Privacy-conscious street photo

[Gianluca Drago]

The town market on the occasion of the patron saint's day, with a focus on privacy issues. I apologize for this semi-serious game, but it is rooted in state regulations. How do you handle privacy regulations in the country you live in when you have to photograph strangers?

I fully understand that privacy-protecting laws have good reasons for existing, but at the same time I don't understand why I can't take a picture of a person, but the city is full of webcams and everyone with a cell phone posts pictures full of faces on social platforms.

 

[Stevenson Gawen]

Now that's rather interesting... I love that you've blurred the statues and animals as well. It kind of lifts it from the ordinary privacy-oriented auto-blurring to something with a more intentional flavour.

Not quite sure what to make of it but certainly thought-provoking.

 

[Gianluca Drago]

Now that's rather interesting... I love that you've blurred the statues and animals as well. It kind of lifts it from the ordinary privacy-oriented auto-blurring to something with a more intentional flavour.

Not quite sure what to make of it but certainly thought-provoking.

I think there is something wrong. In the legislation of the state where I live, I can't take pictures of ordinary people (more or less, there are a few exceptions), but at the same time my face can be caught on webcams, and surely this happens at least 30 times a day, probably more. Asses and boobs are censored in social media, but no one has ever asked for faces to be censored. And face recognition practices/softwares are legal, in the absence of proper legislation. Face recognition is an incubator of nefarious consequences.

To make a long story short, today I have no privacy protection from the law, my life is recorded every moment of the day, but I as a (pseudo)photographer cannot photograph people.

I find something wrong with this way of handling privacy rights.

 

[Stevenson Gawen]

I find something wrong with this way of handling privacy rights.

Gosh! Me too. Most countries I know of have a fair bit of leeway around privacy rules and how they affect photographers.

I must confess that I had jumped to the conclusion that you were blurring the faces due to ethical considerations that I might not totally agree with but would certainly respect.
Not suggesting anything, as I know nothing of your country's laws etc, but have photographers ever or often been penalized? Curious as I've seen Youtube street photographers from elsewhere traveling, including to at least some parts of Italy, without mention of that kind of issue.

 

[Gianluca Drago]

Not suggesting anything, as I know nothing of your country's laws etc, but have photographers ever or often been penalized? Curious as I've seen Youtube street photographers from elsewhere traveling, including to at least some parts of Italy, without mention of that kind of issue.

I am not aware of any photographers who have been sanctioned for taking pictures with people in the frame, but theoretically Italian law prohibits this, except for shots in which people are a very secondary subject of the scene.

 

[Julian Tanase]

Gianluca, if you live in Italy (as I presume you do), then the legislation is similar al over Europe (EU territories). I know the legal requirements and regulations (of course, only to certain extent, not all of them) so I can tell you this:

- taking photographs of randomly chosen people on the street is usually frowned upon. Illegal? Not really, as the purpose behind the photographic action is a hobby, not exposing the persons or trying to do anything illegal with the photographs themselves.

Usually, if I am at say, 20 or more metres away from a person, I will photograph it without consent. If I am close, I usually ask permission which can be (or not) given. Of course, I always maintain (if asked) that I am shooting the scene or a building, so the main focus of my photograph is "that church behind the lady".

Remember, the law expressly forbids the publication or otherwise making public the face of the person without their implicit consent, not the actual snapping your shutter in some direction or another. Briefly: using your camera is ok, making the results public, not so much. Use your common sense, be polite, do not push your luck, if spirits are high do not escalate anything... these are my main rules when shooting film in the street .

Anyways, this subject has exhausted tons of ink. There are innumerable articles chewing the matter; you may check this one here, quite interesting.

https://neilmilton.scot/2023/05/is-street-photography-legal/#:~:text=TL%3BDR%3F-,Is%20street%20photography%20legal%3F,least%20not%20prohibited%20by%20law.



-

 

[Peter Roberts]

Thanks for this clarification of a thorny subject, Julian.
The other thing to bear in mind is not to look like a serious photographer. If you insist on looking macho by aiming full frame Canon or Nikon with a three foot white lens on it you're probably asking for trouble. I find a humble film point and shoot to be best although any film camera will do and can serve as a handy conversation starter.

