A question of ethics...

[alfie Wright]

Hi all,

I know, I know, I only drop in when I want something!

I share my street snaps over a few platforms & have just had to deal with a situation on my Facebook page. I recently uploaded a photo called 'Smoking...' a study more of the smoke in a shaft of light than the two human subjects in the shot. Anyway, the two subjects turn out to be friends of my daughter, who tags them in the photo!

Result is, both girls freak & one sends me a Facebook message telling me I'm a perv & must remove the photo as I didn't ask them for permission to photograph them. She also claims she is studying photography & thinks I'm breaking some law!

I replied to her message apolagising for upsetting her & asked her to read a few links that I sent on 1. street photography 2. Candid photography 3. Photography law. Then look again at the photo & if she still wants me to remove the photo from Facebook I will as to cause no more upset!

Her reply was to remove the photo, which I did even though I like the it quite a lot. Morally & ethically I think it was probably the right thing to do, but a small part of me wanted to keep it on my Facebook page as legally I have done nothing wrong!

Did I do the right thing? Any thoughts on this?

 

[Rob MacKillop]

Alfie, you are asking us to decide upon something we only have your side of the story for. No offence intended, of course. Are you looking for moral support?

If someone is in one of my photos and wants me to take it offline - for whatever reason - I would have no hesitation in removing it. That's my position, but you have to come to your own decision.

 

[Paul Lange]

I don't really know and guess there is some gray area. If your in a public space and happen to be in a photograph can you really control it? Imagine all those people in the background of FB photos after a night out all complaining and requesting the image be removed?

On the other hand Google had to pixelate peoples faces in Streetview.

 

[alfie Wright]

Hi Rob,

Thanks for your honesty, mate. I guess I am looking for moral support or at least checking I did the right thing! Your last paragraph says it all really!

I don't really want to upset anyone & that's why I removed the photo from Facebook. Taking up & close street shots does sometimes upset people though!

I'm not sure if photographers follow a standard code of practice or if we all just work to our own moral codes. I guess it's just my own dilemma!

I don't want to upset anyone for the sake of a photograph, but also I don't want to limit my own creativity when not actually doing anything wrong! There is no privacy in a public space says the law & CCTV takes care of that.

 

[Lesley Jones]

Hi Alfie! It's good to see you again. I'm sorry you've been put in this position. Chances are that if I used FB and/or had family, then I may have encountered something similar. I'm sorry to disagree with Paul, but it isn't grey at all, unless you were on private property or somewhere like a shopping precinct. On the other hand, feelings have been "hurt" and I think you did the right thing, or at least... it is what I would have done. Forget the perv comment as she was in public, fully clothed and not doing anything she shouldn't have been doing. If you had caught them up an alley at night with drugs or a boyfriend, then it would be a different matter. Just because you have taken it down from FB doesn't mean you can't have it flagged as a favourite in something like Bridge

 

[Paul Lange]

Hi Lesley, No worries about disagreeing with me, I don't really know but would like to. Does it mean that providing the photos were taken in a public place you are free to distribute/publish them as you see fit? Does the subject have the right to insist the image is not published and can they claim any right to potential royalties?

 

[alfie Wright]

Thanks Paul & Lesley for the input!

Well, after a few more FB messages it transpires that her family aren't happy with smoking & she doesn't want them to see it!

I have only removed the photo from Facebook atm & not the other sharing sites I use, but this is also part of my dilemma. It's been online for a few days now & has been well liked & faved & has been shared on by other people & is out of my control & even if I remove the image from my accounts it would still be able to be found through a google search.

 

[Hamish Gill]

Yes, taking it down is a good idea ... But calling you a perv is outrageous!
It bothers me to the core when people cast such aspersions ... It's quite a lot about whats wrong with society I think.

 

[alfie Wright]

The legal rights are here Is it legal to take photos of people without asking? | PhotoRights.org

To publish for commercial use would need a modal release. Generally speaking, commercial use means a use that is intended to sell a product, raise money or promote or endorse something, I believe! But If they are for editorial or personal sharing they do not need a modal release!

 

[David Mitchell]

Its why I photograph things that don't move like buildings or landscapes lol much easier

 

[alfie Wright]

Its why I photograph things that don't move like buildings or landscapes lol much easier

Depends where you are in the world, I believe! In the USA they have property release to deal with!

 

[Davie Hudson]

I would say removal was the right thing to do. My own personal views on street photography are, well I don't like it for this very reason.... I would be seriously ****** off if a photo of me turned up anywhere without my permission.

I know i'm in the minority of possibly one but I find street photography an invasion of privacy

 

[Jim Kuo]

I agree with what Lesley said. Alfie you didn't do anything wrong as the photo was taken in a public place. If they had what ever reason not wanting the photo to be seen, they should have requested it politely. It was totally out of order for them to call you names.

I would chose to remove the photos under similar circumstance. Especially you personally know those people. But perhaps you might want to communicate to the friend regarding the name calling...

 

[alfie Wright]

Hi Jim,

They are friends of my daughter, but I haven't met them & didn't know they were friends at the time I took the shot! You 'liked' the shot on facebook it's the one of the two girls backs & sides with the smoke drifting along the shop in a shaft of light. They didn't see me take the shot at the time & didn't know I had taken it.

After realising I was their friends Dad I received an apology about the name calling when things calmed down a little. I've only removed it from Facebook as asked, but if I remove it from Flickr etc I don't think I could remove from cyberspace totally now. We will see what happens...

 

[Jim Kuo]

Yup, I know the pic we are discussing. You have been considerate enough to remove it on fb. I don't think you are obligated to remove/hide it on Flickr.

If they didn't want their family to know they smoke, they should not have been doing it in the first place. You have done them a service for their health IMO.

 

[Hamish Gill]

Is it the photo I just liked on Flickr? You can't even see their faces?

 

[alfie Wright]

Is it the photo I just liked on Flickr? You can't even see their faces?

Yes mate, Thanks for the Fav! I think they've blown things well out of proportion as you say there's no visible faces!

 

[Hamish Gill]

How old are they?

 

[alfie Wright]

Old enough to smoke so that should make them 18!

I've since found out one is 20 & the other is 15 my youngest daughters age!

EDIT: It's the 20 year old that's making the commotion, the 15 year old now would like a copy!

 

[Dan Cattermole]

Okay, respecting wishes is great, by removing what you have been asked to by those individuals concerned is not a bad thing.
That is a respectful thing to do. Street photog is great though, and as stated no laws are really broken being in a public place. So snapping away is not something I personally wouldn't hold back on.
To be asked to remove thereafter and fulfil that persons request is probably the best thing anyone could do to save the hassle and most importantly, protect the photographers reputation if in a position where one could be labelled as something unjustified and uncomfortable.