This hilarious thing happened on the plane the other day. I never seen a situation go so left so quickly.

This old dude who apparently was a professional photographer and was maybe 60 was snapping pics from his window seat throughout the flight. I was in the aisle.

In front of us was a mom maybe in her 30's and her daughter who was like 3. Cute kid.

So at the end of the flight he was like "your daughter is so cute"

And the mom was like "thanks so much" and was happy and all smiling.

Then he said "I have a granddaughter that age. Your daughter was so well behaved on the flight" and then he gave her his business card.

So she was like "What's this for?"

And he was like "Oh I took some pics of her when we were at the gate while we were all waiting to board and thought you might like them" and she FLIPPED out on him.

Guess she was angry he was taking pics of her kid without her consent.

What say y'all? Was she wrong to flip? Was he wrong to take the pics of a little girl without her mom's permission? Was his only mistake trying to give the pics to her?

Poll result (33 votes) Photographer (23 votes) Vote Mom (10 votes) Vote

***
I'm tryna be better off, not better than...

Both doing what they're supposed to.

Mom 'flipping out' might be too over the top, if I had to choose.

----------------------------------
I have a webcomic: www.watchthecomic.com

My webcomic has a page: www.facebook.com/watchyourheadcomic

people are fucking weird

and stupid

thats what photographers do for practice in public settings

the mom is a fucking dumbass

what the photographer did was a very common thing

She went off on a guy for taking photos of her kid without her consent.

Whether legal or not, the photographer is wrong.

it's a public place...

what's wrong about it...nobody has been able to articulate that with anything except emotion

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

it's not illegal

inconsiderate at the most...but that's part of being a photographer

and considered ethical to practice your craft on candid non-volunteers

wtf

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

just said in case she ever wants professional pics.... but mom was over reacting.

--
Sometimes you have to look reality in the face and say 'No!'
-Ben (Reaper)

If you need any help, don't. Hesitate to ask.

since kids cant speak for themselves he should have gotten the mother permission before taking pictures of her kid.

is he wrong in mentioning it? for me anyway...

as a parent, if a photographer were to approach me and over convo divulge he snapped a couple pics earlier, based on his demeanor and the photos taken I would base my reaction on that.

If he's just a kindly gentleman, maybe 8th much

but if he's being creepy and snapping pics of Lil Amy bent over just tying her shoe I'm calling him a child pornographer at least


"i wanna hug all u idiotic bastards & then set you all on fire" -Bin

www.twitter.com/bedstuybetty
http://bedstuybetty.tumblr.com/
DROkayplayer: Giving you good puff since May '05

who knows where these photos will end up.

IDGAF if everyone else does it. Don't do that shit.

I wouldn't have gone off on him, I'd have simply said you do not have my permission to use those photos ever, anywhere. As a parent you literally have no idea where those photos could end up. It doesn't even have to bee the creep pedophile angle. This is the age of the internet, and my kids will not have any photos of them out there without my permission until such a time when they can give permission for themselves.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

to use photos of the child where the photos were taken in a public setting.

he has First Amendment protection and the mom doesn't have a reasonable expectation of privacy in her child's image as captured in public.

the same analysis that applies to paparazzi pix of celebs or file footage of random ppl captured by news agencies or those taken to be compiled for stock photography images would apply here - no reasonable expectation of privacy in public settings. especially these days where there are security cameras all over the place capturing our images. it's life now.

note: i recently represented a guy who was accused of taking pix of school children as they walked on a public sidewalk. he was charged w/disorderly conduct. the case was dismissed after i'd filed a motion to dismiss. it didn't even get to a hearing - the state's attorney dismissed after reading my motion.

fuck you.

as a photographer you can go with legal, and you can go with just plain human decency.

incidentally would this law cover the perv snapping photos of women on the street?

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

if he's taking the pix for his personal collection. and if he's taking underskirt pix, of course.

but the perv could always claim he wasn't taking pix of the ppl but of the trees/bldgs/sun/birds/grass/et al and the ppl just happened to be in the pix. kinda like how any of us who have visited popular attractions or attended public events are likely in other ppl's private photos. if we've been in Times Square we are undoubtedly in someone's pix. if we've been to a Beyonce concert we probably ended up in someone's pix and may even be in a YouTube video posted on the Internet.

note: i also represented a guy who took pix of random women at the supermarket where he worked. he was charged w/disorderly conduct - his case was dismissed.

fuck you.

hated it. never felt so used in my life. and it reinforced a lot of what i already knew about cism.

a huge takeaway was that as a model you had no say in shit. which is ultimately the issue with professional photographers taking photos with kids. parents have no say in shit.

Not a child but reminded of this - http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/25/nyregion/in-health-dept-ad-photoshop-not-diabetes-took-leg.html?_r=0

Though I remember another ad with similar circumstances, in which the model was actually irked as fuck but had no legal grounds because they gave up their rights before the first flash.

Once that photog has that image, they can sell it to anyone who can dow whatever the fuck they want with it. And an ad may not be the worst thing, considering the mean shit going on with photo memes these days. Kids don't deserve that.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

i mean if their parents want to avoid the kids' picture being taken w/o their consent and then used for a First Amendment-protected purpose.

fuck you.

i get it. but again there's the law and just having some respect. there's no implication of privacy in a public space, but that doesn't mean people want to be publicized.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

fuck you.

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

they're Charlie.

fuck you.

