Poll: Candid photography involving children

[Scuzi]

In the other thread the issue of legality and morality when taking candid pictures involving children keeps raising it's head.

What are your views on the subject? Would you be comfortable taking candid pictures which involved children in a public park for example? Is so why and if not, why not?

Are there any specific legal issues or grey areas which may affect photographers?

Discuss

 

[Munkeh]

I don't know of any legal issues regarding the subject but I personally wouldn't do it. Nor would I want someone else taking photos of my own children. I think that common sense needs to be used and in this day and age such actions can lead to consequences which far supass that of a simple "candid photo".

 

[SteveOBHave]

It's an interesting question and I think it is very much a sign of the times that it's something of a social no no to be seen to be taking photos of children. Personally I am of two minds. One being that for the sakes of the photography it's a shame that there is such a huge stigma attached but one the other side I think that if it makes parents feel that their children are at risk then the question has to be asked.

I think there is probably a right way and a wrong way to approach it, the right being ask first and then take the pictures. Present some credentials and offer some sort of collateral, i.e. first dibs on prints or something similar. The wrong way IMO is to just start snapping away like the pap. However I don't see a strong likelihood that parents would respond positively to having a stranger taking photos anyway.

I could be wrong but as far as English law goes this is what I have found:

 

[D.P.]

Personally, as it is not breaking the law, and is not morally wrong for me since I am not a paedo, then I will take photos of who I want when I want.

There are exceptions, such as purposely shooting children within a school without permission etc. The law is fairly clear on these things.


It is also highly impractical to ask everyone for permission first- imagine a busy beach scene that I'm photographing in wide-angle. There would be hundreds of people constantly changing. Even a single person/couple would cause problems since the resulting photograph will no longer be candid and ruin some of the sense of purpose of the picture if it is a staged portrait shot.


This rarely has anything to do with me since I don't like to photograph people anyway. I shoot landscape and nature

 

[Munkeh]

Personally, as it is not breaking the law, and is not morally wrong for me since I am not a paedo, then I will take photos of who I want when I want.

Just a hypothtical point here, and please don't take this badly. I am just playing Devil's Advocate... If you asked permission from someone and they said no would you still take photos regardless? If the answer is no then surely you are assuming that any person/couple etc who you take candid shots of, would if asked, give you their permission. Surely it is safer to believe that they wouldn't give you their permission if asked....

 

[robertgilbert86]

I guess it's what you do with the photos afterwards too, posting on the net is not as acceptable as just keeping them on your computer.

I've seen a few cases of photos people have taken of their own kids being used without consent on creepy websites. Now this is unavoidable, if the photo is on the net, anyone can grab a copy of it and use it as they please.

It's probably a bit silly for me to give the following opinion having not had kids yet, but;

I'd try to fight this movement of discouraging photography of children. Just accept there are sick people in this world and know that is an image of the child they're abusing.
I think if we continue this thing of not posting children photos we're letting 'them' win.

But I guess always asking permission and respecting that decision is the way forward for the time being.

 

[Helium_Junkie]

It isn't illegal, and censorship already goes too far. If the photographer is taking the photos for a perverted reason then thats one thing, but if the photographer is simply capturing a moment then there is no harm or foul - and the results can be a beautiful thing.

I refuse to let the fact that there are some questionable people out there cause me to become a hermit who fears everything "just in case".

 

[Rhys]

Im not sure of the legal stand point on it but surely common sense and courtesy should lead you to ask permission before taking any photgraphy of anyone else.

If anyone feels it is harmless then please go to your local swimming baths and start taking pictures. Then report back with your experience...

edit - Helium_junkie - how old are you? you seem totally oblivious to the real world. (EDIT - just saw you are 24 and from your profile your social skills seem questionable). How are people to know your not a pervert taking pictures of their kids? Do you have a special badge saying "im not a pervert"?

 

[Munkeh]

I am of the opinion that any subject (read person I don't mean ducks etc) has as much right to not have their picture taken as I have to take the picture in the first place. This is the reason I would ask permission forst before taking a photo.

I personally would not want someone taking photos of me and the missus while walking in the park without my consent for example...

 

[PsiFox]

Not withstanding the any of the above you may take a photograph of people and publish it provided it is for editorial use only. If it is taken for commercial purposes then a release form should be signed

 

[Helium_Junkie]

"If anyone feels it is harmless then please go to your local swimming baths and start taking pictures. Then report back with your experience..."

