Just looking for opinions / advice on something - I read about another photography project called 100 Strangers where you basically photograph just that - 100 strangers. I'd assume it'd be in as many days or maybe that's of no relevance. Either way, I've been thinking about taking it on; I think it's a good way to confront my paranoia regarding trying to get a shot when people are around, especially because it's so hands-on.
So my question is - is that even legal to photograph strangers and post the photos online? I guess it's one thing if they're for you only (although that could be deemed a tad creepy) but would I have to get their permission for it? Surely if their faces aren't in the shot, it wouldn't be necessary. I don't know... help?
I can't answer the legal part of the question, but you couldn't pay me enough (well, it would have to be a LOT) to go around photographing people. No way.
It's terrifying, isn't it? I like the idea of it though. And I like that there's a very likely risk of being rejected - especially if you keep going until you reach the target, despite the setbacks.
i want to say that it is legal to photograph people who are in public...as opposed to creepin on people who are in their own homes! :) i'd google it. also, i'm in the U.S., but i don't know if that makes any difference.
"Is it legal to take photos of people without asking?
In public places where there is no right to privacy, yes you can. The same applies in private places where you have the permission of the landowner or the landowner has stated no restrictions on photography. However photographing someone without asking their permission can cause a lot of trouble if not handled sensitively. If someone does not want to be photographed it is best to respect their wishes unless there is an overriding reason not to. Most people in most circumstances respond well to friendly explanation, especially if you show them the photo."
oh, and i am pretty sure it is legal to post those online, to answer your question. i think if you were to try to sell a photograph, you would need written release? especially, if it included a trademarked object
Looks like part of the idea is to ask their permission and get to know them a little bit. This can be intimidating (I have done it a lot as a journalist), but you can experience a lot of personal growth through it. You will get rejected a few times, but then you will figure out how to approach people, and it will get easier. Try going to places where there are lots of people -- like festivals, farmers markets, local parks, etc., where people kind of expect someone is going to be taking photos. It's not as intimidating as at the library or church ... : )
I work at a pre school ,and we have a waiver the parents sign for us to take photographs of the children.. We ask the parents to sign this so we can use the pictures for our handbook's and advertising... our PR guy is always submitting photos to the local press. Most parents are ok with us taking photos of the kids, but some aren't, for a number of reasons. So if they say no, then we take photos of that child, but it is only used inside the classroom and will be deleted at the end of the year. Our policy also is to only have a first name of the child, and no other information relating to that child. (if that pic is going to the press)
I love to photograph people unaware as you get great shots and i think once you are in a public place you can, but the thing is that i would hate to think that someone is photographing me and putting my image up online, without my knowledge, and then you can have a bad reaction like i did in a market in Barcalona, and i was shooting some stalls and a very scary guy ran up to me shouting and grabbed the camara, thank God i had the strap around my neck and only when i showed him the last few images he left the camara go.I had my 15 year old son with me and we were so shocked and scared. That kind of made me wary.
Is it legal to take photos of people without asking?
Tagged: The basics
In public places where there is no right to privacy, yes you can. The same applies in private places where you have the permission of the landowner or the landowner has stated no restrictions on photography. However photographing someone without asking their permission can cause a lot of trouble if not handled sensitively. If someone does not want to be photographed it is best to respect their wishes unless there is an overriding reason not to. Most people in most circumstances respond well to friendly explanation, especially if you show them the photo. Nevertheless some will object that you have violated their rights in some interesting way, and it's best to have the explanations ready.
'You can't take my photo without permission'. Oh yes you can, usually. Point to the CCTV cameras and wave, they never asked either. Of course it is perfectly understandable that individuals may feel singled out and perhaps intimidated, frightened or angry not to be in control, but it's not a legal point.
'You have violated my copyright'. This is in no sense true. There is no copyright in the human face or form, and copying would anyway mean cloning them, not creating an image. An image of a person is copyright of the photographer.
'You have violated my privacy'. Legally this is unlikely to be true. There is no right to privacy in public places as a rule. There is a right to privacy in private places and in public places where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy (eg public toilets), but how extensive this is depends on circumstances.
In private places that are open to the public, permission of the landowner is usually sufficient to be able to photograph visitors and staff. However a recent court case upheld a right to eat a meal in a restaurant in privacy even though the restaurant owner had consented to the photography, because in the court's view it was a customer's normal expectation not to be photographed there. If in doubt, this is probably the question to ask yourself.
'You have violated my human rights'. Police seem to sometimes object to being photographed on the grounds that their 'Human Rights' are being violated. This really means the same thing as 'privacy' and there is none in the street as the presence of CCTV and police photographers shows.
