# taking pics in public.



## invisibledemon (Jan 22, 2008)

how do most of you go about taking pics of random people in public.

say a random pose between two people, or a little kid. something that just looks like it would make a good pic. how do you go about taking the pic, seeing as to how a lot of people are sensitive to this kinda thing in public.

im just wondering how to go about it, i dont want to piss people off by taking pics. 

thanks.


----------



## jstuedle (Jan 22, 2008)

invisibledemon said:


> how do most of you go about taking pics of random people in public.
> 
> say a random pose between two people, or a little kid. something that just looks like it would make a good pic. how do you go about taking the pic,
> 
> thanks.



Usually I just raise the camera to my eye, compose and push the shutter button. I might look at the LCD and shoot another, then walk away.


----------



## Sarah Elizabeth (Jan 22, 2008)

jstuedle said:


> Usually I just raise the camera to my eye, compose and push the shutter button. I might look at the LCD and shoot another, then walk away.


 

*touché*


----------



## Sideburns (Jan 22, 2008)

Mostly you just have to have confidence.  If you look creepy, you'll be assumed to be creepy.


----------



## bhop (Jan 23, 2008)

I have good and bad days.  On a good day, i'm like jstuedle.  I just snap away and not think about it.  On a bad day, I get self conscious about it and then I get angry at myself for not taking the shots I want.  I think jstuedle has the right idea...  I figure, if I have any confrontation, I'll just say i'm a tourist or something, luckily there are a lot of tourists in L.A.


----------



## mrodgers (Jan 23, 2008)

I don't.  I wouldn't purposefully take pictures of someone I don't know specifically.  The professionals can come here and bark all the "photographer's rights" BS all they want, I think it is rude, inconsiderate, and disrespectful.  You have no idea how that person may feel if they had known.  Especially with children.  Yes, children can make some fantastic shots, but think about how the parents feel when they catch some stranger taking pictures of their little girl with something like a dSLR.  Then think about how the parents might feel searching for something on google images and finding their little girl's picture on the internet.


----------



## JerryPH (Jan 23, 2008)

I can see both sides of the issue and understand why someone may want to do candid street photography and why not to do it.

For me, I would think going to locations where a camera is less obtrusive would be easier to shoot candid child/adult shots. Amusement parks, oceans and beaches, tourist locations do offer the same opportunities for wonderful shots, however taking a pic of someone's child as they are exiting a grocery store... well that falls into the "looking creepy" side.

I have no issues raising the camera to eye and snapping ANYWHERE, but I would expect to have a mother running out all worried if I had taken a shot of her child while he or she was sitting on the steps of their home and I was randomly walking by, stopped and took a picture and continued to walk away.

Though one may have the right to do it near anywhere/anytime, there is a personal sense of appropriateness that needs to be accepted, and if one doesn't, and you do take that pic and someone bumrushes you... have the courtesy to talk to them, explain what you are doing and delete the "offending picture" as they chimp with you, if that is their wish.

Personal appearance is also going to have a huge impact on how people perceive you. Try this test (if male that is... lol). Walk around with a shirt and tie snappng away, watch people's reactions. Then come back in torn jeans and a t-shirt and unshaven... and watch the reactions.

That person in a tie will have a MUCH higher level of acceptance in most cases. Mind you, I am not saying that if you go into the heart of the Bronx or a ghetto after dark, that wearing a tie is going to make you credible... it will get your hiney shot... lol. We're talking average afternoon downtown, just clicking away.


----------



## jstuedle (Jan 23, 2008)

mrodgers said:


> I don't.  I wouldn't purposefully take pictures of someone I don't know specifically.  The professionals can come here and bark all the "photographer's rights" BS all they want, I think it is rude, inconsiderate, and disrespectful.  You have no idea how that person may feel if they had known.  Especially with children.  Yes, children can make some fantastic shots, but think about how the parents feel when they catch some stranger taking pictures of their little girl with something like a dSLR.  Then think about how the parents might feel searching for something on google images and finding their little girl's picture on the internet.



The question was "how do you take pictures of people?". Not, "how can I shoot kiddy porn in public?". Your leap of logic and assumption of intent is somewhat bewildering to me. Street photography is an art. Often the best street art is of peoples acts, not faces. And yes, in todays climate children need special consideration. And if I were shooting for an advertising campaign I would ask permission and get model releases. But to make the leap to posting little girls pictures as almost kiddy porn is an insult to myself and great photographers for a hundred years of street art in the public domain.


