Ashamed to be photographed?

[Andy K]

some of which, I have to say, I find shocking and depressing, but hey, that's the internet.

No, that's you.

[MikeSeb]

If you're in public, you're fair game to be photographed. This should not give the photographer a license to harrass anyone, and like someone else mentioned, if a subject objects strenuously, I usually honor their refusal (I'm a hobbyist, not a PJ).

Keep on using those $1.00 (1.80 pound-sterling) words, Roger. Someone's got to look after the Queen's language.

Your point about the present becoming the past is especially well taken in this context.

[Andy K]

Keep on using those $1.00 (1.80 pound-sterling) words,

Actually $1.00 US = £0.55 GBP (approx) at current rates.

[MikeSeb]

First off, one or two people isn't everyone. Secondly, my face and body is mine to do with as I please and it doesn't please me to have strangers having photos of me, especially when I don't know in what way it's being used. People's likenesses are often used to represent something negative. If you want to hold someone up as an example of something negative go find yourself another victim. I have a right not to be your joke, your negative example.

Your assumption of me being ashamed is wrong. Perhaps you shouldn't make such assumptions when you really have nothing to base it on but a desire to make an argument.

Your face and body are indeed yours to do with as you please, but you have no legal expectation of privacy when you leave private spaces and venture out into public. The same legal system that allows others to photograph you in public also prevents them from publishing your image without consent for commercial use, and from holding you up to scorn or ridicule. You have legal recourse if these things happen; and I can't imagine in this day and age any publisher actually doing these things without a model release.

In the meantime may I gently suggest you should lighten up, and realize that none of us is really as important or noteworthy as we'd like to think, in the scheme of things.

How can I gently suggest to you that

[Roger Hicks]

Do we all get a cut when you write your article based on our replies?

Let's see... 1400 views... 90+ replies... take out the VAT... add post and packing... Yeah, send me an envelope, two international reply coupons and one pound (or dollar or euro) and I'll send you a shilling, nickel or 5 centime piece (your choice).

Cheers,

Roger

[catem]

Or why not start a thread about naughty shocking depressing people who are so ashamed they don't use their real names when they get into discussions with you....

[Cooki]

I just don,t allow digital imagry of myself. :rolleyes:

[MikeSeb]

Actually $1.00 US = £0.55 GBP (approx) at current rates.

Yikes! No wonder the UK Chamber of Commerce keeps sending me those invitations to visit! ("Here comes that Yank who can't figure exchange rates!")

[anyte]

Your face and body are indeed yours to do with as you please, but you have no legal expectation of privacy when you leave private spaces and venture out into public. The same legal system that allows others to photograph you in public also prevents them from publishing your image without consent for commercial use, and from holding you up to scorn or ridicule. You have legal recourse if these things happen; and I can't imagine in this day and age any publisher actually doing these things without a model release.

In the meantime may I gently suggest you should lighten up, and realize that none of us is really as important or noteworthy as we'd like to think, in the scheme of things.

How can I gently suggest to you that

I'll learn to temper the manner in which I address people when they do likewise. I find it insulting that someone make the assumption that someone is ashamed of not wanting to be photographed.

And yes, I do have an expectation of privacy when out in public because I have no other alternative but to venture out. If I could stay home 100% of the then I would do so to ensure that not only people were not invading my privacy but also not putting my life at risk (which is another topic).

I would suggest that people not tell other people to lighten up, gently or otherwise, as it only serves to aggrevate matters. And people shouldn't make negative assumptions and generalizations about people. Instead of asking what people are ashamed of, it should have been asked, simply, why some photographers don't want to be photographed. Just because something seems hypocritical (and that's assuming the photographer doesn't ask for permission) doesn't mean someone has a right to negatively label them as being "ashamed" to have their photo taken. That's childish and one could say that perhaps that is the person that needs to lighten up.


I think it unwise for me to continue in this thread so if you wish to say something more to me please send me a PM.