’s some social media pressure forcing them to “look good” (in their opinion), while in fact 95% of those do not (look good) then. Someone once said (I don’t remember who it was): “Women look best when they don’t know it”
- Smartphones: I hate them. Recently I was in a museum where I could get back easily (also rather expensive). I wanted to make some photographs of famous paintings with a slight tele-lens, but the problem was that all those people with their wide-angle smartphones stood immediately before the paintings, so I had no chance to get a shot within an acceptable time of waiting (maybe if I waited 20 minutes per photo, then yes).
- Several years ago when I was sight-seeing New York, I made a photo of a young woman doing some morning sports near the Hudson river. Either she did not notice my (huge) medium format camera, or she did not care, so I made a photo (requiring manual exposure and focusing, so you can’t really make snapshots, especially when considering that you have to wind the film, and you only have 12 exposures per roll). Well, after all the photo is just a young woman doing some morning sports in a park. No more, no less. I’m afraid it would not work today.
I have heard so many horror stories of people being weird to photographers. But frankly, I’ve never experienced any, despite being a balding, white, middle aged male.
If anything, I tend to get the occasional belittling glance, what with carrying one of those bulky ancient picture taking devices (a modern mirrorless camera) instead of a smartphone like normal people. I sometimes get a weird look for photographing some “useless” play of the light, or flower, or bird (instead of a selfie?). But, again, more in a pitiful way than mean.
Even when I’m out at the playground with my kids, nobody bats an eye at my toting a camera. Even when other kids are clearly in the frame. I think a smartphone would actually seem more threatening.
That said, I do go out of my way to ask friends and acquaintances for permission before I take pictures of them. I never got a rejection of course, and more than once they only expressed regret that I didn’t ask earlier, and didn’t include them in more pictures.
Why that is so, I have no idea. Perhaps I look so obviously beta male that people just don’t see me as threatening. Perhaps I am too obviously a nerdy dad. Perhaps my retro-styled Fuji camera gear looks too ancient to be a threat. Or perhaps I just don’t tend to frequent the places where privacy vigilantes hang out (rural Europe).
At any rate, it seems to me that public perception around here has actually shifted. Cameras are no longer seen as a peeping threat. Even pedos would use smartphones these days. Instead cameras are for delusional nerds, the elderly, and hipsters. “Mostly harmless”, as they say.
Funny thing:
I was one of the Google Glass Explorers. That device received a SHOCKING amount of unwanted stigma - people assumed it was ALWAYS recording.
The reality is:
- The quality was crap
- The battery life was awful, if you recorded video you would run down the battery in <30 minutes
Meanwhile, people rarely had issues with my mirrorless cameras - although in general, I was cautious about the environments I used them in. (Concerts where friends were performing and I knew the venue owner, or social gatherings for a young professionals organization where I was the semi-official photographer for the organization hosting the gathering.)
Post-pandemic, where a lot of venues I had mutual comfort with (e.g. I was a regular there, and so the owners/staff/many customers knew me) are no longer existent, I’ve taken out the camera a LOT less.
1 Like