----------



## jstuedle (Jan 23, 2008)

JerryPH said:


> Personal appearance is also going to have a huge impact on how people perceive you. Try this test (if male that is... lol). Walk around with a shirt and tie snappng away, watch people's reactions. Then come back in torn jeans and a t-shirt and unshaven... and watch the reactions.
> 
> That person in a tie will have a MUCH higher level of acceptance in most cases.



Self confidence is a big part of the visual image a photographer projects. I have not worn a tie except to funerals since retiring a manager a few years back. My attire is almost always black Dickies and a dark shirt of some type, often a polo. But with self confidence and a assured attitude, I walk around in a printed Tee and B-Jeans with the same results. The location also makes a big impact in your acceptance. Bluejeans are OK at the county fair, or beach front. Something slightly more professional works better on city streets and events. JMHO.


----------



## mrodgers (Jan 23, 2008)

jstuedle said:


> But to make the leap to posting little girls pictures as almost kiddy porn is an insult to myself and great photographers for a hundred years of street art in the public domain.


Where in my post did I say "kiddy porn"?  I do not want images of my children on the internet or anywhere else other than my house.  There are countless people who have images they have taken randomly of people and they are all over the flickr and other sites.  Thus, I do not want people I don't know taking pictures of my children and posting them on the internet.

It has absolutely nothing to do with "kiddy porn", nor did I state anything of the sort in my post.

I do not agree with the "photographer's rights" and the lack of "privacy rights".  Unfortunately, there's no money to be made with privacy, thus there are very few lobbyists for privacy.  There is lots of money to be made with photography, so there are powerful lobbyists for photography to keep the "rights" in the law....


----------



## Arch (Jan 23, 2008)

ok calm it down.... mrogers you did make the leap from taking pictures in public to children, thats why its got messy. It is a problem that people tend to Immediately put the 2 together.

If you look at one of my fav photogs on this boards work (Tuna), you will see all kinds of public/street photog. There is no reason to call this kind of photog disrespectful.


----------



## jstuedle (Jan 23, 2008)

One fact many of us fail to consider, there is no such thing as privacy outside our home anymore. I any medium to large city we are on video dozens of times a day. The average Brit is captured by public CCTV and stop light cams over a hundred times a day I read recently. I live in a town of 619 and I know of 6 cameras I pass 4 or more times a day. The bank, post office and local store have had CCTV for longer than I care to remember. That would not include the 4 cams I have on our studio and parrot rooms. Privacy today simply does not exist in a way it once did.


----------



## mrodgers (Jan 23, 2008)

invisibledemon said:


> how do most of you go about taking pics of *random people in public*.
> 
> say a random pose between two people, *or a little kid*.


Not sure where I made the connection between shooting in public to shooting people or children in public.

Don't get me wrong, children playing in the park and capturing that in a photo candidly is probably the best subject for photography.  This isn't just children, but I know my wife would not want her photo taken or to find it in someone's "internet photo blog" as well.  But, I see all the time, photos posted on forums I'm now visiting with the statements that "I don't know who that is, but it was a great shot.  Here it is...." kind of thing.  But, it never seems to be that these people think about what the people who are the subject feel about it.  No one thinks to respect other people in this world (not only with this subject but just in general.)

My thoughts are not just with children, but respect to everyone, kids and adults.


----------



## shorty6049 (Jan 23, 2008)

i'm scared to take pictures of people in public unless i know they wont see me or i could make  it look like i wasnt taking THIER picture. partially it comes from the fact that it feels pretty awkward if you notice someone taking your picture, or someone videotaping you , and i dont want to put that on other people and make them wonder what i'll be using it for, or just why i'm taking their picture


----------



## bhop (Jan 23, 2008)

mrodgers said:


> This isn't just children, but I know my wife would not want her photo taken or to find it in someone's "internet photo blog" as well.  But, I see all the time, photos posted on forums I'm now visiting with the statements that "I don't know who that is, but it was a great shot.  Here it is...." kind of thing.  But, it never seems to be that these people think about what the people who are the subject feel about it.  No one thinks to respect other people in this world (not only with this subject but just in general.)



What's the difference in someone looking at you (not you specifically) on the street and someone looking at the exact same scene on a public web page?  What fear do you have about it?