The Human Rights Act 1998 recognises a human right to expect privacy wherever privacy is normal, eg in the home. So photographs taken where privacy may be expected require permission of the subject. EG photographs taken from public places that depict someone within their home in a situation where they expect privacy, for instance through a window using a telephoto lens, will be actionable.
'You are harassing me'. Photography can indeed constitute harassment, but for an act to constitute harassment requires deliberate acts of harassment on at least 2 separate occasions. The complainant may then seek a restraining order from the court.
Harassment is potentially an issue for paparazzi in their pursuit of celebrities, but equally a restraining order has been used to suppress inconvenient photography by npower at Radley lakes.
'You need a model release'. Model releases are not necessary for anything except photographs to be used for commercial purposes. For editorial or artistic purposes they have no relevance unless you intend defaming the subject and need them to make a contractual agreement not to sue you for libel. If you intend selling the image for marketing or advertising use that implies endorsement by the subject, then yes, you need a model release (or rather, the advertiser does).
'You have violated data protection law'. Superficially this seems correct as the Data Protection Act does indeed prohibit the recording of data that identifies an individual. A photograph certainly qualifies and the DPA certainly applies to CCTV monitoring, ID photos etc. However the DPA Part 1 Section 3 specifically exempts as a 'special purpose' photographs or other data recorded for journalism, or for artistic or literary purposes.
For me it’s really a challenge doing it, and for the legal issue, "shoot first ask permission later" could be fine (if only they knew or caught you taking it). And personally, I have this future plan of printing some of my candid-strangers shots and hang them in the coffee shop I’m planning as well. Wherein if you saw yourself in one of those hanged picturesque of mine, you’ll receive probably the best deal of your life, hahaha...free coffee...seriously, everything will be served for free...and you'll get a copy of the picture itself...of course for free...
And just to share one of my most intimidating candid-stranger shot… http://365project.org/french_blue/365/2010-08-17 here I used canon 50mm f/1.4, I’m so closed at him doing this without getting noticed.
I enjoy this kind of photography a lot, especially if I received my telephoto lens in the future…cheers!!!
wow. i can count the number of people shots in my project with the fingers of one hand. this has always been something scary for me so it might be worth a shot.. maybe... sometime in the future... :p
I am doing the 100 Strangers project right now (it's one of my albums on here) and I only have 4!! I'm not giving myself a time limit--I take pictures of people who have made some type of impact on my life, or I think they are interesting in some way. I always tell them about the project , get their permission, and make sure they are comfortable first--so far I havent had any problems. It is waaayyyy out of my comfort zone but I like the challenge! :)
What an interesting project and topic! I just took a bunch of candid people shots at the International Festival we went to. It was my first time taking photos of strangers, but there were so many people there (including tons of photographers with cameras MUCH bigger than mine), that nobody cared. I believe that the performers and dancers knew they were going to be photographed, and he rest of the people were just having fun! I bet somebody even has me in their photos ;-) Last year back in Bulgaria I was walking on the street and I saw this guy sitting in a coffee shop take a photo of me - I thought to go and ask him why, but then I decided I wouldn't bother. It's a really sensitive subject - to ask ot not to ask for permission, but I'd definitely say ask after you take the photo, because then it wouldn't be candid, right? ;-)
I think it sounds incredible...a saw a guy sitting in his truck at a gas station this morning and was about to go over and ask him for a photo...it would have made the most wonderful B&W shot.
I think I'm going to start this project under a new album. (once I upgrade my account, that is)
What a great idea,,, i myself am far too chicken to try this, good luck with it!! love to see the results, i would imagine the adrenalin rush will be intense!! , but ultimately rewarding.
There are people whose religion forbids them to be photographed. Also some people are running from the law or the deranged ex and don't want their whereabouts known. Then there are people who simply are very, very private. Some people are afraid of what people can do with photos of them on the big bad internet. For that reason, my pictures are all of things, and not of people.
I find this idea of photographing strangers interesting, and I do take photographs of interesting people from time to time, without them knowing. I think that if I asked them first, then they would be posing, and I would miss the candid part of the photo.
I personally wouldn't want someone posting a photo of me anywhere without asking me first or at least letting me know, so I am not posting any photos of people. While I have asked people, "Can I take your picture?" especially at craft shows or someplace where they probably wouldn't mind, but I haven't asked whether I can post the photo online.
I would love to hear about how people do this project and what they have experienced.
