Trying to think of how to set up this story without ruining the punchline...
I was at the local Air Show, on Sunday, photographing with my handheld medium format. I took a picture of one of the Civil Air Patrol cadets, a girl of 15. A male cadet turned to her and said, "You have to be really careful about "old men" taking your picture, you don't know what they're going to use it for." The girl said, "Um, it's ok, that's my father."
Sad, true, and funny at the same time...
Given my daughter's sense of humor, I glad she didn't say, "That's alright, it probably won't come out, anyway."
The sound of children, laughing, playing is one of the most beautiful and joyful sounds in the world. To watch them at play is as wonderous as watching nature. But when you consider the amount of abductions, pedophiles, the dangers from predators, is it any wonder that parents are protective of their children? I do not blame them at all.
Their was a time when you could talk, joke with a child other then your own, but no more. You have to be very careful of how you interact with children. It is much more then sad, it's tragic. One of the simpilest pleasures in life has been taken away from us.
Time & tides wait for no one, especially photographers.
I don't know the laws on photographing children and anyone else in a public place. Is it actually illegal to take a picture that happen to have children in it? This is a UK question but it would be interesting to know the state of play in other countries.
In Denmark it is legal to take pictures in all public places including the people there. But asking for permission is considered to be polite. I do a lot of candid work in the streets, but I never use a photo that would embarrass the subject.
Originally Posted by sparx
Technically in the UK anyone in public is fair game for being photographed and it extends to taking pictures of people not in public physically but can be seen from a public place (hope that makes sense). The problems come when people / the Police start invoking things like the child protection act. A well intentioned law but not really understood by anyone it seems, so add a little dosh of paranioa and things start getting dirty.
Originally Posted by sparx
What I do find strange is that if I turn up at a story and say it's for the local paper parents are shoving their children into the picture I'm composing. Seems social record pictures are not acceptable in many places but children are fair game in a cause / politics.
If your in the UK I recommend membership of the Bureau of Freelance Photographers and you can join whatever status you have. Leagal advice is part of the membership as is 24 hour legal representation.
Last edited by TPPhotog; 09-28-2004 at 06:57 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Reason: bad gwammer
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
But thats exactly the kind of paranoia that we should try and stop. I totally understand parents being paranoid about their kids safety, but actually if you ACTUALLY DID consider the number of abductions, pedophiles, and particulary preditors around then you'd feel a whole lot safer.
Originally Posted by RAP
Kids are more likely to be struck by lightning than abducted. Yes it happens but it happens maybe once per year in the UK and is national news for the next month.
The preditory pedofile is a frighning image but it's not at all common, even taking into account how rare abuse is:
"Among rape victims less than 12 years of age, 90% of the children knew the offender, according to police-recorded incident data.
40% of the offenders who sexually assaulted children under age 6 were juveniles (under the age of 18)."
Other abuse stats:
"biological father: 19%;*
biological mother 14%;*
I pulled these off a couple of reputable internet sites. They don't prove anything of course. I totally get that statistics don't mean anything when it happens to someone you know.
If a child is abused it's probably by either a family member or slighty older child. Unfortunatly that's more difficult to deal with that - far easier to lynch photographers.
It's simply not reasonable to say that "the amount of abductions, pedophiles, the dangers from predators" justifies the way we're behaving.
I agree that we can only protect our children so far and I have a 14 year old who I'm constantly worrying about. But doesn't stop me letting him go out to play with his mates blah blah blah ..... My beards so grey with parenting I could be mistaken for a landscape photographer.
In Canada, photography in public areas is fair game. It is considered polite to ask first, but not manditory. If you take a pic, and the person says you can't take my photo, you can (legally) take no more of said person. They DO NOT have the legal right to demand your film, unless you persist on taking more.
Cell phones (with or without built in cameras) are being banned from many places. The first was co-ed gyms and public pools followed right behind.
I like the line "I'll gladly supply my rates", will have to get something printed up.
I don't normally photograph kids. Have been asked by a couple of friends and I found I prefered candid shots over having the parents directing the pose. I think the kids did too Pictures of kids can be challenging at times, parents (sorry, NON-photographic) parents seem to make thing worse and all you get are so-so pics of unhappy children.
Ian - sounds about right to me. In between my IT career(s) I had 4 years out in the Police and the following year working in social work. Nearly all abuse of children and also murders were committed by a family member or friends of the family. The very people that most people consider to be the ones they can trust.
Rogueish - yep I do shoot portraits when asked but my conditions are that they are candid and I won't shoot any posed ones. I usually get told that they are the best pictures they've ever had of their kids and that I've captured something of them. From my perspective they are just natural candids but the parents and children are happy which is what counts.
more a reaction than anything else, but for what it's worth, i've always felt photography was sort of creepy - particularly in a public space when the pictures are of people and things and events not related to the photographer. i mean i always wonder why a person needs a photograph of what they can already see and are enjoying in the present. but that's just me.
okay. back to the regularly scheduled programming.