Well that's the thing, I wouldn't know what he was doing, hence: speaking to him. Being protective of your children from potential paedophiles and strangers isn't being a busy body; it's being a good parent.
uk tourist arrested in portugal for suspected taking pictures of children
- Thread starter binaryknight
- Start date
Well that's the thing, I wouldn't know what he was doing, hence: speaking to him. Being protective of your children from potential paedophiles and strangers isn't being a busy body; it's being a good parent.
I would say its not the person with the DSLR and the tele lens, but the person walking around with a compact trying their person to look like they are not taking photos.
Associate
- Joined
- 27 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 206
I've just read this thread with real interest. Firstly, I don't have any children of my own, however I have worked with children and I have a lot of friends/family who have children.
I agree that children make fantastic subjects and I have taken pictures of my friends children. However, I would not do this without the parents consent and I would not take photographs of children I didn't know - because to be quite honest if I had children I wouldn't want people taking photographs of them if I didn't know who they were (male or female).
I think, as a parent, if you see someone taking a photograph of your child, you have every right to ask the photographer what they are doing - and as someone rightly said earlier, its not being a 'busy body', its being a good parent. I spend a lot of time with the children of family and friends and if I was out with them i'd have no hesitation in approaching someone if they were taking photos without consent. As someone said earlier, the risk is small but it is still a risk and when you are looking after children (whether they are your own or not) the phrase 'trust no-one' always applies.
I agree that children make fantastic subjects and I have taken pictures of my friends children. However, I would not do this without the parents consent and I would not take photographs of children I didn't know - because to be quite honest if I had children I wouldn't want people taking photographs of them if I didn't know who they were (male or female).
I think, as a parent, if you see someone taking a photograph of your child, you have every right to ask the photographer what they are doing - and as someone rightly said earlier, its not being a 'busy body', its being a good parent. I spend a lot of time with the children of family and friends and if I was out with them i'd have no hesitation in approaching someone if they were taking photos without consent. As someone said earlier, the risk is small but it is still a risk and when you are looking after children (whether they are your own or not) the phrase 'trust no-one' always applies.
I understand what you mean, but someone with a compact would have to be pretty close, as most compacts go up to about 10x max optical zoom. They'd also have to be still to get a decent photo.
So you've got someone close to you, standing still, taking photos of your children.
On the other hand, someone with, for example, a 40D and a 100-300mm zoom lens is gunna be able to be at a distance. Sure, they'll also have to be still, but you might not even see them with that kinda focal length on the camera. And to see it pointing directly at your children would set alarm bells ringing, no doubt about that. It's highly unlikely your first thought would be "Oh, I hope that guy up there amongst the tree's is getting some nice photos of my children playing
", simply not gunna happen.
Associate
The risk of something bad happening is greater with males than it is with females. Sad, but unfortunately true.
You can dress it up as being discriminatory, but the fact remains that the risk is greater (albeit still extremely small). We males just have to be respectful of this fact and do what we can to mitigate any concerns - e.g. by obtaining consent to photograph one's children.
I hope these posts don't come across as inflammatory, as this is not the intention. I just think that the parents view should be accurately presented to help those who don't have children to understand
That's an interesting point of view.
Most people/parents are surprised to learn that the biggest risk to their children from an abuse point of view is not strangers, or male's with cameras for that matter, but rather their own families...
I'm afraid it IS hysteria, and stories like this just help build the perception that everybody with a camera is out to 'get your child'.
If you think about it, although it's natural to ask why somebody would be taking pictures of your child, even in a public space, what harm is coming of it? Are people worried that they are being subject to some kind of hostile reconnaisance?
Some of my colleagues are involved in a very specialist area of child protection (and it takes a toll on them too...), and the sad fact is that the kind of images that we would all be sickened by are in the vast majority of cases taken by the family and/or friends of the child, and who have trusted access to them... If you think about it, that's about the only way that such images could be taken.
I'd be interested to see what they charge this guy with, if in fact they do.
Man of Honour
Absolutely, it is paranoia of the highest order, kids are as safe if not safer now than they were 30 years ago yet parents are too taken in by tabloid hysteria and similar garbage to let their kids play outside on their own. This same 'logic' extends to photos unfortunately, it is sad and it is illogical based on the facts...