When I put myself in their position, I too would be really upset to know someone had taken a photo of me without asking and even if they had, I probably would politely refuse, just because it'd be uncomfortable.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
http://www.100strangers.com/
In public places where there is no right to privacy, yes you can. The same applies in private places where you have the permission of the landowner or the landowner has stated no restrictions on photography. However photographing someone without asking their permission can cause a lot of trouble if not handled sensitively. If someone does not want to be photographed it is best to respect their wishes unless there is an overriding reason not to. Most people in most circumstances respond well to friendly explanation, especially if you show them the photo."
:D
Is it legal to take photos of people without asking?
Tagged: The basics
In public places where there is no right to privacy, yes you can. The same applies in private places where you have the permission of the landowner or the landowner has stated no restrictions on photography. However photographing someone without asking their permission can cause a lot of trouble if not handled sensitively. If someone does not want to be photographed it is best to respect their wishes unless there is an overriding reason not to. Most people in most circumstances respond well to friendly explanation, especially if you show them the photo. Nevertheless some will object that you have violated their rights in some interesting way, and it's best to have the explanations ready.
'You can't take my photo without permission'. Oh yes you can, usually. Point to the CCTV cameras and wave, they never asked either. Of course it is perfectly understandable that individuals may feel singled out and perhaps intimidated, frightened or angry not to be in control, but it's not a legal point.
'You have violated my copyright'. This is in no sense true. There is no copyright in the human face or form, and copying would anyway mean cloning them, not creating an image. An image of a person is copyright of the photographer.
'You have violated my privacy'. Legally this is unlikely to be true. There is no right to privacy in public places as a rule. There is a right to privacy in private places and in public places where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy (eg public toilets), but how extensive this is depends on circumstances.
In private places that are open to the public, permission of the landowner is usually sufficient to be able to photograph visitors and staff. However a recent court case upheld a right to eat a meal in a restaurant in privacy even though the restaurant owner had consented to the photography, because in the court's view it was a customer's normal expectation not to be photographed there. If in doubt, this is probably the question to ask yourself.
'You have violated my human rights'. Police seem to sometimes object to being photographed on the grounds that their 'Human Rights' are being violated. This really means the same thing as 'privacy' and there is none in the street as the presence of CCTV and police photographers shows.
The Human Rights Act 1998 recognises a human right to expect privacy wherever privacy is normal, eg in the home. So photographs taken where privacy may be expected require permission of the subject. EG photographs taken from public places that depict someone within their home in a situation where they expect privacy, for instance through a window using a telephoto lens, will be actionable.
'You are harassing me'. Photography can indeed constitute harassment, but for an act to constitute harassment requires deliberate acts of harassment on at least 2 separate occasions. The complainant may then seek a restraining order from the court.
Harassment is potentially an issue for paparazzi in their pursuit of celebrities, but equally a restraining order has been used to suppress inconvenient photography by npower at Radley lakes.
'You need a model release'. Model releases are not necessary for anything except photographs to be used for commercial purposes. For editorial or artistic purposes they have no relevance unless you intend defaming the subject and need them to make a contractual agreement not to sue you for libel. If you intend selling the image for marketing or advertising use that implies endorsement by the subject, then yes, you need a model release (or rather, the advertiser does).
'You have violated data protection law'. Superficially this seems correct as the Data Protection Act does indeed prohibit the recording of data that identifies an individual. A photograph certainly qualifies and the DPA certainly applies to CCTV monitoring, ID photos etc. However the DPA Part 1 Section 3 specifically exempts as a 'special purpose' photographs or other data recorded for journalism, or for artistic or literary purposes.
And just to share one of my most intimidating candid-stranger shot… http://365project.org/french_blue/365/2010-08-17 here I used canon 50mm f/1.4, I’m so closed at him doing this without getting noticed.
I enjoy this kind of photography a lot, especially if I received my telephoto lens in the future…cheers!!!
I think I'm going to start this project under a new album. (once I upgrade my account, that is)
I find this idea of photographing strangers interesting, and I do take photographs of interesting people from time to time, without them knowing. I think that if I asked them first, then they would be posing, and I would miss the candid part of the photo.
I personally wouldn't want someone posting a photo of me anywhere without asking me first or at least letting me know, so I am not posting any photos of people. While I have asked people, "Can I take your picture?" especially at craft shows or someplace where they probably wouldn't mind, but I haven't asked whether I can post the photo online.
I would love to hear about how people do this project and what they have experienced.
I got the nerve up today and asked, both if I could take a pic, and if I could post it online. I got a yes, and here's my pic.
http://365project.org/shelina/365/2010-09-05