A swimming pool would be a private place and therefore you would not be allowed, so that's not really an issue. Perhaps a similar setting would be a beach, you'd get kids in bathing costumes there and personally I wouldn't take any candids in that situation, or of any child in any state of undress. I don't feel that a fully clothed child represents a "dodgy" image though.

edit - Helium_junkie - how old are you? you seem totally oblivious to the real world. (EDIT - just saw you are 24 and from your profile your social skills seem questionable).

What the hell... how is that called for here? My "social skills seem questionable"!?
This is a debate, not a personal attack forum, how incredibly rude and unnecessary.
Can you try to make your point without that please?

 

[Rhys]

What the hell... how is that called for here?

I was trying to make the point that you seem to think just because you feel that you are not a pervert that everyone should also understand that when you take pictures of their children and you find it offensive that anyone should have an objection to it. You have never asked permission to take photos of children and I feel that it is a naive belief that people would not mind. Also you seem to be unable to grasp that I was trying to give my views as a father to you to help you avoid problems in the future.

 

[Helium_Junkie]

That's not even close to the point you were trying to make, why could you not have said that instead of questioning my age, morality and social skills?

This is a well made point:
"you seem to think just because you feel that you are not a pervert that everyone should also understand that when you take pictures of their children "

This is a personal, rude, and thoroughly unnecessary hurtful comment:
"Helium_junkie - how old are you? you seem totally oblivious to the real world. (EDIT - just saw you are 24 and from your profile your social skills seem questionable)." (what does that even mean?)

More of the former please, I'd rather discuss this like adults, and won't be drawn into a slagging match with you.

So regarding:
"you seem to think just because you feel that you are not a pervert that everyone should also understand that when you take pictures of their children "

No, you misunderstand - I feel that people should not assume that everyone else IS a pervert, this is optimism and hope that our country isnt as decrepid and disgusting as other pessimistic people like to think. I'd willingly place a wager that in that park on that day, there was not a single paedophile, rapist or murderer. From you're opinions I wonder if you would bet against me?

 

[Rhys]

That's not even close to the point you were trying to make, why could you not have said that instead of questioning my age, morality and social skills?

this response to my comment

 

[Helium_Junkie]

You entered that thread and utterly derailed it with no provocation, and I asked you to leave. I may have been rude about it but not once did I make an insulting comment about how old you aren't, how you are oblivious to the real world and lack social skills... and I certainly didn't bring anything personal into this thread. I've rationally debated your points, but I won't debate myself with you - that's not relevant in the slightest and is none of your business.

 

[Snakedoctor]

I don't really understand why anyone would want a picture of someone else's brat. Kids are annoying enough, best to send them all off to boarding school till they are 25

 

[Tripnologist]

Personally, I would never consider taking photos of children unless they were my own, playing with my own or if they were children of people I knew.

If I had children and I caught someone taking photos of them, I would ask them to stop and delete the pictures. In my mind, any photographer not doing it for dodgy reasons should have no problem with deleting the pictures if requested by the parent.
If they refused, I would remove the camera from their person and delete the pictures myself... regardless of the legal consequences.

I should clarify that the above would only apply if a person was taking direct photographs of my children. If the person was taking pictures of his own children and mine just happened to be in the shot, that would be completely different.

 

[syke]

Id take pictures of children, yes. Not on their own though, if they are with older people there, similar to Helium Junkies' pictures, yes i would.

And Rhys, we all know you dont agree with it, this isnt a chance for you to have a personal attack on HJ. You've said what you wanted, now leave it.

I think as long as they arent used for material that is sold etc, but just as a candid, that it is fine.

Although, if i was aiming for all candids, of children, adults etc, i would most likely ask permission.

 

[Helium_Junkie]

If I had children and I caught someone taking photos of them, I would ask them to stop and delete the pictures. In my mind, any photographer not doing it for dodgy reasons should have no problem with deleting the pictures if requested by the parent.
If they refused, I would remove the camera from their person and delete the pictures myself... regardless of the legal consequences.

I honestly think thats completely fair.
But what about if you didnt see them do it, if you never even knew that anyone had taken a picture - obviously as you dont know you wouldnt care, but ignore that minor fact, and tell me if you think that it would be a problem for you?
And knowing that people can, and do take pics of others in public places like that, would you refrain from going to the park again to safeguard yourself from it?

 

[robmiller]

There are no legal grey areas. I don't think I'd ever do it, though, just because of the inevitable hassle. Normatively, I don't think there's anything wrong with it; practically, though, it's a whole different kettle of fish. The rational position is that it's fine, but people aren't rational—especially about their kids.