Reminds me of an incident at Heathrow. We were waiting for international students to arrive all day. As we were walking past a shop, I noticed a middle aged man taking pictures of a couple of small children in the shop (a good 15-20ft) outside. What made me a little worried was the fact he was knelt behind a trolley, it 'appeared' he was concealing himself. I politely told a nearby policeman; he went and talked to the man for a few minutes (who went into the shop after). The policeman came back and told me the man was their father (two kids were with in the shop with the mother but not directly next to each other). Cue the red face but the policeman thanked me, lol.
Man of Honour
Yes, lets ban photography because some people are uncomfortable with it.
Associate
It seems that most people here believe that parents accuse anyone taking photos of their kids of being a paedophile - where has this come from? Has that ever happened to anyone here?
Parents may wish to be cautious. This is their right, their decision. Does that mean that they believe all photographers are paedophiles? Erm.... no! That's a rather absurd view in my opinion!
Parents may even get a bit defensive of someone taking photos of their kids - but this still doesn't mean they think that person is a paedo. It just shows they are uncomfortable with the circumstances.
I could ramble on about risk management and all sorts here to help explain my views, but I think discussion such details won't help. I'm not about to bang my head against a brick wall trying to present different views to those who are not willing to consider them.
So I will just say this: please consider a parents view before photographing children, and remember that the majority of parents would be pleased to allow you to photograph their children so long as you conduct yourself in a proper manner.
Parents may wish to be cautious. This is their right, their decision. Does that mean that they believe all photographers are paedophiles? Erm.... no! That's a rather absurd view in my opinion!
Parents may even get a bit defensive of someone taking photos of their kids - but this still doesn't mean they think that person is a paedo. It just shows they are uncomfortable with the circumstances.I could ramble on about risk management and all sorts here to help explain my views, but I think discussion such details won't help. I'm not about to bang my head against a brick wall trying to present different views to those who are not willing to consider them.
So I will just say this: please consider a parents view before photographing children, and remember that the majority of parents would be pleased to allow you to photograph their children so long as you conduct yourself in a proper manner.
I understand what you mean, but someone with a compact would have to be pretty close, as most compacts go up to about 10x max optical zoom. They'd also have to be still to get a decent photo.
So you've got someone close to you, standing still, taking photos of your children.
On the other hand, someone with, for example, a 40D and a 100-300mm zoom lens is gunna be able to be at a distance. Sure, they'll also have to be still, but you might not even see them with that kinda focal length on the camera. And to see it pointing directly at your children would set alarm bells ringing, no doubt about that. It's highly unlikely your first thought would be "Oh, I hope that guy up there amongst the tree's is getting some nice photos of my children playing
so a compact with x10 cant be an equivilant of a 300mm?
because they are in public, if you want privacy go home and close all the curtains
Ok....to clear things first, I have no children.
It seems to me there are a few photographers on here who think it is their right to photgraph other peoples children because they are in a public place. I feel to photograph children without permission is just wrong.
If you feel the parents would be happy for you to take pictures then why wouldnt you ask them in the first place? Why secretly take pictures?
It seems to me there are a few photographers on here who think it is their right to photgraph other peoples children because they are in a public place. I feel to photograph children without permission is just wrong.
If you feel the parents would be happy for you to take pictures then why wouldnt you ask them in the first place? Why secretly take pictures?
Associate
I think you have to look into the circumstances of how something like this could happen. As a photographer it is often best practice and also polite to ask permission of a parent or person before taking images of a 'personal' nature.
I do not however, believe taking a photograph should be treated as a criminal offence without any additional evidence to support an arrest.
I do not however, believe taking a photograph should be treated as a criminal offence without any additional evidence to support an arrest.
candid photography is often the best kind, due to it capturing natural behavior, which you cannot do if you ask for permission first.
thats what the LAW says is okay..
Man of Honour
Actually I don't photograph people much at all, I don't enjoy it really, rather wildlife or landscapes any day.
I just hate the stupid irrational paranoia that people have about it, kids are fantastic subjects in terms of expression and emotion if you do enjoy photographing people. The only reason people are reticent about allowing it is the fear of harm coming to their kids, the facts say that's based on nothing at all, it's a complete fallacy.
Sure, it's the parents right to decide, but they're seemingly deciding based on irrational and groundless prejudices, if they want to fine, but they're being dumb.
I would ask the parent not the child. The child would not know.
I belive the guy was arrested for taking pictures of children on the beach.
Like that would work, as if the child will be oblivious to the guy talking to their parents for a bit
Yeah your correct, the child would definately come to the conclusion that the guy talking to their parent was asking permission to take pictures.
As a photographer myself, if I seen a guy secretly taking pictures of children on a beach I would have to say something. I am sorry if people disagree but in this day and age children come first.