Join Now
Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
Interesting discussion developed here on the ethics of candid photography.
Some seem to think its just a bit of harmless fun, others, myself among them, think its distasteful and creates problems down the line for other (male) photographers.
Since there was so much discussion, thought it should come here.
Thanks for starting a forum area for this, a more appropriate place to discuss the issues at length.
Why is an ethical approach important, well in the UK there are no laws that prevent taking pictures in a public place. There are many pressures, from uninformed community support officers and the like, many instances of such pressures have been well documented on EPZ and other places. Therefore self regulation is required if we as photographers are to produce images which inform, entertain, challenge etc without being disrespectful or harmful.
It is an important consideration too for when we go on holiday (there is a whole branch of photography related to street photography entitled ethnographic photography) particularly when we encounter significant cultural differences. This can be just as relevant in Mediterranean or Eastern Europe as it is in another continent say South America or Africa.
I myself try to uphold the recommendations as adopted by many photojournalists, some of which I detail in my current blog entry.
I would be interested to hear of what practical steps do you take to ensure that the images you produce are 'fit for purpose' or what ethical considerations most inform your choices of image making?
The photo linked to isn't fun. The vignetting creates a peephole effect which moves it towards voyeurism and away from documentary or street photography. As part of a literally broader picture providing some context, I might not see a problem with it, but it does specifically target one person out of context, and I feel target is the right word.
"Candid" could imply something quite innocent, perhaps humorous, like perhaps the Cartier-Bresson photo of the man jumping the puddle. Has candid become a word like "glamorous" which has a particular, and often somewhat downmarket, connotation in photography ?
I wonder if there is a distinction between
candid
and
predatory
photography
@ Stolzy ~ not just male photographers it cuts across both genders
@ riprap (nick) fit for purpose? ~ easy, if you have the capacity for empathy
I have an interest in travel photography and for me, street photography is so much part of capturing a 'sense of place'. Obviously, there have to be limits and clearly that centres around respect and propriety. I've just got back from Ghana, where I was working at a hospital (not a 'jolly', I had 5AM starts!). I've already posted a couple of photographs on here about which I've thought very hard - I like to think that they are respectful and appropriate but in the current UK culture shots around a school would be unacceptable. There is always cultural variation and over the years I've learned that you just go along with the local rules, abroad or at home - there isn't any choice. One thing I did see in Ghana early in the morning, driving in to the hospital was many children washing - naked - in the street. I decided this wasn't appropriate to photograph for all sorts of reasons although doing so would have captured aspects of the local culture, no doubt.
With regard to John's shots, I can see both points of view, although for me there are much better images in his series than shot No. 1.
Just out of interest, who thinks this photograph (which most people will know well) should be banned? After all, it includes a naked young girl who can hardly have given consent. On the other hand, it's a shot (with all its technical imperfections) that shook the world and was a Pulitzer prize winner.
Quote: Just out of interest, who thinks this photograph (which most people will know well) should be banned?
Two points, fisrtly, even though I strongly dislike John's picture, I'm not suggesting it should be banned.
secondly I think the intention behind the image is relevant. If it is merely prurient, without any artistic merit or public interest content then I think it deserves censure.
Quote: stick with the plot
No, this issue is exactly as I describe. The point I am making is that what we deem acceptable (or predatory, voyeuristic or any number of things) is something that is dependent both on culture and opinion, not any absolute or measurable values. I'm sure you don't have to use too much brain power to think of places where photos such as John's might get you into real trouble and others where it would just be considered a bit of a amusement.
I'm sorry if my views are straying too far away from what you consider the thrust of this debate, Diana - I'll try to ensure that in the future everything I write will be submitted for your prior approval.
The photo tells a story rip, if the photo was photoshopped in any way the moment would be gone, it tells of the tragedy of the situation in which these people found themselves in, the horrors of warfare. i don't usually approve of nudity involving kids but in this situation i think it is valid.
Terry.
Add a Comment
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
Login or Join Now
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Related Content
Join Our Free Newsletter
Awards
Current Competitions
foliopic 'Movement' Competition
1st May 2012 - 31st May 2012
This month's competition theme is 'Movement' which can be interpreted in a number of ways. You could photograph an animal running, a person walking or a car speeding...Featured e2 Photo
Featured Directory Listing
May's Photo Month
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
Interact
Photography Gallery Photography Forums Recent Forum Activity Members' Meetings Members' BlogsSearch ePHOTOzine
Having trouble or would like to make a suggestion? Create a report
Calibrate your monitor so you can see 16 different shades.
ePHOTOzine © 2001 - 2012 Magezine Publishing | Contact Us | Site Map | Top