 

[Gianluca Drago]

Remember, the law expressly forbids the publication or otherwise making public the face of the person without their implicit consent, not the actual snapping your shutter in some direction or another.

Thank you @Julian Tanase for your comprehensive explanations on the subject and, yes, I know there is a difference between photographing scenes with people and publishing such shots. My concern was about publication issues, because sometimes you want the very people to be the main subject of the photo. Sometimes I ask permission before or after the shot, but this is not always feasible or practical.

 

[Gianluca Drago]

Thanks for this clarification of a thorny subject, Julian.
The other thing to bear in mind is not to look like a serious photographer. If you insist on looking macho by aiming full frame Canon or Nikon with a three foot white lens on it you're probably asking for trouble. I find a humble film point and shoot to be best although any film camera will do and can serve as a handy conversation starter.

You should use a cell phone to become invisible. I use a compact camera, but people still see it as professional equipment.

 

[Gord Tomlin]

This topic highlights the reason why I have never been able to embrace street photography...not legal concerns, but a general feeling that I am invading people's privacy.

 

[Julian Tanase]

How I mitigate people seeing me using my camera:

If the camera is an AF, do not check its viewfinder. Shoot from the hip.

It helps if the shutter is not noisy

If using an MF camera, shoot by distance focus

A wide lens will help you capture the street better than say, a 50mm lens

A higher ISO film helps getting an image in all sorts of light. For general street shots, if I want to be inconspicuous, I use a 400 film, or if the situation demands it, a 400 film pushed to 800. Not a gallery award solution, but you'll get good printable images. Faster speeds too, which means less time for people to notice you.

Avoid, if possible, large cameras. If you still wish to use such, focus at distance (do not put your camera up to your eye, that'll draw attention on you). Examples: a Nikon F3 is harder to be noticed than say, a Nikon F6. An OM1 harder to notice than the same, with a motor attached.

Same goes for the lens used: a Nikkor 35-70 AF is easier to spot than a 28. I know, not the same thing, but needs must in many situations.

If I use my Nikon F4, I just grip it in my left hand, finger on the release button, and let the lens rest in the V shape made by my left arm (sort of military carrying their gun in the field, if you know what I mean). Point to the scene and press the shutter. Good position too: you be seen as facing another area, not the scene you're interested in, as you'll be facing 45* of the scene. One thing though: for this to work, the lens would need to have the focusing ring in the nose of the lens, not on its main barrel. And of course, if the lens is an AF. It works though with MF lens, but you'll need to pre-focus at distance prior to taking the shot.

Shoot at a right angle. I do this quite often, if I use a p&s camera (my Olympus XA2, for instance). Do not face the scene, but stay at a 45* angle; keep the camera in front of your chest, point it to your left or right and shoot. ​

Hope this helps. Take care !

 

[Gord Tomlin]

Thanks, Julian. I was aware of most, but not all, of these techniques. The "grip it in my left hand, finger on the release button, and let the lens rest in the V shape made by my left arm" technique is new to me and quite interesting. For me, though, the issue runs deeper: these are ways to "get away with" invading people's privacy, which I'm not totally at peace with even if I manage to go undetected.

 

[Julian Tanase]

The issue here is known widely and discussed at length. I give you an example: years ago, I was visiting the beautiful town of Rothenburg on Main, in Germany. Medieval city, with all that entails that notion: narrow streets, old buildings, nice people. I was resting on the stairs of the local Rathaus (town hall), for a snack. Obviously, I was there to take in the city and to photograph the heck out of it.

A tourist stopped right in front of me, looking lost, checking her phone in what I perceived to be an attempt to localize herself in the town. I raised the camera and she looked at me, she smiled. I asked her in a mute sort of way if I can photograph her, and she nodded, smiling. So, asked for the permission, obtained it, snapped the photograph, all legal, right?​

Now, on the other side of the square there were some restaurant terraces, where tourists were enjoying a coffee, snack or whatever. Obviously they came to be photographed as well. What was I to do? Ask permission from everyone?