Personally, if I found my pic on a website (and I have) it doesn't bother me.  I'm not really a paranoid kinda guy or anything... I just don't see what the problem is.  Of course, there are boundaries, if the pic was of me inside my apt. window, that'd be a problem.


----------



## TheOtherBob (Jan 23, 2008)

Well, I've been in a lot of street pictures, but most of them were accidents - my commute involves walking through Times Square.  But one time I was coming home from work late at night, and was leaning on a light post near Times Square waiting for the light to change so I could cross - and someone walked by and took my picture.  I didn't find it insulting or annoying at all - I thought it was very...neat, for lack of a better word.  I don't know why they thought I was worth photographing, but I enjoyed knowing that they thought so.


----------



## Sideburns (Jan 23, 2008)

mrodgers said:


> Not sure where I made the connection between shooting in public to shooting people or children in public.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, children playing in the park and capturing that in a photo candidly is probably the best subject for photography.  This isn't just children, but I know my wife would not want her photo taken or to find it in someone's "internet photo blog" as well.  But, I see all the time, photos posted on forums I'm now visiting with the statements that "I don't know who that is, but it was a great shot.  Here it is...." kind of thing.  But, it never seems to be that these people think about what the people who are the subject feel about it.  No one thinks to respect other people in this world (not only with this subject but just in general.)
> 
> My thoughts are not just with children, but respect to everyone, kids and adults.



I think you have a twisted perspective on this.  Maybe you're one of those big brother is watching us guys.

Whether or not someone takes your picture while swinging on the swings at the park...you're in plain view for the whole surrounding area to see.  What's the difference if it's just them seeing you, or if it's a few people online appreciating a good photograph?

I'm just sayin...it's gonna happen sometimes...and it's not really an issue of privacy whatsoever.  It's an issue with people all up in arms about their so called "rights".  (maybe to not have their picture taken IN PUBLIC).

The issue would be if someone tried to sell it..then ya...your likeness is being used and you deserve compensation...but whatever.


----------



## gtwosaints (Jan 23, 2008)

To me it really depends on the shot. I haven't really had experience but,  I can say what I would do. If it's like a shot of two kids on a swing, I'm not really going to ask for permission unless the kids are bothered or the parents don't want me to. If they do I will probably try to persuade them if it's a great shot and ask if I can take a different photo. If no then it's usually no unless I must have the shot. I know privacy is difficult but, when dealing with kids I like to be a bit careful. If I'm shooting you know like a portrait outside I will definitely ask for permission from the parent. I'm not sure parents want to see their kid posing for a stranger with a camera. If the parent doesn't like it then I would probably delete it and try again. Now adults is a bit of a different story.


----------



## nagoshua (Jan 23, 2008)

Im just wondering though... what is the law on this (british ones preferably lol). If someone is in a public space are you allowed to take a photo of them and do they have the right to say what you can and cant do with it?


----------



## skieur (Jan 23, 2008)

You are allowed to take a photo of almost anything in a place to which the general public has access with a few common sense exceptions such as change rooms, courts in session, washrooms etc. The restriction on use is that advertising use requires a model release since this kind of use takes it out of context in that the person does not necessarily follow a particular diet program etc.

You may however use it on a website, display or sell it as an art photo or use it in a magazine. This is the case in non-French speaking countries.
In France they are still arguing over photo rights issues and in Québec there have been some contrary rulings that have not been appealed, so until a ruling gets further to Appeal Court or the Supreme Court, it is hard to say what it means in terms of precedence.

skieur


----------



## Lostfiniel (Jan 23, 2008)

nagoshua said:


> Im just wondering though... what is the law on this (british ones preferably lol). If someone is in a public space are you allowed to take a photo of them and do they have the right to say what you can and cant do with it?







> You are allowed to take a photo of almost anything in a place to which the general public has access with a few common sense exceptions such as change rooms, courts in session, washrooms etc. The restriction on use is that advertising use requires a model release since this kind of use takes it out of context in that the person does not necessarily follow a particular diet program etc.



My understanding on model releases and public photos was different. I have always been lead to believe that a public photo (of people) is fine as long as there is a group in the shot or the focus is not on an individual person. If you are walking down a sidewalk and zoom in on someone's face for a close-up, (from my understanding) you would need a model release. Even if it wasn't a close-up, as long as the focus is on one or two individual people you would need one.

Now, I could be wrong. But, this is why I am very cautious of public photos. i tend to shoot scenery and animals to be safe. And surfers, they don't seem to notice. 

