Project Sun


cardiffgareth

Link Posted 13/09/2021 - 11:24
A few for a little project I set myself called 'Sun'. All shot with the K1 and either D FA 24-70mm or DA* 60-250mm

I posted these into a local group on Facebook for Barry where people upload images out and about of Barry, businesses post what they're up to, general gripes and good things happening all go into that group. So I posted these and everyone who commented was raving saying how wonderful it was seeing people relaxing and enjoying the beach, how refreshing that there was no litter on the beach for a change, a slice of social history to look back on etc and the likes and hearts came with the post. 2 days later I get a notification the post has been removed from the group as I didn't get the consent from all the people in the images! They then in the group say posts have been deleted etc for X, Y, Z reasons so I ask why my post was removed when you've said I need consent for something I don't need consent for as I was in a public space and so were they! More to the fact, there are many posts on there from others who have taken a selfie on the beach with members of the public in the background visible and identifiable, and also businesses have posted images of their cakes for sale on their counters with their customers in the background unaware they've had their image taken sat down chatting etc. Double standards I say, it depends on that groups admin and what they deem okay and not okay rather than blanket cover the situation!

Anyway a back and forth breaks out WHERE THE ADMIN then say, now bearing in mind no one in that group can see the images as they have been removed, I also photographed a child in a state of undress. How damming is that, that makes me look like a paedo and so damaging to my businesses and reputation bearing in mind I work in a school! The child in a state of undress is pic 3 below, facing away from camera, nappy on, t shirt on, non identifiable child with a spade enjoying the beach. Well luckily after they said that they removed me and banned me from the group so I couldn't hit the turbo button but luckily after I end them a strongly worded private message, then removed the post so damage limitation.

Anyway, here are the pics I posted up, a little slice of social history 2021 of people enjoying the beach and the sun shine.

1.

Barry Island 07/09/2021 by Gareth Williams, on Flickr

2.

Barry Island 07/09/2021 by Gareth Williams, on Flickr

3.

Barry Island 07/09/2021 by Gareth Williams, on Flickr

4.

Barry Island 07/09/2021 by Gareth Williams, on Flickr

5.

Barry Island 07/09/2021 by Gareth Williams, on Flickr

6.

Barry Island 07/09/2021 by Gareth Williams, on Flickr

7.

Barry Island 07/09/2021 by Gareth Williams, on Flickr

8.

Barry Island 07/09/2021 by Gareth Williams, on Flickr

9.

Barry Island 07/09/2021 by Gareth Williams, on Flickr

10.

Barry Island 07/09/2021 by Gareth Williams, on Flickr

11.

Barry Island 07/09/2021 by Gareth Williams, on Flickr

12.

Barry Island 07/09/2021 by Gareth Williams, on Flickr

13.

Barry Island 07/09/2021 by Gareth Williams, on Flickr
Gareth
Welsh Photographer

My outfit: K1 gripped - Pentax D FA 24-70mm - Sigma 70-200mm OS HSM - Pentax modified DA* 60-250mm f4 - Irix 15mm Firefly - Pentax FA 35mm - FA 50mm - Tamron SP 90mm macro - Pentax AF 540 FGZ II

My Flickr
My PPG
My 500px

RobL

Link Posted 13/09/2021 - 12:52
The truth is administrators for groups like this are volunteers who have no knowledge of the rules around photographing in public and children in particular and often hold the commonly held view that you cannot photograph anyone without their consent, so to avoid any imagined legal consequences it is easier to take the action they have.

Helpful

Lubbyman

Link Posted 13/09/2021 - 14:37
Agree as far as the law is concerned. However... just because something is legal and therefore can be done doesn't mean it should be done. Many people - me included - do feel very strongly that they don't want a clearly recognisable picture of them put on the web, even if it is legal to do so, unless they are happy for it to be there. In some cases, they have very good reasons that the photographer cannot know unless permission is asked, for example they don't want an abusive partner or ex-partner to know where they go. The law is on the side of the photographer, but the law isn't everything. Moderators of social media groups are quite entitled to take this into account in what they do and don't permit. That might well be the case for a local group where local people might well recognise individuals in photos.

