Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Photographs of Children in Public

Options
  • 01-11-2015 1:44am
    #1
    CabanSail
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 9,047 CMod ✭✭✭✭


    This is a thread to discuss issues surrounding photographs of children in public places. It is a more general than a more specific thread which was closed.

    Please note: While issues about violence or criminal damage can be discussed, actual threats will not be tolerated.


«134567…12

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    m5ex9oqjawdg2i
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11,221 ✭✭✭✭m5ex9oqjawdg2i


    It's evident that this is a very touchy subject. Personally I don't take pictures of people, only on rare occasions. Not a bit fan of portrait photography and I am rubbish at it. It is very unfortunate that my fellow photographers may encounter some problems when taking pictures of people, especially children.

    I believe that most people are fine with it, but there are some parents that will see red if you take a picture of their little treasure. Somehow you are viewed as a creepy old man that's up to no good. Why is this mentality is possessed by some? You may be courteous and ask a parent if you can take a picture of their child but it's not essential (In a public place). Some posters in the other thread were quite aggresive and threatening "If you take a picture of my child i'll smash your camera", like wtf? I find it incredibly difficult to understand what a parent is thinking when they get upset about taking pictures of their children, can somebody explain this to me?


  • Options
    #3
    The Sidewards Man
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,570 ✭✭✭The Sidewards Man


    Op do not be photographing children, that's bad.


  • Options
    #4
    CabanSail
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 9,047 CMod ✭✭✭✭CabanSail


    I have wondered what would be more dangerous to a child. Having their photograph taken or seeing a parent assault someone and illegally damage their property?


  • Options
    #5
    toe_knee
    Registered Users Posts: 840 ✭✭✭toe_knee


    Parents don't know if you are a paedophile or not. Some parents don't even want to have photos of their own kids online. That's up to them. Why is this such an issue?


  • Options
    #6
    Paulw
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 13,381 Mod ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    The Sidewards Man wrote: »
    Op do not be photographing children, that's bad.

    Why? You're not stealing their soul by taking a photo. :cool: It's simply a photo.

    Also, I feel that there are too many "anti-child-photo warriors" online. I have never had a problem taking photos of children, but yet from comments online a lot of people are violently against it.

    Why is it such an issue???


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Cynortas
    Registered Users Posts: 282 ✭✭Cynortas


    Im surprised most people would seem to be ok with some randomer taking their childs picture. Yes 99% of people taking the picture would have good honest intentions but whos to know who is in that 1% bracket? It seems like easy pickings for a pedo just to go out and take some pictures of kids to use them for illicit purposes if they use flimsy excuses such as oh its Halloween or its for my Instagram profile.


  • Options
    #8
    _Brian
    Registered Users Posts: 18,515 ✭✭✭✭_Brian


    I think we all know that in the depraved sections if society photos of children are saught after.
    Many parents control photos of their children and intentionally never post them on social media or share them even with friends, as parents protecting their children this is their right to protect their children as they see fit.

    So, why as some random stranger would a photographer think they have the right to photograph children and them the images are completly out if the control of the parents. It has to be said, the chances of a photo being misused is probably small, but in general parents aren't comfortable taking these even small risks.

    As a parent of two young girls myself I would not be happy about it at all. I wouldn't be resorting to violence but I wouldn't be letting it pass either.


  • Options
    #9
    Diamond Doll
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭Diamond Doll


    As a parent, I don't think I'd have an issue with anyone taking a photo of my child in public. I guess there's a time and place for it too - to be honest, if a lone man is hanging around a childrens playground taking photos of children without permission, it may of course be entirely innocent, but they're looking for trouble by doing so. Whereas you're probably less likely to offend with discreet street shots.

    Having said that, I do think it would be courteous to ask the child's parents for permission first. I know in my case, I'd probably both appreciate being asked, and I'd also be very interested in perhaps getting a copy of any photos if possible, if the photographer was open to that.

    The other thing is, I do know parents who are extremely private when it comes to photos of their children going on the internet, to the extent that they won't even share them on Facebook, even with maximum privacy settings in place. I don't particularly understand that, but I do respect that, in that I would never even consider putting photos of their child on my page without their permission. I'm not entirely sure what their logic is, paedophile paranoia I guess, but while it's irrational to me, I wouldn't want to upset them by going against their wishes.

    My understanding is that - legally - the photographer is doing nothing wrong in these situations, but I do think that the decent thing to do is ask the parents permission in advance if possible.


  • Options
    #10
    RustyNut
    Registered Users Posts: 3,430 ✭✭✭RustyNut


    Cynortas wrote: »
    Im surprised most people would seem to be ok with some randomer taking their childs picture. Yes 99% of people taking the picture would have good honest intentions but whos to know who is in that 1% bracket? It seems like easy pickings for a pedo just to go out and take some pictures of kids to use them for illicit purposes if they use flimsy excuses such as oh its Halloween or its for my Instagram profile.