I had also understood that shooting children as individuals or a couple children would require a photo release signed by a parent or guardian.


----------



## azruial (Jan 23, 2008)

There are lots of long and sometimes angry threads about legality... http://thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=105890&

I liked this link from kundalini, it kept me busy for a while(!) and gave a weakly cited but informative overview with at least as much credibility as any forum.
http://www.danheller.com/model-release.html

But that's off-topic for this thread!!
Personally, I'm scared s#*!-less when it comes to taking pics that include people in public, it just feels awkward for me and I feel that I should work on it.  I plan to head downtown to some tourist spots because I feel like that will be an easier environment to take candids.


----------



## JerryPH (Jan 23, 2008)

jstuedle said:


> Self confidence is a big part of the visual image a photographer projects.


 
Most definately.



jstuedle said:


> I have not worn a tie except to funerals since retiring a manager a few years back.


 
I was not suggesting that everyone do it all the time, just try it as a test.  Appearance makes a big difference, especially with the law.  I know profiling is inherently wrong, however I have been testing it out for years.  

Wear dirty jean shorts and a torn t-shirt to an airport and you are almost guaranteed a cavity search (lol).  Wear a white shirt, tie and pressed pants, and you get through with a lot less hassle.  Of course profiling at an airport is more than just physical appearance, it unfortunately often involves race colour or creed... but this does work, please believe me when I say that.  In the last 30 or so flights I have gone on and tested this with, I always experienced more negative attention when attire was not neat in appearance.




jstuedle said:


> The location also makes a big impact in your acceptance. Bluejeans are OK at the county fair, or beach front. Something slightly more professional works better on city streets and events. JMHO.


 
Yes I agree.  As Imentioned, we're discussing an average afternoon downtown, just clicking away at a few street scenes.  Wearing a suit and tie at the beach will definately get you the attention of the wrong people... the guys with the white jackets ready to take you away.


----------



## PhotogGirl (Jan 23, 2008)

I'm new here, but just read this topic from beginning to end.  I struggle with street photography, but I love to do it on days I feel confident.  I try not to intrude, I just casually "go about my business" and most of the time people don't even notice they're being photographed.


----------



## hawkeye (Jan 23, 2008)

mrodgers said:


> so there are powerful lobbyists for photography to keep the "rights" in the law....



lobbyists? 

Yeah, there are lobbyists all over washington there to protect the rights to use your camera in public!  Not that they have more important issues to lobby... like medical research, civil rights, tobacco and the like :er:

without these powerful lobbyist it would be against the law to have a camera at public... thank goodness for the work they do [/sarcasm]


----------



## skieur (Jan 23, 2008)

Lostfiniel said:


> My understanding on model releases and public photos was different. I have always been lead to believe that a public photo (of people) is fine as long as there is a group in the shot or the focus is not on an individual person. If you are walking down a sidewalk and zoom in on someone's face for a close-up, (from my understanding) you would need a model release. Even if it wasn't a close-up, as long as the focus is on one or two individual people you would need one.
> 
> Now, I could be wrong. But, this is why I am very cautious of public photos. i tend to shoot scenery and animals to be safe. And surfers, they don't seem to notice.
> 
> I had also understood that shooting children as individuals or a couple children would require a photo release signed by a parent or guardian.


 
No, yours is the misunderstanding of the use of model releases. They are more for advertising purposes than for any other reason.

skieur


----------



## jstuedle (Jan 23, 2008)

skieur said:


> No, yours is the misunderstanding of the use of model releases. They are more for advertising purposes than for any other reason.
> 
> skieur



True, a release is only needed if you intend to profit from your photos.


----------



## rob91 (Jan 23, 2008)

mrodgers said:


> Not sure where I made the connection between shooting in public to shooting people or children in public.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, children playing in the park and capturing that in a photo candidly is probably the best subject for photography.  This isn't just children, but I know my wife would not want her photo taken or to find it in someone's "internet photo blog" as well.  But, I see all the time, photos posted on forums I'm now visiting with the statements that "I don't know who that is, but it was a great shot.  Here it is...." kind of thing.  But, it never seems to be that these people think about what the people who are the subject feel about it.  No one thinks to respect other people in this world (not only with this subject but just in general.)
> 
> My thoughts are not just with children, but respect to everyone, kids and adults.



If you make it your business to photograph the world then that also includes the people in it.


----------



## skieur (Jan 24, 2008)

jstuedle said:


> True, a release is only needed if you intend to profit from your photos.