Having said that, though, that child is perfectly decently dressed - I've raised 3 of 'em and never had a problem with people seeing them dressed like that.

Good shots, though. All of them.

Steve

Helpful

1stEverPentax

Link Posted 13/09/2021 - 15:42
Tricky one this...I can see and understand both points of view...for and against posting such images.

Overall i'm with Steve on this one...I personally wouldn't like my recognisable image posted publicly anywhere without my consent and can therefore identify with anyone who might have objected to some of these images irrespective of the legality.

I've just come back from a weeks holiday on the Welsh coast and did take some images of landscapes that included people not known to me...but most were incidental to main image and most barely recognisable
without a magnifying glass. Possibly a few exceptions although most of these didn't involve people in swimwear / partly naked which I suspect is what many people in such images would be unhappy with.
If in doubt I wouldn't post anything that might cause posible embarrassment...all the way up to and including anger. I would avoid virtually 100% any image of a young child unless the image had some particular merit and parents / guardians gave explicit consent.

Overall like the images Gareth...from a social / historical perspective all work for me...but I wouldn't have posted No.6 (wouldn't even have taken it!) and No.5 could be interpreted more than one way. And unless the people imaged in 3, 9 and 10 are known to you and happy to be shown online I would have approached them / guardians for consent before posting.

Just my personal take...everyones own 'boundaries' will differ.

regards

Karlo

Helpful

RobL

Link Posted 13/09/2021 - 21:07
For those of us who sell stock photography these would qualify as Editorial shots so could be sold legally in that category and therefore visible on websites. Whether you would want to do that is another matter but no-one has the right to demand control over their images taken legally. I do know one person though whose image I must never put on a public site because the consequences for the family could be disastrous, so they have to stay extra vigilant when out and about.
Last Edited by RobL on 13/09/2021 - 21:18

Helpful

Flan

Link Posted 13/09/2021 - 22:11
Itís contentious photographing people when they are unaware
I know youíre intentions were honorable, but the world is so litigious today

Number 6 was also a no from myself as itís a intimate moment and I know it is only suncream he is applying and is harmless but to upload photos so recently taken in this social media driven world could cause you some problems

Street photography has the same problem and is why you see so much ICM, or intentional blur to avoid the subject from instant recognition.

I might be a bit odd ,when I say I do not like being photographed even though I love taking Photos of places and people

I have of course now been photographed and video graphed many times I imagine with mobile devices and posted online and Iíll probably never see one of them.

Itís just not like it was in times gone bye

Helpful

cardiffgareth

Link Posted 13/09/2021 - 22:18
Seems a decisive topic, if that's the right grammar. I posted this on Facebook regarding street images, when we look back at iconic images through such masters like Henri Cartier-Bresson, Joel Meyerowitz, Garry Winogrand, Robert Doisneau, Vivian Maier or Diane Arbus, almost always these photographers captured images in front of them on the street that told a story and captured a slice of history. Fast forward to here and now with me and I've done the same, although not to their standard! When we get to the point where we have to ask anyone who can be identifyable in an image for their consent we lose street photography and the ability to capture history.
Gareth
Welsh Photographer

My outfit: K1 gripped - Pentax D FA 24-70mm - Sigma 70-200mm OS HSM - Pentax modified DA* 60-250mm f4 - Irix 15mm Firefly - Pentax FA 35mm - FA 50mm - Tamron SP 90mm macro - Pentax AF 540 FGZ II

My Flickr
My PPG
My 500px

Flan

Link Posted 13/09/2021 - 22:33
The woken , have taken over the asylum

Ones intentions can be misinterpreted or misconstrued so easily today and can quickly escalate
I donít do Facebook or any social media for those reasons . I like forums for what interests me and like minded people
I do love a good street photo and there have been some genius ones from the past and even from the present.
Best of luck to you Gareth

