Strangers Photographing Both You And Your Dog Whilst Out In Public

[Tatelina]

i think as a society we are becoming more fearful and it is affecting our community spirit, what once was an innocent pastime (taking photos of people who are interestong or kids) has become a big no no

i find that very challenging because whilst i understand it and will support the vulnerable in society, i dont like that we fear so much

How about in a situation, where you have an expensive/rare/imported/highly-desired breed of dog and would like to reduce the likelyhood of strangers (with possible bad intentions) knowing unneccesary details about you.

Therefore, you do not keep a Facebook/Twitter/Photo sharing account, you don't post photos of yourself or your dogs online and any forum that you frequent, and generally keep to yourself when out walking your dogs not because you are an unfriendly, petrified hermit paranoid that everyone will steal your dogs, but because you prefer to enjoy the company of your own dog/s and share them mainly with your family and friends?

Edited November 12, 2010 by Tatelina

[Greytmate]

As the hostile attitude towards photographers increases, the zoom lenses just get longer. You are far less likely to know if you are being photographed today than ever before.

[raz]

If someone is taking a photograph of you and your dog, how on earth would you know they are not just capturing a moment that speaks to them?

What about in scenario A? Having your/your dog's photo taken by a camera phone from a person in their car at the lights?

I'm assuming we're talking about different things here...

'Street photography' as you've described to capture moments for whatever reason for a persons own collection of photos.

And photos that can potentially specify whom, with what dog, where, and when to then be posted online 'for the sake of it'.

I totally understand what you mean, Tatelina. But how do you know? Weirdo guy with camera taking a pic at the lights. OK that would really creep me out as well but if I'm not doing anything unusual like letting my dog poo and not picking it up I might think he's a painter who is taking a quick snap of me being happy chappy with my dogs to go home and paint something.

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

i think as a society we are becoming more fearful and it is affecting our community spirit, what once was an innocent pastime (taking photos of people who are interestong or kids) has become a big no no

i find that very challenging because whilst i understand it and will support the vulnerable in society, i dont like that we fear so much

How about in a situation, where you have an expensive/rare/imported/highly-desired breed of dog and would like to reduce the likelyhood of strangers (with possible bad intentions) knowing unneccesary details about you.

Therefore, you do not keep a Facebook/Twitter/Photo sharing account, you don't post photos of yourself or your dogs online and any forum that you frequent, and generally keep to yourself when out walking your dogs not because you are an unfriendly, petrified hermit paranoid that everyone will steal your dogs, but because you prefer to enjoy the company of your own dog/s and share them mainly with your family and friends?

well i have one of the more unusual breeds and i dont publish any photos on the web.

i still think my position is the same

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

As the hostile attitude towards photographers increases, the zoom lenses just get longer. You are far less likely to know if you are being photographed today than ever before.

totally agree.

[Remarkabull]

I've had photos of myself and my old Dobe (Sarge) put on websites without my permission but it was always on sites promoting flyball and they were taken by a member of a flyball club.

At competitions spectators were always taking pics of us and dogs competing and it didn't bother me much as most pics were of the dogs and not of us people.

I have had people (mostly Japanese tourists) ask to have a photo taken with Sarge while at the Sydney Royal and at other comps and I didn't mind that either but I would feel a little uncomfortable if someone was taking pics of me and dogs without asking and for no reason that I could see.

[Ker]

I HATE having my photo taken, but wouldn't mind someone taking a pic of my dog. After all, she IS gorgeous. But I'd prefer to be asked, and I would not be amused to see the pic online without permission being asked.

[raz]

I would feel a little uncomfortable if someone was taking pics of me and dogs without asking and for no reason that I could see.

If I took a photo of you dropping a piece of paper in the bin and you actually noticed me taking it, would you think that was weird? To me that moment in time might be saying something. To you, you're just dropping a piece of paper in the bin so therefore, I'm a weirdo? It's not like I know your name, where you live and what you ate for breakfast. I'm just capturing a moment. How can you tell if someone is taking a photo for 'no reason'?

[whiskedaway]

I feel that street photography can still be something that can be candid, however I believe that photographers should take the photo and then ask permission. Most subjects will state it's fine to use the photo once they've seen it and found out what it's for, and it will only be the odd person that says no. Studying film at uni we had to get a release from all talent we used, so why shouldn't photographers be the same? After all, if the photograph was published and the subject saw the photographer making money from that photograph, I would not put it past some people to sue, or try to get some compensation.

