Photographing kids for Halloween at my door

Poncke

All the kids should wear a black bar in front of their eyes, that would make a nice fancy dress

Poncke

@Tasden, those randomers are people related to the parents, and they might want to see/show the full picture. Go sue them and see what happens because I dont think you have a case.

But yeah happy Halloween

Paulw

Tasden wrote: »

No, "they" can have perfect pictures including all the kids that they can cherish all they like. Randomers on the internet will have a picture that doesn't include my child. I cant control what people put on their own social media (the exact reason why i dont like her being photographed by randomers, I cant guarantee where they'll end up). I just personally don't agree with people posting pictures of other people's children online.

But, you cannot control who takes photos or how they use them. You have no right to object to someone taking photos. You may not like it, but that is the law currently.

Tasden

Poncke wrote: »

@Tasden, those randomers are people related to the parents, and they might want to see/show the full picture. Go sue them and see what happens because I dont think you have a case.

But yeah happy Halloween

What are you even talking about "a case"? My whole point was that i prefer people not to photograph my child in the first place for that exact reason- i can't control what they do with the photo. It is my personal opinion that photos of others people's children shouldn't be posted online/that permission should be sought first. It is quite obviously not everbody else's and that is the reason i gave for prefering that she is not photographed in the first place-because i then have no control over where they are published.

Edit again for paul's comment: again, where have i said i try to control or object to anything? I gave my opinion on what I believe is respectful/should be done, and explained why i don't like my child being photographed by people- because I can't control where it will end up. Not once did i claim i had a "case" or that I am entitled to be treated a certain way- it is my opinion that kids privacy should be respected, because it is not by many people i would have an issue with random people taking photos because I cant guarantee where they will end up.

Poncke

"you cannot control who takes photos or how they use them"

well, usage is controlled by law

Poncke

Tasden wrote: »

What are you even talking about "a case"? My whole point was that i prefer people not to photograph my child in the first place for that exact reason- i can't control what they do with the photo. It is my personal opinion that photos of others people's children shouldn't be posted online/that permission should be sought first. It is quite obviously not everbody else's and that is the reason i gave for prefering that she is not photographed in the first place-because i then have no control over where they are published.

I understand what you prefer, unfortunately for you, you dont have the law on your side and anyone can photograph whoever they want in public. Not in a school though, where parents need to give consent. So you do have some control there.

And I think its a bit far fetched that you want everyone to ask your permission to post a photo of their kid online if it happens to have your kid in the background.

Anyway, we wont agree here, so I will leave it at that.

Tasden

Poncke wrote: »

I understand what you prefer, unfortunately for you, you dont have the law on your side and anyone can photograph whoever they want in public. Not in a school though, where parents need to give consent. So you do have some control there.

And I think its a bit far fetched that you want everyone to ask your permission to post a photo of their kid online if it happens to have your kid in the background.

Anyway, we wont agree here, so I will leave it at that.

Can you not see that was exactly my point? Somebody asked why people would be annoyed at a randomer taking pictures and i pointed out that it is not just paranoia about paedophiles, that it is a privacy issue, that you cannot control where the photos end up. I'm not asking you to agree with me or saying I expect people to do anything, I'm saying that they don't do things that I would consider basic respect and that is the very reason I'd have an issue with them photographing my child.

Poncke

I thought we were discussing the school play example, they are not photographing your child, they are photographing THEIR child, your child happens to be in the frame.

Unless a stranger is singling out your child and take their photo, I could agree you want to find out what the story is

jaded_pause

Jaysus people are far too sensitive and paranoid, and this thread proves it. If my kid trick or treated at Poncke's house, and we both had a scare because of a flash, I'd laugh so hard, and so would my kid. Further, if we got a photo of the moment we were both momentarily scared poopless, I'd financially reimburse him, because it would only be right.

Tasden

Poncke wrote: »

I thought we were discussing the school play example, they are not photographing your child, they are photographing THEIR child, your child happens to be in the frame.

Unless a stranger is singling out your child and take their photo, I could agree you want to find out what the story is

I'm speakig generally, and in the context of the op, and giving my own opinion on posting photos of kids that are not your own online. All i am saying is what I personally believe to be basic decency, obviously other people don't view it that way, and that is the very reason why I would not like someone I don't know taking a photo of my child because I cannot control what happens to the photo. That was the only point i was making.

Poncke

If you are talking about the OP, I never said I was going to publish the photos. My intentions were to take a unique photo of the kids and give the photo to the parents for free and have a laugh or two. They would get my business card with my company details. And if they didnt like it I would delete the photo there and then. No photo was ever going to be published by me, anywhere. Nothing more nothing less.

But at the moment because of the apparent over sensitivity of people I have decided not to take any photos at all. I am going to have a beer and my wife will hand out the candy.

Cheers

jaded_pause

Poncke wrote: »

But at the moment because of the apparent over sensitivity of people I have decided not to take any photos at all. I am going to have a beer and my wife will hand out the candy.

Cheers

Shame. Have a good evening anyway bud.

Poncke

Just had a chat with the neighbour and she said that she thinks people will not appreciate the photo being taken. She also said that it is against the law. I explained that she was wrong but that I agree that it is best not to do it and that I understand the concerns.

To me it shows that people dont know the law but make comments about the law thinking they strengthen their point and this is where it all gets ugly because when you tell them they have it wrong, they get upset and think you are being stubborn.

