Comments on: Asking Permission to Photograph People

By: boris

boris — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 10:54:12 +0000

Nice article, i like your moral aproach to the subject. It’s good for people to read it because many travelers really don’t know much about their destination and customs there. I act completely the same as you on my travels.

By: David Cross

David Cross — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 14:52:55 +0000

Great article. One should also be cognizant of what is acceptable legally in a country – for example in one Scandinavian country, one can photograph people for “personal” use but not for publication/professional use without explicit written permission.

By: kris

kris — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 13:19:31 +0000

Interesting about the woman chasing. I feel this blog has helped me understand a great deal about legal rights of those I’m including in my photos. I have obviously violated tons of people at this point – interesting to note that google street view smudges all the faces of those on the street when their photo truck drives by. I can take this to mean they cannot get everyone to sign off and understand the privacy laws completely.
In my experience, the only time people have actually complained about being in one of my pictures – and I often take shots of crowds or gatherings – has been due to those people being involved with drug activities of some form or another. I generally don’t argue with any suggestions from these individuals, even though I just took a picture of a hundred people and haven’t singled anyone out. Delete or be deleted, I guess is a good rule of thumb.

By: L.C.Counts

L.C.Counts — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 00:54:51 +0000

To Dawn: I lived in Hong Kong for 5 years and can tell you absolutely that you do NOT take photos of people if they know about it without permission. My daughter was chased down the street by a lady when her photo was taken. even though my daughter was taking the marketplace she was selling from rather than the lady. Admittedly the U.S. is much stricter on laws that Europe, because of our vast system of law suits. Hong Kong has learned by being a western country as a British Colony, and access to the US media the value of litigation. There used to be no lawyers (or soliciters) there, but there are now, even though they are under the control of China and no longer a free colony. Releases are NOT needed there, but permission definitely is. You can certainly take groups (for example Tai Chi groups exercizing in the park or people on the Star Ferry) since they are also used to “silly tourists” who photograph everything. But if you are taking a single person or small group, ASK first or be sorry later.

By: L.C.Counts

L.C.Counts — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 00:47:13 +0000

One note: The law on personal photography does state that it is illegal if you are publishing it “for personal gain”. I don’t consider web sites, chat rooms, blogs and other “cultural” sites to be commercial. On the other hand if you publish those photos on sites that are selling them for you, you have crossed the line and need a release. Use common sense and let the word “personal gain” be your guide when photographing people. If you aren’t making bucks from what you are doing and if you watch your backgrounds so that you aren’t intruding on security problems for the buildings in the background and you should be fine. There’s a fine line between legal and illegal when taking images of other people. Be safe if you plan to profit.

By: L.C.Counts

L.C.Counts — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 00:42:14 +0000

David and Peter bring up another point. Do be aware that there are “off-limit” sights as well as people when photographing. It is illegal in virtually every country in the world including the U.S. to photograph military installations, police and emergency buildings, and,all private businesses in the U.S., Britain, France and other western countries . You must ask permission before photographing in front of or inside almost all commercial businesses. Tiffany’s is a good example. Reason: Criminals would love a record of the inventory or the physical set up. Even though open to the public, businesses are privately owned (at least for now) in the U.S. and many other countries. Just because they are in a mall or open to the public on a sidewalk does not give you permission to take a photo of the business or even with it in the background. Ask permission of the manager or owner first. No release is required, but do get his name when you are granted the right to take the picture. Remember even though this law isn’t often enforced, especially in the U.S., it is there and you can pay a price for ignoring it. Barristers and Solicitors (lawyers and their helpers) are everywhere. Often nothing is said when you do it because businesses dislike causing problems in their establishments, but that does not make it legal. I think the discussion here is what is legal, not what we can get by with.