 
Not quite correct, street photography as art has sold for high prices, been displayed on sale in galleries and been published in magazines without the need or requirement of a model release and been displayed on web sites.

skieur


----------



## ThePup (Jan 25, 2008)

azruial said:
			
		

> Personally, I'm scared s#*!-less when it comes to taking pics that include people in public, it just feels awkward for me and I feel that I should work on it. I plan to head downtown to some tourist spots because I feel like that will be an easier environment to take candids.


I'm in the same boat    Went out today with the camera whilst the car was being serviced, and missed a number of great shots due to lack of confidence.  Did take one average shot of a construction worker, and as I got closer was asked "What are the photos for?"  I Got nervous and said, as politely as I could "Just for the sake of taking photos - I enjoy it".  Turns out he enjoys photography too (Though mainly underwater - He dives too), and we chatted for about 10 minutes about it before he went back to work    That actually boosted my confidence a little.



jstuedle said:


> True, a release is only needed if you intend to profit from your photos.



Not quite - A Model release is only needed if you intend to make it appear that the person in the photo is endorsing a product... (Which includes being on the front of a magazine, it appears as though they are endorsing the Magazine... INSIDE the magazine doesn't require a release though.)  Print and sell all the copies you like, as long as it's not endorsing a product.


----------



## JerryPH (Jan 25, 2008)

I think every one that wants to discuss law, needs to take into consideration the simple fact that this is an international board... and what is legal in London is not legal in Dubai but again is legal in Canada, but totally illegal in the USA... lol

If you aren't going to state where you are from in the post, at least have the courtesy to have a location in your profile, that way we don't get into a "...is so!.. is not!" kinda situation.


----------



## LaFoto (Jan 25, 2008)

Jerry is, of course, right with regards to the legal aspect of the matter - it changes from state to state and from country to country.

I don't think it really is legal matters that want to be discussed here, though, but the personal feeling each of us has when they are out in public places, happening to photograph strangers or even wanting to do so.

Some become quite intimidated (myself, too, I might add), others have the confidence to "be in the right, so what can the photographed person say?". I wish I were more daring what street photography is concerned (I only sometimes am, as some of my NYC pics show, but at the time I stepped out of my shoes quite a bit because I was a stranger). 

Actually, I did photograph some people in town only on Tuesday morning, but that town is so old and pretty that people are used to tourists taking photos, which changes the situation somewhat. 

Therefore I might suggest that those who want to "teach" themselves a little more confidence go to places where it is relatively "normal" that people take photos. 

You cannot always FIRST go up to the people and ask them "May I take your photo, please?", for that'd ruin the very moment you want to capture. You need to get a feeling for the situation. Sometimes it feels alright to take the photo (like when I photographed the four guys eating ice-cream in Berlin, they were quite amused by the fact that someone directed her 300mm lens at them), and sometimes you have your doubts, like with that painter in Cowes on the Isle of Wight who was taking a break from work, sitting on the street in his painter's outfit, and I thought this would be a nice pic, I looked at him, ever so slightly lifted the camera, he shook his head equally slightly, I nodded --- and that was it. No photo. He very obviously didn't want to be photographed. I had to accept that. 

I also remember the situation of the young oriental couple with their baby boy in the park who could only JUST about walk. He still staggered in the way toddlers do and looked really cute. I took his photo and they saw me take it and never either came closer or said anything to me or grabbed up the boy and left or anything ... so I took that as their silent agreement that they were ok with me taking a pic of their baby boy. I guess they even felt a little proud that a total stranger found their boy cute enough to be wanting to take his photo.

As you can see, the situation can vary a lot.


----------



## spiffybeth (Jan 25, 2008)

sometimes when people notice you are taking pictures of them on the street, they smile.


----------



## ThePup (Jan 25, 2008)

JerryPH said:


> If you aren't going to state where you are from in the post, at least have the courtesy to have a location in your profile, that way we don't get into a "...is so!.. is not!" kinda situation.



You're right, sorry!  I'm in AUstralia, though it's my understanding that my statement is correct for the majority of the 'western' nations.

I suppose another good thing to point out is that, as far as I'm aware, none of us are lawyers  



			
				LaFoto said:
			
		

> You cannot always FIRST go up to the people and ask them "May I take your photo, please?", for that'd ruin the very moment you want to capture.