Anyway, as Jaded says, its a shame.

But then again, nothing lost either, and probably a lot of agony prevented.

Cynortas

If i saw you taking a picture of my child regardless of where it is without my permission you'd straight up be flat on your back and your camera in a million pieces. Regardless of the law taking pictures of children without permission is creepy and wrong morally

jaded_pause

I asked himself, if he would feel the same as me or others, if he wouldn't mind for the laugh or if he wouldn't appreciate it, he said if it was a stranger's house he would find it weird and ask the person to delete it, to which I responded "Then why are you ok with your daughter knocking on their door and asking for sweets?" he shrugged. peoples are cray!

RustyNut

Cynortas wrote: »

If i saw you taking a picture of my child regardless of where it is without my permission you'd straight up be flat on your back and your camera in a million pieces. Regardless of the law taking pictures of children without permission is creepy and wrong morally

Why?

dave1982

Sad world we live in, people always assuming worst. Kids are dressed up masks and clothes. There will be no naked children. Sounds like good idea but way things are now if you take photos of kids, it's automatically assumed its perverse and seedy reasons you are doing it. If parents are present with kids ask them bout taking a photo obviously if no parents there. Don't even think of inviting in to take photo.

Great pic on Facebook of kids trick or treating, cartoon image of kids dietary requirements. No lactose no seeds blah blah

How did we survive years ago?

shane.

its not against the law but it is best practice to ask permission before taking the photo,if i called to someone's door with my kid and he asked if he/she could take a photo and give it to me id be absolutely fine, if he/she took a picture then said it to me i wouldn't be too happy

magicbastarder

CabanSail wrote: »

Rubbish, you are within your rights to do so. Especially as they are on your property.

there's a massive gulf between what is legal and what is common sense.
if i was bringing my kid around (i'm not a parent, mind) trick or treating, and they had their photo taken as soon as the door opened i'd turn and walk them away, because in this situation, the saying 'if you're explaining, you're losing' is incredibly apt.

also, we just had a bunch of ten year olds at the door. what would you do; hand them a business card, telling them 'get your parents to ring me'; or let them come back saying 'some weirdo with professional looking camera gear took our photo'?

i find the 'it's not illegal for me to do it, therefore it's fine' argument tiring.

magicbastarder

Paulw wrote: »

Nope, not at all. What is creepy about taking photos? Are you paranoid? You walk down the street every day and there are tens, if not hundreds of CCTV cameras that capture you and your family, doing your daily activities. But yet a photographer taking photos is creepy? I love your logic. :eek:

you don't see how context is everything here?

magicbastarder

Cynortas wrote: »

If i saw you taking a picture of my child regardless of where it is without my permission you'd straight up be flat on your back and your camera in a million pieces.

... and this is the other end of the spectrum.

RustyNut

magicbastarder wrote: »

you don't see how context is everything here?

Kids in fancy dress is the context of this thread, surly a kodak moment in anyones book.

magicbastarder

sure, but (as the original idea suggested) taking a photo before they've even opened their mouths, in order to get the frightened look on their face?
if you know and are friendly with the parents, fine. doing it to children of strangers, that's a *little* bit off.

Poncke

Cynortas wrote: »

If i saw you taking a picture of my child regardless of where it is without my permission you'd straight up be flat on your back and your camera in a million pieces. Regardless of the law taking pictures of children without permission is creepy and wrong morally

Taking an innocent photo with the best intentions is wrong but assaulting me and breaking my 4000 euro camera is acceptable to you? You'd end up using your children's tuition money to pay me off.

lazeedaisy

shane. wrote: »

its not against the law but it is best practice to ask permission before taking the photo,if i called to someone's door with my kid and he asked if he/she could take a photo and give it to me id be absolutely fine, if he/she took a picture then said it to me i wouldn't be too happy

It's amazing how many people find it easier to hide behind the law, I agree with you, but not all "photographers" see the sense in this and are quick to quote law!!

Hellrazer

OP --You should have put a sign up saying that you were going to be taking pictures of the kids in their costumes and giving out the pics to the parents for free.Anyone that doesn't want them can see them being deleted.

I guarantee you that no one would object if they knew what you were doing.

It was / is a great idea and nothing creepy(excuse the pun) about it.

Cynortas

Poncke wrote: »

Taking an innocent photo with the best intentions is wrong but assaulting me and breaking my 4000 euro camera is acceptable to you? You'd end up using your children's tuition money to pay me off.

How would i know your intentions are good if you popped out your door and snapped a picture? In this day and age pedos come in all shapes and sizes and it only take one minute for something bad to happen.

humberklog

Cynortas wrote: »

How would i know your intentions are good if you popped out your door and snapped a picture? In this day and age pedos come in all shapes and sizes and it only take one minute for something bad to happen.

As opposed to bygone days when peados came in one shape and size and bad things happened much slower?

Musta been real easy to identify and catch'm.

Poncke

Cynortas wrote: »

How would i know your intentions are good if you popped out your door and snapped a picture? In this day and age pedos come in all shapes and sizes and it only take one minute for something bad to happen.

So you assault me first and then ask questions. Doesnt that make you the hypocryte?

Qualitymark

Are any of the people who are saying that photographing children is or is not legal lawyers or gardaí?
Sensible decision by the OP.