---
but have you ever checked out my website? www.dtaylorimages.com

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

and freedom of expression trumps personal feelings about the expression.

fuck you.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

the photog's mistake was in telling the mom about the pix. he should've just kept that to himself. but i understand his impulse to share the info w/her - they'd established a relatively friendly connection. if he was going to reveal that he'd taken the pix he should've couched it w/in the context of the intended use. but generally i think he should've just kept that to himself.

fuck you.

but if i do... psh

mind you i've also walked up to the perv on the street using his camera phone to take candid shots of a womans cleavage. basically just whispered in his ear you should be a fucking shamed of yourself. no big scene. he stopped and said you right.

he was probably covered legally too. and all these motherfuckers that be posting shots of people picking they nose on the train or whatever. fuck them too.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

fuck you.

---
but have you ever checked out my website? www.dtaylorimages.com

Oh there's no immediate intents to use the shot. But let it come out good. Let a motherfucker get a book deal. And let the pub say that'd make a great cover photo.

You didn't ask me for shit, i didn't give you permission for shit. You gonna track me down to get a model release? You gonna tell the pub not to use that photo? You're happy just having took it right, no need to put it out there?

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

First and foremost let me be very clear.

I don't do this.

I don't take my camera wherever I go, I take my camera where I am hired to be.

I do, however, respect the right of photographers to capture natural life as it happens.

And when you (they) see an interesting moment, you capture it then and deal with the formalities after the fact.

If you make your presence known, you might as well not do it at all, because people get self-conscious or start posing.

It ain't about a book cover, it's about art.

Some of the greatest photos in our history were taken before permission was granted to do anything with them.

The respect of the art and profession of photography has diminished severely over the years due to accessibility and the internet.. So in the prime era of the old man in this story, someone would be more likely to be happy that a professional would want to capture them.

Unfortunately it ain't like that no more.

So I stick to the candids that I'm paid to take.

---
but have you ever checked out my website? www.dtaylorimages.com

>Oh there's no immediate intents to use the shot. But let it
>come out good. Let a motherfucker get a book deal. And let
>the pub say that'd make a great cover photo.
>
>You didn't ask me for shit, i didn't give you permission for
>shit. You gonna track me down to get a model release? You
>gonna tell the pub not to use that photo? You're happy just
>having took it right, no need to put it out there?


the publisher for the most part would not use a not model released photo

i think you are correct to be a bit more concerned regarding editorial use
but the ethics of that is pretty much not to offend
you are being a bit over blown about it

~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

he would need a model release
even if it was taken in a public space

"i fear no fate" e.e. cummings
"No girl. No fried chicken. I'm going back to get some sleep." - Haruki Murakami

to show celebs kids or is that not commercial use?

But they may be considered news photos and not commercial. Maybe that's how paparazzi can sell them without consent of the subjects. But I dunno.

fuck you.

i don't know how that doesn't get challenged more often but hey

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

even when that impulse has them behave rudely or unnecessarily.

i see it in lots of actions and stances parents take. it's cute.

fuck you.

my kids cute as fuck. lots of photogs actually ask me, and i'll tell em, thank but no thanks. that cat i see who's supposed to be focused on the concert i'm at but keeps sneaking shots of my kid. i'll walk up to him nicely and ask for his card. then tell him please don't publicize those pictures of my kids and walk away. thankfully that works. if it didn't well then i might get unnecessary.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

fuck you.

lemme leave this post

this subject is way more emotional for some apparently

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

my stance is clear. you think i'mma just be like yeah you right. FOH!

#parentlife

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

aint nobody asking anyone to agree...

just not to get your panties in a bunch about largely irrelevant BS to the point where i don't even know what the fuck youre talking about

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

while making the pap out to be beneath you?

FOH!!

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

and why dont u instead of me trying to guess what u are implying say it straight out?

i'm not a journalist nor a photographer...just a reasonable human being who think public spaces shouldn't be treated the same as private ones

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

it's a bit hypocritical to challenge the journalistic rights of pap to take photos of celebs in public spaces but think it's reasonable for non pap to take shots of general pub without permission because they are in public places.

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

>it's a bit hypocritical to challenge the journalistic rights
>of pap to take photos of celebs in public spaces but think
>it's reasonable for non pap to take shots of general pub
>without permission because they are in public places.
>

i'm not challenging whether or not they have the right...

i think they have the right in public places to do so...

I'm questioning whether or not the fact that celeb A took a shit today is in fact news...I also think that the means in which they use to get these shots should be questioned. For instance photographing a moving vehicle is dangerous (just ask Lady Di)

i think the journalistic right is valid but that what constitutes journalism could be up for grabs...

pap is also pretty well known for bending the rules and using private photos as well

these are the things i question about journalistic rights and the large umbrella of what constitutes journalism


>█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
>Big PEMFin H & z's
>"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1
>thing, a musician." � Miles
>
>"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

just because it's shitty tabloid journalism doesn't mean it isn't still journalism.

they took a picture and sold it to the enquirer, and the enquirer wrote an article about it and put it into a newspaper that gets printed, distributed, and sold.

How is that not journalism? It's not like they're taking a picture of Brad Pitt eating Oreos and then using that photo in a nationwide Oreo campaign. THAT would require consent, because it's a purely commercial purpose.

*Jews you*

"this is okp tho, reading is completely optional" (c) desus

Proceed with caution. I am overtly racist.

<-- In Pigpen we trust

to question what comprises news isn't something I just made up

not just what is news but also the means the info/data are obtained

Let me sport my Air Hyperbole 2010s in peace. (c) ansomble

Building repetoires (c) spm since 1983

>to question what comprises news isn't something I just made
>up
>
>not just what is news but also the means the info/data are
>obtained



letter of the law?
no facts is facts

~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.