Taking photos in public.

Paulw

ajsp. wrote: »

My take: Step out in public and you have waved your right of privacy, Is this wrong?

Yes and no. It can depend on a number of circumstances, including the use of the image taken.

RLJ

Paulw wrote: »

Even without his permission you'd be ok. Press usage is considered editorial, so doesn't require the subject's permission.

But could not anyone claim to be a journalist if snapping street fights /arrests. I am not an NUJ member but anyone can call themselves a journalist although i do not claim to be

Anouilh

A search for "Anna E Helling" and "personality" leads to some very good reading on the subject of tort of personality and how laws in relation to privacy differ between Europe and the U.S.

I have decided to skip France from now on, as the laws on street photography are quite limiting. Governments should be looking at these issues carefully. While individuals should always be protected in public spaces, the very social activity of capturing streetscapes with people in them is a very communicative past time.

Paulw

RLJ wrote: »

But could not anyone claim to be a journalist if snapping street fights /arrests. I am not an NUJ member but anyone can call themselves a journalist although i do not claim to be

It's not what you claim to be (or are). It's what you do with the image. Being a member of the NUJ has nothing to do with it, as they have no special photographic rights above anyone else.

Tony1000

In a nutshell you can take photos of people in public,but you cant use them for advertising purposes unless you have their permission.
Be careful if you are shooting in a local park as people tend to become aware that you have a camera especially if you are taking pictures and their are children around.
By all means take photos but do use common sense when out there.
Regards Tony

Burnt

Personally, I feel that it's better to beg forgiveness than ask permission
in regards taking pictures; each opportunity is a critical moment, when it's
past; the movement, expression, light, it's gone never to be recreated.

There is far too much "perverted witch-doctor sealing my soul and posting
it on the internet" B.S. paranoia out there.

Anouilh

Paulw wrote: »

It's not what you claim to be (or are). It's what you do with the image. Being a member of the NUJ has nothing to do with it, as they have no special photographic rights above anyone else.

While this is true, membership of the NUJ has traditionally meant that members can contribute to the debate on protocols from a professional standpoint.

The jolly days of dear old Father Browne documenting society freely are, seemingly, gone forever for anybody who is conscious of contemporary society and its norms.

I don't know how this pilot study has evolved:

http://www.epuk.org/News/836/met-to-relax-london-photography-restrictions

However, the fact that a professional journalist took time to highlight the shortcomings of tagging photographers is noteworthy. Amateur photographers like myself do not tend to make political stands in relation to freedom of expression.

It is interesting that members of the NUJ often do...

(Also, I am aware that laws in Britain are not the same as those in Ireland, but EU laws operate here and it is good to be aware of protocol when travelling.)

Anouilh

jamesdublin12 wrote: »

...The other thing, is that if there is a logo in a pic, can i not submit it, cos of logo and copyright etc...

If you do some searches for "photograhy" and "fair use" you will be able to see general trends on this subject. Ireland is relatively relaxed, I find, but you might find some useful reading here:

http://news.deviantart.com/article/47231/

Certain buildings and police logos are copyrighted.


I think that temperament counts for a lot when photographing on the streets. Some people like to confront, others just take safe options.

Really, given that millions of photos are uploaded onto the Internet every day, there is no need to be over scrupulous.

Anouilh

RLJ wrote: »

But could not anyone claim to be a journalist if snapping street fights /arrests. I am not an NUJ member but anyone can call themselves a journalist although i do not claim to be

In fact, people do not usually call themselves journalists. There has been a decline in the regard in which the profession is held since I worked as a hack and it is often assumed, and wrongly at that, that journalism and sleaze are one.

As for recording street fights, I think you have put your finger on why street photojournalism is still a male preserve. I have taken photos of people who looked very displeased to be on camera. I would not dream of uploading them to a public forum and if fights were to start near me I would not photograph them. One journalist I spoke to explained, with humour, that when documenting a street riot and the participants, enraged, break one's camera, it's one way of getting some nice new gear, thanks to insurance...

RLJ

Anouilh wrote: »

In fact, people do not usually call themselves journalists.

I meant to the garda who challenged them to let him know one would not be intimidated

In a certain local radio the 'journalist' when called to a dispute about a delay at a railway crossing drove there in the station jeep with the logo in huge letters. Of course they saw her a mile off so no story. That is the problem with the ego of the 'journalist' more worried about being seen in the company jeep than getting the story

I just meant saying 'i am a journalist' if challenged. A writer friend of mine found the words I am a journalist and i know the law very effective even tho he is not and doesn't always know all the relevant laws. It cannot be any more of a bluff than a cop who tries to bluff people about the law.

Paulw

RLJ wrote: »

I just meant saying 'i am a journalist' if challenged.

But, being a journalist gives you no special rights/access at all.

You might as well claim to be Superman, a milkman, a taxi driver, as a journalist.

Anouilh

RLJ wrote: »

I just meant saying 'i am a journalist' if challenged.

Things certainly have changed. People used just offer me tea...

News reporting is different and carrying a press badge is still useful. It does not bring privileges, but proves that one is at work.

RLJ

Paulw wrote: »

But, being a journalist gives you no special rights/access at all.
.

but it tells the cop you know the law and are more likely to be assertive than an ordinary person. I am speaking here about being challenged by the garda as distinct from the rioters. I think someone wrote in this or another thread that a cop took his camera and was aggressive

I think it was a different thread i will try to find it

Here http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055645768

RLJ

Anouilh wrote: »

News reporting is different and carrying a press badge is still useful. It does not bring privileges, but proves that one is at work.

and it let the cops know they will be exposed if they do any bullying. That is my point

Paulw

RLJ wrote: »

but it tells the cop you know the law and are more likely to be assertive than an ordinary person. I am speaking here about being challenged by the garda as distinct from the rioters. I think someone wrote in this or another thread that a cop took his camera and was aggressive

I doubt many journalists know the law that well. I'd bet that a majority wouldn't know any more about the law than you or I. Being a journalist affords you no special protection under the law.

RLJ

Being a journalist affords you no special protection under the law.

i know that. i am talking about speaking up for your self ...oh i am not going to bother no one seems to understand my point.but if iam out taking pics a cop won't bully me....

Paulw

RLJ wrote: »

i know that. i am talking about speaking up for your self ...oh i am not going to bother no one seems to understand my point.but if iam out taking pics a cop won't bully me....

You can speak up for yourself, and stand up for your rights, without having to make false statements, or false claims. It should make no difference.

Claiming to be a journalist should make no difference at all as to how you are treated.