    As an example, If I was to have taken some photos of kids dressed up as minions or what not last night, what illicit purposes could they be used for?


  • Options
    #11
    Cynortas
    Registered Users Posts: 282 ✭✭Cynortas


    RustyNut wrote: »
    As an example, If I was to have taken some photos of kids dressed up as minions or what not last night, what illicit purposes could they be used for?

    Well your probably not a pedo so your intentions wouldn't be illicit but if you were a pedo it would be the perfect excuse to go out and take pics and then use them for nefarious purposes either way i wouldn't let you snap a pic of my child as theres no way to know how you intend to use the pics


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Diamond Doll
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭Diamond Doll


    Cynortas wrote: »
    Im surprised most people would seem to be ok with some randomer taking their childs picture. Yes 99% of people taking the picture would have good honest intentions but whos to know who is in that 1% bracket? It seems like easy pickings for a pedo just to go out and take some pictures of kids to use them for illicit purposes if they use flimsy excuses such as oh its Halloween or its for my Instagram profile.

    Look, I'm sorry but your kids are probably not all that sexy! There are countless photos of countless children readily available on the internet, both amateur and professional, there is no market there that's screaming out for innocent photos of your fully dressed child.

    If you're going to talk about that 1% bracket, sure aren't those same paedos just as likely to perve over your clothed child any day of the week when you have them out in public, without you ever being aware of it? Perhaps you should keep your kids locked up at home all the time, just in case?

    It would bother me if someone tried to take photos of my child naked, however I ensure he's never undressed in public places - problem solved. Other than that, I really don't see the problem.


  • Options
    #13
    Pawwed Rig
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 22,327 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    No issue with photographing children in public. The pedo threat is way over exagerated and what could be done with a photo of a child anyway? Do people really think pedo look at random snaps?
    Children are constantly on camera these days anyway.


  • Options
    #14
    Paulw
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 13,381 Mod ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    Diamond Doll wrote: »
    I'm not entirely sure what their logic is, paedophile paranoia I guess, but while it's irrational.

    Parania indeed. Totally irrational.

    The crazy thing is - statistically, more children are abused by family or persons well known to them. Yet, parents don't seem to mind those people taking photos of their children.
    Diamond Doll wrote: »
    My understanding is that - legally - the photographer is doing nothing wrong in these situations

    Correct.


  • Options
    #15
    Poncke
    Registered Users Posts: 955 ✭✭✭Poncke


    Let me be the devil's advocate here and say something controversial. I do understand why parents are protective of their child and of course I can agree with the reasoning. Now I am not defending any pedo behaviour here, just throwing this out.

    So the person taking a photo of kids in the park is a pedo. Kids are unaware that their photo is taken. Pedo goes home and get off on looking at the photo and what else he does with the photo. Put the photo in his underpants and wear it at work, or whatever.

    The child is not abused in getting the photo nor are they aware of anything. How does that photo damage or hurt a child?

    No need to attack me over this comment, it is not suggesting anything, nor am I defending or condoning any malicious behaviour. Its a debate, lets keep it that way please.


  • Options
    #16
    Poncke
    Registered Users Posts: 955 ✭✭✭Poncke


    Diamond doll kind of suggests the same I noticed now


  • Options
    #17
    Poncke
    Registered Users Posts: 955 ✭✭✭Poncke


    Cynortas wrote: »
    i wouldn't let you snap a pic of my child as theres no way to know how you intend to use the pics

    How would you prevent the photo being taken? Just curious.


  • Options
    #18
    toe_knee
    Registered Users Posts: 840 ✭✭✭toe_knee


    Diamond Doll wrote:
    If you're going to talk about that 1% bracket, sure aren't those same paedos just as likely to perve over your clothed child any day of the week when you have them out in public, without you ever being aware of it? Perhaps you should keep your kids locked up at home all the time, just in case?


    Glad to see you are an expert on what gets paedophile off. I feel safe now.


  • Options
    #19
    Poncke
    Registered Users Posts: 955 ✭✭✭Poncke


    toe_knee wrote: »
    Glad to see you are an expert on what gets paedophile off. I feel safe now.

    Are you then? Because you seem to suggest that you do know.


  • Options
    #20
    toe_knee
    Registered Users Posts: 840 ✭✭✭toe_knee


    Poncke wrote:
    Are you then? Because you seem to suggest that you do know.


