Strangers Photographing Both You And Your Dog Whilst Out In Public

[raz]

totally agree with you but it is the reason this is happening so if anything is to be done this needs to be taken into account.

But as Ash said, a creep can spank the monkey looking at a kmart catalogue so do we get rid of photos all together because the minority have bad intent? I mean look at people like Rex Dupain - I think down the track they'll just dump their cameras and give up. How many times can a guy like that be jumped on by cops and have his equipment confiscated before he just says - well stuff you all.

[Ashanali]

Another question, to the people on here who object to a stranger taking a photo of you walking your dog down the street or of your kids etc, do you confront the person with the camera?

I have had people ask me what I'm doing. I show them the photos and never had anyone ask me to remove the images.

If you notice the zombie photos on my blog or facebook page, most of them were taken without permission (although you will see posed ones also), I gave out cards to lots of the people after the images were taken. On the facebook page, the mother of the youngest girl there has said that she loves the photos.

I photographed spectators at my nephews grid iron game and while they looked at me funny, nobody minded.

Of course, it might be that I don't look like a creepy pervert but I'd love to know what a creepy pervert looks like before I draw comparisons.

[raz]

Of course, it might be that I don't look like a creepy pervert but I'd love to know what a creepy pervert looks like before I draw comparisons.

Most people wouldnt know a creepy pervert if they fell over one. It could be some nicely polished person in a very expensive suit. Who knows what they look like - I certainly dont.

I gave an example to someone earlier about my husband who looks nothing like his brother. He went to the local pool with brother and the kids one day and took photos for them. Imagine how mortified he would have been if someone confronted him and either said or implied that he was a creepy pervert. I think he'd end up throwing away the camera if that happened.

[Ashanali]

Oh good god that is insane.

JaxxBuddy made a good point, though - is it the fear of not what the photographer's intent is but the intent of a viewer somewhere down the track? eg If Casey posts those photos up on the internet and some creepy perve gets his jollies looking at the photos

There will always be someone somewhere who will get their jollies off anything. Some people get off on people with crooked teeth, some people get off on pictures of women's feet, some people are oddly attracted to inanimate objects. This is not going to stop me posting photos of brides with crooked teeth, putting their shoes on during the course of their wedding day.

Of course, I only post tasteful photos on our website but even those can be picked out by 'the wrong sort'... heck, even a KMart catalogue is fodder for some people!!

What I'm saying is the element has always been there in society, it's just more public now that freaks are among us. If people start sanitising because of the freaks, then there will be nothing left to put online... because ANYTHING can be seen as 'attractive' by some people.

totally agree with you but it is the reason this is happening so if anything is to be done this needs to be taken into account.

edited to clarify

what i mean is if photographers are in general ok and they have no evil intent, why are they being policed, why isn't energy being put into managing/stopping the people causing the issue?

i will answer that one too..because it is easier to spot someone with a camera than it is to spot a paedophile so we are in this situation because the powers to be are lazy

Put it in terms of dog breeding... with all the restrictions being brought in, it's becoming harder and harder for ethical breeders to continue breeding and only viable for those prepared to flaunt the law to keep going.

If you put lots of restrictions on taking photos then it becomes harder for people doing the right thing to continue what they're doing and the only people who will be taking photos are those who are prepared to flaunt the laws anyway.

I would rather see a photographer on a beach taking photos of people within their site than some person sitting in a car with a telephoto lens and his pants dropped.

[raz]

I would rather see a photographer on a beach taking photos of people within their site than some person sitting in a car with a telephoto lens and his pants dropped.

well said but thanks for the visual!

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

Oh good god that is insane.

JaxxBuddy made a good point, though - is it the fear of not what the photographer's intent is but the intent of a viewer somewhere down the track? eg If Casey posts those photos up on the internet and some creepy perve gets his jollies looking at the photos

There will always be someone somewhere who will get their jollies off anything. Some people get off on people with crooked teeth, some people get off on pictures of women's feet, some people are oddly attracted to inanimate objects. This is not going to stop me posting photos of brides with crooked teeth, putting their shoes on during the course of their wedding day.

Of course, I only post tasteful photos on our website but even those can be picked out by 'the wrong sort'... heck, even a KMart catalogue is fodder for some people!!

What I'm saying is the element has always been there in society, it's just more public now that freaks are among us. If people start sanitising because of the freaks, then there will be nothing left to put online... because ANYTHING can be seen as 'attractive' by some people.

totally agree with you but it is the reason this is happening so if anything is to be done this needs to be taken into account.

edited to clarify

what i mean is if photographers are in general ok and they have no evil intent, why are they being policed, why isn't energy being put into managing/stopping the people causing the issue?

i will answer that one too..because it is easier to spot someone with a camera than it is to spot a paedophile so we are in this situation because the powers to be are lazy

Put it in terms of dog breeding... with all the restrictions being brought in, it's becoming harder and harder for ethical breeders to continue breeding and only viable for those prepared to flaunt the law to keep going.

If you put lots of restrictions on taking photos then it becomes harder for people doing the right thing to continue what they're doing and the only people who will be taking photos are those who are prepared to flaunt the laws anyway.

