So...let's talk photo ethics for a second. Okay, time's up.
Yes, I do take photos of strangers such as the two dudes above. How brazen I am about it turns almost entirely on my intuition--my gut feelings--rather than how well the situation meets an established pre-articulated code of photo ethics. My intuitions may, in fact, unconsciously respond to an ethic, but I've never thought through what it might be, exactly. My former practice used to be to ask virtually anyone I took a picture of whether I had their permission to do so, and I also gave them permission to delete the photos if they didn't like them. Now I just shoot and click. I may ask someone permission, but that's because I want them to pose for me. And then I'll let them delete the photo if they don't like it.
What's interesting (to me) about this photo is that this photo ranks right near the top, if not at the top, of the discomfort I felt while taking it. I sensed a real sense of intimacy between these two young men. (Father and son? Brothers? Friends?) Best as I can tell, they weren't speaking but I sensed it was a moment designed to be private, alone, away from it all, and my lens was an intrusion, albeit one to which they were oblivious.
Put differently, insofar this photo captures a sense of intimacy, it's done its job.
So dudes, thanks for the photo. Hope you don't mind.
Posts
.jpg)
5 comments:
It helps that your camera doesn't give you away with an audible "click." Very stealthy.
What do you do if someone does tune in to the fact that you were taking their photo unannounced? Run?
Well, they were by loud rushing water. That's usually going to trump a click from many yards in the distance. But if someone notices, I either (a) continue and let them do sumpin bout out if they want to, or (b) whistle and look around innocently, hoping that the moment will go away. "Do do do. Nothing to see here."
I love this photo. It helps that you chose a song title that someone very close to me "gave" me the song... But the photo stands by itself without the title.
I will say though, just to comment further, that this is Exhibit A in what I have long suspected -- that these interesting photos you show us are really taken during your second job moonlighting as a P.I. I don't want to know what this man's family told you they suspected him of doing when they hired you; I only hope the boy wasn't hurt.
And I suspect this "ethics" ruse was really designed to get this free legal advice for yourself, so here you go: under federal law it is legal to "eavesdrop" without a warrant as long as one party to the conversation knows it's being recorded...
Okay, so that means I can preserve nine of my tapes; the other thirteen hundred and forty-one must be destroyed. Drat it all.
If one is going to have the audacity of doing stuff in public, then one runs the risk of being photographed.
I so declare it.
Post a Comment