"I was disturbed to see one of your pictures...."
- Thread starter editor
- Start date
Bernie Gunther
Fundamentalist Druid
Worried about their property values maybe?
Cops can be peculiar about getting their pictures taken. I remember a demo some years ago outside parliament when a lad was taking pictures of the police. One portly plod came up to him and asked him to stop taking his picture because he had a wife and children and valued his privacy.
editor
hiraethified
Ahem: "...but was disturbed to see a picture of a neighbours house"
There's no number on it anyway, not that it makes any difference to my right to photograph it.
editor
hiraethified
Why? You think I should edit out photographs based on some random neighbours opinion that it doesn't paint the town in a nice enough light?
Fuck that.
Right.
Of course. But would you remove it if the owner wrote to you and politely asked you to do so?
Not on a neighbour's opinion, no - I think I've clarified.
editor
hiraethified
No. It plays a part in documenting how I saw the town.
To remove it would present a dishonest view and, as a photographer, I capture what I see, not what neighbours would like to see.
They can hire their own photographer for that.
5t3IIa
Registered User
I don't think I'd like a pic of my place looking shitty on the internet tbh. Isn't it like having a pic of a victim of a crime in a tabloid? Invasion of my privacy for no good reason.
I hesitate to get into this discussion but, as i say, I wouldn't like a pic of my house looking shit and easily indetifiable on the net as an example of what a shit house looks like in that manor.
I hesitate to get into this discussion but, as i say, I wouldn't like a pic of my house looking shit and easily indetifiable on the net as an example of what a shit house looks like in that manor.
editor
hiraethified
How is it an invasion of privacy? It's a house. In a street. On a road. Everyone can see it.
But if you don't like it, what do you suggest - banning photographers from taking pictures of 'shitty houses' in case the owners object?
greedy banker
I have a very large penis
I agree with you in this case, but if someone was visible through the broken glass window or something I think common courtesy would require you to remove it.
Fair enough. As you say, you have a right to photograph what you want. Personally, as I said, I think I'd accede to a polite request to remove if I had no strong feelings on the issue, and didn't see the photo as vital in some way. Clearly you feel differently. It's not a criticism. These things have to be decided on a case-by-case basis.
Personally I think I'd be amused by it. Should your sense of deep personal shame be the ultimate arbiter in this?
5t3IIa
Registered User
I might not be amused by it. Why should my gaff be, in effect, held up as an example of a shitty house in, by implication, a shitty manor?
I think if you take a picture from a public place (i.e. a sidewalk or park or whatever) then anything goes, so you're ok
editor
hiraethified
I've had some random person - who doesn't even own the house - questioning my photography and my legal right to take a certain picture.
I have every right take the photograph and politely told them so. I'm a documentary photographer, not an unpaid member of the Hebden Bridge Tourist Board (even if my photo collection is overwhelmingly positive about the town).
Apply that rule to everyone's photographs and there'd be a lot less great photos around.
editor
hiraethified
Covered in considerable depth here: http://www.urban75.org/photos/photographers-rights-and-the-law.htmlI think if you take a picture from a public place (i.e. a sidewalk or park or whatever) then anything goes, so you're ok
5t3IIa
Registered User
Fair enough that it's legal and you have every right. And proably them asking if it's legal is a confused way of them saying their upset cuz, as I said I might not be amused by it. Why should gaffs near me be, in effect, held up as an example of a shitty house in, by implication, a shitty manor?
greedy banker
I have a very large penis
Yes. But you can consider each case on its merits, no? There doesn't have to be an absolute rule.
Why not? Assuming that you own it and are looking to sell, it's unlikely that prospective buyers would ever see the photo. Are there other reasons why you might want it to vanish?
Mr Moose
What the hell are we supposed to tell the kids?
I think if you take a picture from a public place (i.e. a sidewalk or park or whatever) then anything goes, so you're ok
Yes that's right, though what the fark a 'sidewalk' is who knows?
However context is everything - the house is identifiable because its the one with the sign on.
If my son accidentally kicked his football through a window, which I then got repaired the next day, but the picture appeared in some photojournal depicting the urban decay of, ahem, Herne Hill (Or on the cover of New Model Army's next album) - I'd let you know you were misrepresenting my crib dude.
Without having seen your work its hard to say - so what were you trying to get over by the pictures inclusion? - and don't say 'nothing its just a picture' or we'll all go apeshit.
editor
hiraethified
But it's not even their house! I'll be fucked if I'm going to censor my photos just because some random neighbour thinks it's not doing a good enough PR job for their street.
If they're upset by the broken glass spoiling their view, they should be talking to the neighbour, not moaning to people who take pictures of it.
5t3IIa
Registered User
I might be ashamed and be upset that my house was being made an example of.
But this is a neighbour we're talking about, not the owenr.
editor
hiraethified
Thing is, it's part of a fairly large photo study of the town, and as far as I'm concerned it's an integral part of how I saw the town.
Mr Moose
What the hell are we supposed to tell the kids?
Similar threads