I would rather see a photographer on a beach taking photos of people within their site than some person sitting in a car with a telephoto lens and his pants dropped.

i am in agreement with you......the law is an ass. they are policing the wrong people

[Ashanali]

I would rather see a photographer on a beach taking photos of people within their site than some person sitting in a car with a telephoto lens and his pants dropped.

well said but thanks for the visual!

I shouldn't laugh because it really is the sad truth.

[raz]

I shouldn't laugh because it really is the sad truth.

Well there you go. I just ASSumed they would wait until they got home and put the photos up on the computer screen to drop their pants. How do they hold a heavy camera and telephoto with one hand?

Sorry Tatelina.

[Ashanali]

I shouldn't laugh because it really is the sad truth.

Well there you go. I just ASSumed they would wait until they got home and put the photos up on the computer screen to drop their pants. How do they hold a heavy camera and telephoto with one hand?

Sorry Tatelina.

Hey, I figure that if some perve can drive a truck and entertain himself at the same time (as happened to me when some creep pulled over to 'ask for directions' when I was 16), there is someone, somewhere holding his equipment and a camera at the same time.

ETA... and they could use a monopod to hold up the lens... or rest it on their car window, steering wheel, dashboard... possibilities are endless

Edited November 12, 2010 by Ashanali

[raz]

there is someone, somewhere holding his equipment and a camera at the same time.

Not many. Men cant multitask

[Guest Tess32]

i have been thinking...ok so a photographer takes a shot, innocent and a good photo, subject immaterial.

now we are told the photographer can't take any more shots like this because some people may view this photo with evil intent.

so the photographer and all of us with no evil intent are punished because society/law makers etc are too lazy or too overwhelmed to fix the base problem that we have bad people in our midsts that they/we dont want here

this is truly a case of the lowest common denominator setting the standard

That's the point though, the laws aren't needed because they are protective of something that would happen so rarely we might as well ban animal photos next in case rugby league players all become bestiality freaks as well

I wouldn't like to just blame the schools because having been on baby forums recently it DOES seem to be parents who are paranoid for no real reason.

Some may have a genuine reason for not wanting their kid photographed but some truly don't want it because they think the photo will end up in the hands of a pervert. It boggles the mind this even occurs to people. Better not take the kid out shopping in case someone is sitting there watching for cute kids and takes the memory home later !

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

i have been thinking...ok so a photographer takes a shot, innocent and a good photo, subject immaterial.

now we are told the photographer can't take any more shots like this because some people may view this photo with evil intent.

so the photographer and all of us with no evil intent are punished because society/law makers etc are too lazy or too overwhelmed to fix the base problem that we have bad people in our midsts that they/we dont want here

this is truly a case of the lowest common denominator setting the standard

That's the point though, the laws aren't needed because they are protective of something that would happen so rarely we might as well ban animal photos next in case rugby league players all become bestiality freaks as well

I wouldn't like to just blame the schools because having been on baby forums recently it DOES seem to be parents who are paranoid for no real reason.

Some may have a genuine reason for not wanting their kid photographed but some truly don't want it because they think the photo will end up in the hands of a pervert. It boggles the mind this even occurs to people. Better not take the kid out shopping in case someone is sitting there watching for cute kids and takes the memory home later !

that is very relevant in SA today because the xmas pageant is on....so all those kids in public with lots of media attention...will parents stop taking kids to events like this?

goodness what sort of society have we become?

[Ashanali]

there is someone, somewhere holding his equipment and a camera at the same time.

Not many. Men cant multitask

two chai!!

[raz]

Here's a solution for people who object to strangers taking their photo without permission

http://www.news.com.au/world/terrifying-mo...i-1225952336232

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

Here's a solution for people who object to strangers taking their photo without permission

http://www.news.com.au/world/terrifying-mo...i-1225952336232

[raz]

Here's another scenario. Say you're down in the local dog park playing with your dogs and talking to other dog owners and someone is sitting in the corner with a camera and snapping away. Would those of you who object to photos of you and your dogs being taken without permission be upset with that? Would it make a difference if the person is sitting with a friend and they're laughing at dogs doing zoomies?

Edited November 13, 2010 by raz

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

Here's another scenario. Say you're down in the local dog park playing with your dogs and talking to other dog owners and someone is sitting in the corner with a camera and snapping away. Would those of you who object to photos of you and your dogs being taken without permission be upset with that? Would it make a difference if the person is sitting with a friend and they're laughing at dogs doing zoomies?

this is a really interesting discussion about ethics and critical thinking as well as the law.

i think if we take kids out of the equation it is easier for us to look at scenarios as you have outlined.

so my response based on your scenario would be i have no objection to the photo being taken

[raz]

I've never been confronted after taking a photo so I'm actually curious to try this out. Not sure I'm game though after reading this thread. Someone might smash my camera.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

I've never been confronted after taking a photo so I'm actually curious to try this out. Not sure I'm game though after reading this thread. Someone might smash my camera.

lol that's what i am thinking...i might dust off the camera and see what happens and i think i will start asking people some of the questions that have been raised in this thread because i am really curious on how many people see this as an issue.

[raz]

i might dust off the camera and see what happens .

Just dont sit in your car with your pants dropped, Jaxx