Helpful

RobL

Link Posted 14/09/2021 - 08:39
A couple of weeks ago I thought I would try photographing people in a local weekly market. One stall holder turned his back whenever the camera pointed in his direction, another asked for his photo to be deleted as he was on the run, and a third said as a Muslim he didnít allow any photos of his face except on his passport and driving licence. I was asked if I had permission to do this (from who?). In days gone by there was only the smallest chance of a photo appearing anywhere and people werenít bothered but with social media now everyone is suspicious of your motives. I have been watching online courses by Joel Meyerowitz and Steve McCurry and although their back catalogue includes hundreds of candid shots they both espouse striking up a dialogue and getting people to agree to being photographed. Photographers like Vivian Maier used a Rolleiflex twin lens reflex so it wasnít obvious they were pointing a camera at anyone and it gave an interesting perspective, I suppose you could do the same with the rear screen folded out.

Helpful

cardiffgareth

Link Posted 14/09/2021 - 11:53
RobL wrote:
A couple of weeks ago I thought I would try photographing people in a local weekly market. One stall holder turned his back whenever the camera pointed in his direction, another asked for his photo to be deleted as he was on the run, and a third said as a Muslim he didnít allow any photos of his face except on his passport and driving licence. I was asked if I had permission to do this (from who?). In days gone by there was only the smallest chance of a photo appearing anywhere and people werenít bothered but with social media now everyone is suspicious of your motives. I have been watching online courses by Joel Meyerowitz and Steve McCurry and although their back catalogue includes hundreds of candid shots they both espouse striking up a dialogue and getting people to agree to being photographed. Photographers like Vivian Maier used a Rolleiflex twin lens reflex so it wasnít obvious they were pointing a camera at anyone and it gave an interesting perspective, I suppose you could do the same with the rear screen folded out.

Interesting point re the gentleman who was muslin and his answer, as I see many muslims have had their image taken and posted online, poss it depends how strong and strict you want to follow the faith ?

RE - Using the flip out screen, that or use the Bronica with the WLF, not like that shutter is like a tank when it fires so uber discreet Jokes aside there I have in the past shot portrait orientation and just held the camera to my side, using back button AF and shot
Gareth
Welsh Photographer

My outfit: K1 gripped - Pentax D FA 24-70mm - Sigma 70-200mm OS HSM - Pentax modified DA* 60-250mm f4 - Irix 15mm Firefly - Pentax FA 35mm - FA 50mm - Tamron SP 90mm macro - Pentax AF 540 FGZ II

My Flickr
My PPG
My 500px

pschlute

Link Posted 15/09/2021 - 15:28
A very nice set that portrays exactly what you intended. No. 10 gets my vote.
Peter



My Flickr page

Helpful

cardiffgareth

Link Posted 16/09/2021 - 21:58
pschlute wrote:
A very nice set that portrays exactly what you intended. No. 10 gets my vote.

Thanks Peter
Gareth
Welsh Photographer

My outfit: K1 gripped - Pentax D FA 24-70mm - Sigma 70-200mm OS HSM - Pentax modified DA* 60-250mm f4 - Irix 15mm Firefly - Pentax FA 35mm - FA 50mm - Tamron SP 90mm macro - Pentax AF 540 FGZ II

My Flickr
My PPG
My 500px

droopsnoot

Link Posted 17/09/2021 - 12:59
I go to various classic car and steam related shows, and I've found myself not taking some photos that might come out quite well, just because of the potential for "trouble". For example the old merry-go-round at the local steam fair might make a good photo, but not enough to fend off accusations of taking photos of the kids that are on it. So I strive to take photos that don't have any people at all in them, which can be quite limiting. In truth, for anti-social people like me, it's not much of a hardship.
Real name: Mike Edwards. My homage to seventies Vauxhalls: www.firenza.net

Camera - Pentax Kx, 18-55 kit lens, 18-200 Sigma, 50-500 Sigma, 500mm Tamron mirror

gtis

Link Posted 18/09/2021 - 13:26
hi Gareth
the worlds gone mad
they are all great but I like number 2 best
just for the simple abstract
neil
cheers Neil
pentax k3 k5 super A
DA* 300 f4 DA* 50-135 f 2.8 smc DA* 16-50 f2.8 50mm f1.7 af 360 fgz pentax1.4xhd converter





Panasonic Dmc Fz200
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.