[sllebasi]

The thing that probably gets me is that I didnt or dont get a choice whether my photo is taken. If there is a news camera whereever, I can choose to cross the road and cross my fingers that i am not videotaped. so i think the big question is whether you have the choice to either be involved or not. if you are at a general area showing your dogs, the expectation is there that at some point you will be photographed. if i am walking my dogs down the street, or even at a dog park, my expectation would be that I am not going to get photographed.

I hear some beaches now have banned photos being taken - dont know if its the privacy issue, or the higher than usual number of undesirables.

[raz]

I feel that street photography can still be something that can be candid, however I believe that photographers should take the photo and then ask permission.

It's a bit hard to ask permission when you take...say 50 or 100 photos in a very short period of time. The people are all gone. It's not like street photographers take 1 photo then run up to the person and say 'hey I just took your photo. Do you mind if I post it on the internetz?'

[sllebasi]

i am going to disagree with you on this one, you are invading my privacy, and my personal space and you have NO right to take a photo of me without my knowledge. I am not getting cranky with you, this is an interesting discussion but you just cannot do it. The only way i can see you being able to do it legally is by having some sort of banner up saying between these hours on this particular piece of land you will be taking photos of everyday normal things. You cant invade peoples privacy and absolutely cannot then go and display it whether on the net or in an art gallery.

[stormie]

i am going to disagree with you on this one, you are invading my privacy, and my personal space and you have NO right to take a photo of me without my knowledge. I am not getting cranky with you, this is an interesting discussion but you just cannot do it. The only way i can see you being able to do it legally is by having some sort of banner up saying between these hours on this particular piece of land you will be taking photos of everyday normal things. You cant invade peoples privacy and absolutely cannot then go and display it whether on the net or in an art gallery.

I'm not sure this is correct though. I think so long as you're not making money off the image of the person, you are free to do what you wish with the image.

Correct me if I'm wrong, photographers.

[sllebasi]

just googled unauthorised photos and this came up

it is illegal to take any photograph of a minor without authorisation by a parent/guardian

publishing such photographs on the web is a criminal offence

Australian law comprehensively prohibits 'street photography' (including images of public beaches and crowds in streets or other public places).

[stormie]

As I said earlier, you wouldnt have a clue if I took your photo walking your dog down the street.

This is you, isn't it Raz...

[raz]

i am going to disagree with you on this one, you are invading my privacy, and my personal space and you have NO right to take a photo of me without my knowledge. I am not getting cranky with you, this is an interesting discussion but you just cannot do it. The only way i can see you being able to do it legally is by having some sort of banner up saying between these hours on this particular piece of land you will be taking photos of everyday normal things. You cant invade peoples privacy and absolutely cannot then go and display it whether on the net or in an art gallery.

I havent taken any photos of you and I'm unlikely to but I get what you're saying. Where do people draw the line, though? Street photographers are actually documenting their feelings so I hate to say it, but the subject is actually the last thing in the equation. Do you ever look at historical photos of some nameless person? If you do, you are then invading their privacy, are you not? But the photo isnt about them - it's about the photographer's feelings at that one moment in time.

Disagree with me all you like - it's actually making me question myself and my need to shoot people when I travel.

[raz]

As I said earlier, you wouldnt have a clue if I took your photo walking your dog down the street.

This is you, isn't it Raz...

:D :D :D Yes it is. Be a Lert, not alarmed.

[natamalie]

just googled unauthorised photos and this came up

it is illegal to take any photograph of a minor without authorisation by a parent/guardian

publishing such photographs on the web is a criminal offence

Australian law comprehensively prohibits 'street photography' (including images of public beaches and crowds in streets or other public places).

Interesting... why are there so many photos in magazines and newspapers of crowded areas then? Is it different because they are generally reporting on something to do with the image rather than just displaying it for art's sake? I don't understand. :D

[Jaxx'sBuddy]

As I said earlier, you wouldnt have a clue if I took your photo walking your dog down the street.

This is you, isn't it Raz...

splurk :D :D :D

[Steve]

I dunno - I dont mind either way but I can imagine scenarios where people would mind if they are going to be published on line or in places where other people can see them. There are a lot of people in this country who for what ever reason dont want someone knowing they are in the state or even that they are still alive.

What if the lady who has recently had her son burn her house down was frightened of him coming back if he knew they were in an area identified by a lanmark etc in the back ground?

What if he thought he had killed her and his children and didnt know they were still alive - what of people who may be paranoid for no good reason who have come out of domestic violence situations or been witness to a crime etc ?

Sorry I think if you're going to keep them and just use them for your own personal collection thats different to publishing them and I dont think that anyone can assume that just because you live in a world that is secure that everyone else doesnt have fair reason not to like it or feel threatened etc.

Edited November 12, 2010 by Steve