By: L.C.Counts

L.C.Counts — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 00:31:26 +0000

Two points: I must disagree with Sime. I have photographed for travel magazines for several years all over the world, and when publishing pictures with a person as the focal point, I always have a model release, even if it is a candid shot. I taught “Photography and the Law” at university and know that there are laws that require model releases from both adults and children (two separate forms) if you want to avoid possible law suits. These forms are available on line from several Universities including Cornell or just go to a search engine. People do have a right by law to “public privacy” meaning you do not have a right to photograph them just because they are out in public IF they are the main subject of your shot. Crowd scenes are not a problem but shots of individuals or small groups need releases. However, having said that, anyone who has advertised himself for personal gain, has forfeited his right to public privacy under the law. This includes politicians (anyone who has run for elected office), performers, realtors who put their photos on their business cards, and a gigantic group of other people. Anyone who might be recognized in public fall into this category. Sime might have gotten away without releases, but it is not legal. In today’s world, to avoid legal action if you sell or publish photos, get a release and keep it in your files FOREVER.
_Point 2: I also am not comfortable paying for photographs. However, I have found in third world countries, if I carry a polaroid camera with me, and offer to GIVE them a photo if I can TAKE one with my other camera, works wonders, since in many countries it is either expensive or impossible to get personal photos.

By: Peter Sanderson

Peter Sanderson — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 23:46:55 +0000

With respect to asking permission when photographing people, I have been a professional photographer on the Gold Coast for 20 years.
I learned a hard lesson early when shooting dining shots for restaurants. While shooting a wide angle shot at night I suddenly had a solicitor get up from a group dining table and almost kicked over my tripod,
indicating that his high profile client did not wish to be photographed.
These days I use humour to thaw out any potential situations in a dining shot.
I ask each table individually with a big smile on my face
“whether there is anyone having dinner with someone else’s husband or wife this evening”
That line has always broken the ice and I usually get full cooperation. On rare occasions I have hit the nail on the head with that question and couples have actually got up to leave or declined permission for the shot and that’s OK.

Peter Sanderson (pixelpete)

By: Sime

Sime — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 22:54:04 +0000

Keith, You’re not right, no… You don’t need permission from someone in a public place to either take their photo or to upload it to a free website / personal website. You can even print that image out as art and sell it some of the time. What you can’t do is advertise a product with it… For example, if I saw you looking cool and holding a can of Coke – I can’t just photograph you and use you on the Coke website. (That would equal court case)

The web is a publishing tool, sure, but there is no law that says you can’t take a photo of someone in public and post it on the internet. If someone found that photo, they could ask you to remove it – but legally you don’t have to.

I actually think that you should have a bit of a re-think about your whole idea on this, your thoughts are scarily close to reminding me of some sort of crazy police state… of course you can put your family christmas on the web if you choose?….

If you were in a shopping mall, you could put the images on the web, but not in an advertising or defamatory manner. If there is a sign on the front of the shopping centre that says NO PHOTOGRAPHY then, no.

You don’t need a signed person or property release for general street photography that is not intended for advertising. You can publish someone’s photo on the front of the biggest newspaper in the world and not get their signature… Of course, this is all subject to local laws – so make sure you’re not on private property breaching someone’s terms and conditions.

Hope this helps…. (Now you can relax and go take some photos)

Sime

By: Keith Rowland

Keith Rowland — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 21:59:16 +0000

Regarding permission to publish. By all accounts I consider the uploading of images to your own website, free photo sharing site (Flickr) or for sale publishing sites (SmugMug, etc) to be publishing. Therefore would you need written permission of anyone in the photos? I’m thinking so.

I’ve seen people post candid family photos on these photo sites, which are in plain public view of the world, and I doubt these people has given written permission. Whether or not the photography got paid or not, the web is a publishing tool.

Am I wrong? Can I post the family Christmas photos on the web without anyone in the picture knowing? I believe many photographers are violating the rights of people, who in their homes, are being photographed.

On another note, if I was in a shopping mall, a public place, although private property, can I publish to the web any photos I take?