Permissions for Candids?


fatspider

Link Posted 21/01/2016 - 01:10
Quote:
There is a definition of the term "public place" in the Criminal Justice Act 1972. It is “Public place” includes any highway and any other premises or place to which at the material time the public have or are permitted to have access, whether on payment or otherwise ”

Possibly because when you pay to enter somewhere or are "invited" onto private land you cease to be a member of the public and become a patron
My Names Alan, and I'm a lensaholic.
My PPG link
My Flckr link

andrewk

Link Posted 21/01/2016 - 09:05
Does anyone have a reference to an authoritative source for the notion that we can legally take photos in any public place?

Is it just wishful thinking - or is there some case law or other solid source for it?

Andrew
Flickr photostream
Last Edited by andrewk on 21/01/2016 - 09:08

johnriley

Link Posted 21/01/2016 - 09:06
At Whitby it's usually a good idea to ask before shooting. Very rarely, something priceless might need to be caught first, in which case I would explain and ask afterwards. Sometimes even a friendly smile can suffice. Photographers with friendly, quiet confidence probably do better than those who are nervous and unsure as this will show and look furtive. Pushy photographers who trap subjects in corners are definitely not helpful to anyone.
Best regards, John

davidtrout

Link Posted 21/01/2016 - 11:09
This is an interesting thread involving a debate that has been continuing for some years. Because I have an interest in street photography I often mentally debate many of the already quoted questions with myself.
Events such as the Whitby Goths, Edinburgh Fringe, war weekends etc are popular with photographers who often appear to outnumber the volume of participants in the event, most of whom are there to parade their costumes and go with the express purpose of being photographed. Non-the-less if I'm doing portraits I always ask permission first. And that includes Fat Spider who started going to the Goths as a photographer before he turned native and now appears as a Goth. Might see you there again in the next couple of months Alan.
For general street views I work within the law that states photography in public places, in the UK at least, is legal. For one thing street photography is not about portraits any more than its about streets. Its about the relationship of people to their environment. This means any people in the shot shouldn't be done as portraits but as figures in a larger view. Newspapers and TV news programmes daily show pictures of crowed streets - its preposterous to suggest every one of those individuals in view should first be approached for permission.
Schools banning proud parents taking pictures of nativity plays and sporting events may be acting within their rights but in my view are misguided. How could those snaps encourage perversion in any way?
JAK raises the question of this week's French competition. Its giving me a lot of thought. The last time I was in Paris, its a few years ago now, I did a lot of street photography. Now I'm wondering if I can retrospectively get away with entering something from then.
David
PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout
Last Edited by davidtrout on 21/01/2016 - 11:11

johnriley

Link Posted 21/01/2016 - 11:24
I have street photos from Paris and other French locations, but I very much doubt that anyone would object to their use. It would be an extraordinary set of coincidences that brought together the image, the subject being aware of it, the subject being sufficiently aggrieved to object to it and the subject actually finding it worthwhile to do so. However, if it did, I'm sure that removing the image out of courtesy would end the matter?
Best regards, John

Gwyn

Link Posted 21/01/2016 - 12:02
An interesting discussion. It isn't really my "thing" but I am following this with interest.

On the BBC website today there is an article about a photographer taking photos from a London bus. There is absolutely no way he could ask permission of his subjects.

andrewk

Link Posted 21/01/2016 - 12:15
davidtrout wrote:
For general street views I work within the law that states photography in public places, in the UK at least, is legal.

I have yet to discover any law that states that photography in public places is legal. Which law is that?

I have always believed that photography, like wearing brown shoes or singing whilst you walk, is just a human activity that we do not have any specific legal right to do - but with very few exceptions, neither is there any law that prevents it.

There are some "public places" that we enter by permission, which might or might not involve the payment of an entry fee, and the owners of those places, e.g. the National Trust or maybe a club of some kind may place conditions on our entry into the place. If we breach those conditions, which might include a prohibition on taking photographs, then we become a trespasser and ultimately could be ejected from the place or possibly sued in the civil court for damages.

Andrew
Flickr photostream
Last Edited by andrewk on 21/01/2016 - 12:30

johnriley

Link Posted 21/01/2016 - 12:29
You're right Andrew, laws that say we can do things are unknown I suspect, well almost.

In general, as I understand it, we are pretty much free to do anything as long as no law prohibits it and, of course, providing we don't impinge on others' freedoms as a result.
Best regards, John

JAK

Link Posted 21/01/2016 - 12:40
Gwyn wrote:
An interesting discussion. It isn't really my "thing" but I am following this with interest.

On the BBC website today there is an article about a photographer taking photos from a London bus. There is absolutely no way he could ask permission of his subjects.

An interesting link, thanks Gwyn.
If it helps, the actual link is:
http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20160118-striking-photographs-from-a-london-bus
(Gwyn's link has http repeated so it fails.)

Totally off topic, it seems odd the BBC are using the Radio Caroline bell logo at the top of that page!
John K
Last Edited by JAK on 21/01/2016 - 12:46

fatspider

Link Posted 21/01/2016 - 13:26
Quote:
And that includes Fat Spider who started going to the Goths as a photographer before he turned native and now appears as a Goth

GOTH

Steampunk David, STEAMPUNK!