I Was watching a young lad, perhaps 8 or 9, busking in a mall, playing the violin.  It was raining (He was undercover, but everything was pretty wet and dreery) and he was wearing a bright yellow jacket, with the hood up over his head.  I Saw his mother watching him from maybe 5 metres away.  I dropped a few coins in, and looked at the mother, raising the camera - She nodded, then came over, lowered his hood, straightened his collar, and made him look at the camera!  Exactly what I DIDN'T want!  I Took a couple of snaps anyway, but because they were posed, they just looked like family happysnaps, and didn't capture what I originally wanted.

(Oh, This wet, cold downpour was in the middle of summer, and supposedly a drought... Stupid weather, go figure...)


----------



## invisibledemon (Jan 26, 2008)

this is byfar the most helpful, and informing forum i have been on. 
thanks for all of your input, answered the questions i had.

when speaking of taking pictures of children, im more or less meaning places like a mall, or highly trafficked area. i couldnt snap a pic of someone at their home, people here would think they are being stalked. 

i go downtown, and we have this big ass mall (Opry Mills) that is useless for shopping bc all of the stores are overpriced (considering you can go into the same store at another mall and get the same thing cheaper). but there are a lot of tourists and locals that go there to walk around, and see this place that was once a nice amusement park. lol. 

but there are a lot of ops for an interesting photo or two, and am always nervous that the subject would get pissed and try to make a big deal of it.


----------



## Mystwalker (Jan 27, 2008)

I would not have probs if someone took my picture while I was walking down the street, or somewhere in public.

But I feel awkward about taking picture of other people in public.  There is no way for me to tell how others feel about "their privacy".  Not much privacy out on streets, but it is still a picture of them.

I guess I would not have problem with using a wide angle and taking picture of landscape/buildings - people that happen to be "there" are not the focus of picture.


----------



## azruial (Jan 27, 2008)

Okay, life works in funny ways.  My friend (female) was waiting for the subway train and she noticed someone with a P&S taking pics.  She didn't pay much attention at first, but she realized that he kept walking behind women and aiming the camera at their butts, then walking off and apparently reviewing his shots, then going back for more!!!  He came over to her and she didn't know how to react.  I'd say that's harassment, but it's so strange any way you look at it.  I said she should'a smacked him silly, but man, I just can't get over it, I mean I guess this is part of where some people's fears come from?  I hate stuff like this, it's just ridiculous. :madmad:

I thought this was kind of relevent... how NOT to take pictures of people in public...


----------



## invisibledemon (Jan 27, 2008)

hahaha, i would really expect to be punched if i were doing that kinda crap. thats not photography, thats just perversion. 
no, i wouldnt be taking that kinda crap.


----------



## TAGMAN (Jan 27, 2008)

Manhattan is the best place to photograph people. I can snap away without
to many people taking notice.If there is somebody specifc that interests me,
I just ask them. I had business owner yell at me once for taking images of 
the front of his restaurant. 

Hey, I try to be respectful of everyone. I admit to being a little nervous
taking the children images of strangers though.


----------



## Lauralegz (Mar 28, 2013)

Gotta question my picture was used from last years home opener of the jays in the paper and now my face is on the ticket for the third opener game should I take legal action to get free tickets or something cuz I was smash case when photo was taken so voids anything I would have signed and didn't see anything on back of jays tickets........


----------



## Ilovemycam (Mar 28, 2013)

I hate street photos that look like nothing except a bunch of people on the street. 

If you shoot street, shoot quality.


----------



## gsgary (Mar 28, 2013)

mrodgers said:


> I don't.  I wouldn't purposefully take pictures of someone I don't know specifically.  The professionals can come here and bark all the "photographer's rights" BS all they want, I think it is rude, inconsiderate, and disrespectful.  You have no idea how that person may feel if they had known.  Especially with children.  Yes, children can make some fantastic shots, but think about how the parents feel when they catch some stranger taking pictures of their little girl with something like a dSLR.  Then think about how the parents might feel searching for something on google images and finding their little girl's picture on the internet.



I think you need to get a life, what does it matter if someone has taken your photo, i sorry but when im shooting on the streets i couldnt give a toss what people think


----------



## Overread (Mar 28, 2013)

Thread locked:

Lauralegz - its great to see people using search to find older references, but if you have a new question please do make a new thread instead of bumping one from way back in 2008. A new thread with your post first will let people be able to focus upon your topic instead of rehashing the old one at the start of the resurrected thread


----------