I believe the touristic sites are the less controversial when it comes to protecting one's intimacy if you ask me. There is a clear line between shooting in the middle of say, Trafalgar Square and doing the same in front of building where people can be seen in their ground floor rooms. The law is not blind, and it always discerns between the purpose, situation and method of recording one's face.

I fully understand (and agree to) what you're saying; we are all aware of the pitfalls of infringing on intimacy/privacy regulations. But sometimes we photograph places and things and scenes which are, by their own nature, surrounded by passers-by. We do not photograph those people, but what is near, behind, in front or adjacent to them. The focus is not the people, but the things we want to immortalize. There is a world of a difference to photograph an old house, as opposed to going behind the house and snap away at the owners of that house in their own private garden, in an illegal and intrusive manner.

So, for what is worth, rest assured sir I am not devising ways of perpetrating people's intimacy, nor do I advise anyone to do so. We need to be considerate in our actions, not overstepping ourselves in what we're doing, polite and always pay attention to the decency and to the right of other's privacy.​

 

[Gord Tomlin]

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you are doing anything wrong. It's just a personal discomfort with me doing it. To put it another way, it's a Gord problem, not a Julian problem.

 

[Julian Tanase]

Gord, of course you implied nothing, but I thought to express my thoughts on this entire matter.

Thank you !

 

[Gianluca Drago]

This thread is probably exhausted, but I want to add a couple of lines. I bought a compact camera - after many years of being virtually camera-less - and randomly came across articles and videos about photography, particularly digital photography. I noticed that "street photography" was a thing and one day I wanted to try it. I am a shy person, "pointing and shooting strangers in their faces" is not my cup of tea, but I forced myself to try it and found it very exciting and rewarding.

The best part of it is when you take a portrait of a person without him noticing and then you take a second shot after he realized that you had caught him, and he is smiling at you (while you blush ).

In short, some people like to be photographed and empathize with you, but you will never know unless you force yourself to photograph them without their knowledge. If you and he had agreed beforehand, you wouldn't have got a candid photo. You have to make the first move, somewhat clandestinely, and then a possible human dialogue will open up.

Of course, as @Julian Tanase pointed out, not all circumstances and all people are suitable. It takes tact, respect, and discernment.

 

[Chris Bennett]

I don't have a problem with openly photographing people in the street and UK law allows it, as well as giving me the right to publish it. Some practitioners in the policing and, most notably, the security profession don't always recognise my right, though. I carry on regardless.
I have never had a problem in other countries but a recent trip to Oslo, gave me the challenge of practicing my hobby while remaining within the law. Since you can photograph a person and publish as long as they are not recognisable, I managed to do so most of the time by employing the use of silhouettes and careful choice of shooting angle, but I found it very constraining. There were some scenes that had to be captured because... well because I love to spot unique happenstances, though Norwegian law won't permit publication.

 

[Julian Tanase]

I don't have a problem with openly photographing people in the street and UK law allows it, as well as giving me the right to publish it. Some practionioners in the policing and, most notably, the security profession don't always recognise my right, though. I carry on regardless.
I have never had a problem in other countries but a recent trip to Oslo, gave me the challenge of practicing my hobby while remaining within the law. Since you can photograph a person and publish as long as they are not recognisable, I managed to do so most of the time by employing the use of silhouettes and careful choice of shooting angle, but I found it very constraining. There were some scenes that had to be captured because... well because I love to spot unique happenstances, though Norwegian law won't permit publication.

At times, a very shallow dof comes in handy, I would guess

 

[Ivar Dahl-Larsen]

I think that your series are very interesting and also what you bring to the table. Julian has enlightened this subject in very good way and he is right about the rules that apply in most countries in Europe. My several visits to Italy have proven to me that rules and regulations are one thing. People's reactions are totally different mostly. I always have got away with the opposite of a serious look at the world.
"A smile is quite a funny thing, it wrinkles up your face. But when it's gone, you'll never find, it's secret hiding place."I am sure a certain Brian, would say, it does not apply to my face.

 

[Gianluca Drago]

Thank you, Ivar!