And I was into Steampunk long before I discovered people actually did it in "real life" seeing it at WGW just tipped me over the edge (after a couple of years plucking up the courage that is )
I've been aware of Steampunk for countless year through Wargaming (playing with toy soldiers) In fact I was probably aware of it before I even joined this forum
My Names Alan, and I'm a lensaholic.
My PPG link
My Flckr link
Last Edited by fatspider on 21/01/2016 - 13:27

davidtrout

Link Posted 21/01/2016 - 14:45
fatspider wrote:
Quote:
And that includes Fat Spider who started going to the Goths as a photographer before he turned native and now appears as a Goth

GOTH

Steampunk David, STEAMPUNK!

And I was into Steampunk long before I discovered people actually did it in "real life" seeing it at WGW just tipped me over the edge (after a couple of years plucking up the courage that is )
I've been aware of Steampunk for countless year through Wargaming (playing with toy soldiers) In fact I was probably aware of it before I even joined this forum

I'm indebted to my learned friend for the clarification M'lud.

andrewk wrote:
davidtrout wrote:
For general street views I work within the law that states photography in public places, in the UK at least, is legal.

I have yet to discover any law that states that photography in public places is legal. Which law is that?
Andrew

As you say and John repeats you don't have laws to say you can do something. In the absence of a law that says you can't do it then its safe to assume its legal.

A few years ago because of the outrage many photographers felt at being stopped and questioned by police and security guards when going about their lawful business of taking pictures the photographic press and some individual members of Parliament who were keen photographers, sought clarification. The clarification was that its legal to take photographs in public places, unless reasons for not doing so were compelling. This is recognised by the Association of Chief Police Officers.
David
PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout

drofmit

Link Posted 25/01/2016 - 13:46
To keep this "in thread" I am cutting and pasting my comment from this weeks competition...
"In France, that is a bit tricky...
hence my comment in brackets above.
Publishing candid shots of people photgraphed in France is illegal...
it is against the very strict French laws on privacy...
every person depicted in "Le fromager", "Chez Ninie", "Laon, 12 Mai 2011" and "Coiffe and ..." could sue the photographer and win!

In Perspicador's shot they are posing for the camera, so there is no problem...
in mine and the Grande Arche pictures, the people are incedental to the picture, not the subject...
those are OK, too.
You don't need the language to ask...
point at your camera and then the subject...
if they smile and carry on... take that as tacit permission.
If they frown and/or look away, move on...
if they pose and you don't want that, it isn't difficult to indicate that you want to photograph what they are doing.
By rights, the permission must be in writing...
but that doesn't seem to follow in fact.
Pentax User images turn up on Google image searches...
remember, when we enter a competition like this....
we are publishing pictures to the wide world!! "

While I agree with John that it is unlikely that the subject will see, and object to, their picture... you just cannot be certain.
People object for the wierdest of reasons... a picture like "Chez Ninie" could even go viral on "SocialMedia"...
there may not be "share" buttons on Pentax User, but it only takes a right click on an image to copy it.... or save it.... and paste it wherever!!
Additionally, it doesn't need the person themselves to see the picture initially... communication has become much more instant in recent years.
And removing the image that we've posted.... when others are still posting it... just won't work in a court situation.... here or the UK...
and France has become more and more litigous in recent years.... a long way behind the UK, but it is occuring more and more.
At events like the car event I showed, only the dimmest person would expect not to appear in photos....
the people on the steps of the Grande Arche are too small to be identified....
but, being photographed while you are doing you shopping or having a coffee and chat...
and that picture then appearing on the internet...
we wouldn't have a leg to stand on in court... without having asked permission first.
I've never had a refusal, here or in the UK... but it take very little time to ask, so please do.
Many people will actually be flattered by the request...
as was the wearer of a wonderful mohican I had as a subject moons back.
Sometimes you'll need to stop them posing their way and spoiling your intended shot!!

The minimum penalty in France is the removal and destruction of equipment...
computers and stored files are included in equipment....
as well as your cameras and lenses!
You need to ask yourself....
"is it worth the risk for a competition without a cash prize?"
From my personal viewpoint it isn't!!
It wouldn't effect most competitions, even those with subjects that include people....
we just all need to be aware of how laws apply in countries that we visit.
Never be afraid to talk about your techniques...
"Give a thousand photographers...
the same camera, lens and scene...
and you'll always get a thousand different takes!!"
Anon.

JAK

Link Posted 25/01/2016 - 14:42
drofmit wrote:
The minimum penalty in France is the removal and destruction of equipment...
computers and stored files are included in equipment....
as well as your cameras and lenses!

Wondering what the maximum penalty is?
Article 226-1 of the French Criminal Code:
“A penalty of one year’s imprisonment and a fine of €45,000 is incurred for any wilful violation of the intimacy of the private life of other persons by resorting to any means of:
1° intercepting, recording or transmitting words uttered in confidential or private circumstances, without the consent of their speaker;
2° taking, recording or transmitting the picture of a person who is within a private place, without the consent of the person concerned.

However, where the offences referred to by the present article were performed in the sight and with the knowledge of the persons concerned without their objection, although they were in a position to do so, their consent is presumed”.

John K
Last Edited by JAK on 25/01/2016 - 14:43

Blythman

Link Posted 25/01/2016 - 17:25
If you ask permission to take a candid, is it then candid? I don't think so.
Alan


PPG
Flickr

johnriley

Link Posted 25/01/2016 - 18:16
Fair point Alan.
Best regards, John
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.