    Not a clue. Never said I did. Not sure if they liked clothed kids or not but not taking f a chance


  • Options
    #21
    sportloto86
    Registered Users Posts: 125 ✭✭sportloto86


    I can never understand this "asking for permission in advance". To me photography is about capturing the moment whatever that moment may be. Never liked perfectly photoshopped shots and would never ask anyone to pose for a picture as it never has the same effect I'm after. Moment can never be repeated. You can act the same but it will become commercial. How do you repeat sadness, joy, dreaming, gust of wind messing up hair and twirling falling leaves?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Cynortas
    Registered Users Posts: 282 ✭✭Cynortas


    Poncke wrote: »
    Let me be the devil's advocate here and say something controversial. I do understand why parents are protective of their child and of course I can agree with the reasoning. Now I am not defending any pedo behaviour here, just throwing this out.

    So the person taking a photo of kids in the park is a pedo. Kids are unaware that their photo is taken. Pedo goes home and get off on looking at the photo and what else he does with the photo. Put the photo in his underpants and wear it at work, or whatever.

    The child is not abused in getting the photo nor are they aware of anything. How does that photo damage or hurt a child?

    No need to attack me over this comment, it is not suggesting anything, nor am I defending or condoning any malicious behaviour. Its a debate, lets keep it that way please.

    OH FFS are you actually saying that as long as the child is actually not physically abused its all good? Wow just wow.


  • Options
    #23
    ScottStorm
    Registered Users Posts: 364 ✭✭ScottStorm


    I heard the undercover paedos are using super wide lenses that allow them to photograph your kids and pretend they took a picture of something else.

    I say we lynch any photographers seen near kids!


  • Options
    #24
    Paulw
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 13,381 Mod ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    Cynortas wrote: »
    OH FFS are you actually saying that as long as the child is actually not physically abused its all good? Wow just wow.

    No, the question is - how is the child hurt?


  • Options
    #25
    Pawwed Rig
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 22,327 CMod ✭✭✭✭Pawwed Rig


    Poncke wrote: »
    How would you prevent the photo being taken? Just curious.

    With extreme over the top violence as he outlined in the previous thread


  • Options
    #26
    Cynortas
    Registered Users Posts: 282 ✭✭Cynortas


    Paulw wrote: »
    No, the question is - how is the child hurt?


    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/pictures-of-irish-schoolgirls-placed-on-pornographic-website-1.1997150

    No your right it could never hurt them at all im very sorry im 100% wrong here


  • Options
    #27
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Its hysteria of course.. and gets ridiculous when parents aren't allowed to photograph their kids christmas concerts for example.

    However, remember that the Mob is always right, especially if its heading your way!


  • Options
    #28
    Diamond Doll
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,344 ✭✭✭Diamond Doll


    sportloto86 wrote: »
    I can never understand this "asking for permission in advance". To me photography is about capturing the moment whatever that moment may be. Never liked perfectly photoshopped shots and would never ask anyone to pose for a picture as it never has the same effect I'm after. Moment can never be repeated. You can act the same but it will become commercial. How do you repeat sadness, joy, dreaming, gust of wind messing up hair and twirling falling leaves?

    Yes and I do get that. Personally I think it would be great if you could ask the parent in advance - but I totally understand that this mightn't always happen, and the opportunity might be lost in doing so.

    However as a parent, if a random stranger photographer were to capture a moment like that on camera, I'd really very much appreciate if they were to at least approach me afterwards, show me the photo, offer me a copy. I'd actually be delighted in that situation, to get a better photo of my son that I'd ever be able to take myself. And I can't imagine I'd be in any way suspicious of ulterior motives or weird intentions.

    Of course then there's the risk that you'll encounter a mental parent who'll demand that you delete a brilliant photo. :( So I can understand, too, why photographers would be reluctant to engage with the parents at all!


  • Options
    #29
    magicbastarder
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 48,646 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    Cynortas wrote: »
    OH FFS are you actually saying that as long as the child is actually not physically abused its all good? Wow just wow.
    you're the person who regards criminal assault and damage to be justified when someone innocently takes a photo of your kid, so we may be a while explaining the ins and outs of what 'good' and 'bad' are to you.


  • Options
    #30
    Paulw
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 13,381 Mod ✭✭✭✭Paulw


    Cynortas wrote: »
    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/pictures-of-irish-schoolgirls-placed-on-pornographic-website-1.1997150

    No your right it could never hurt them at all im very sorry im 100% wrong here

    Brilliant. Thanks.

    From that exact article -
    The photographs were those that the girls had taken of themselves and their friends.

    So, we should now ban everyone from taking photos of themselves and their friends. No? Am I reading it wrong?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Poncke
    Registered Users Posts: 955 ✭✭✭Poncke


    Cynortas wrote: »
    OH FFS are you actually saying that as long as the child is actually not physically abused its all good? Wow just wow.

    I am glad all my disclaimers went completely over your head. Please just read the comment instead of coming up with a bunch of fallacies.


Advertisement