Are There Any Ethics in Street Photography?

by Eric Kim on January 26, 2011

1x1.trans Are There Any Ethics in Street Photography?

Recently I made a post on my Facebook fan page, asking the community what they wanted me to write about. One of the topics at hand which was popular was the ethics of street photography. I intend this post to showcase some of my thoughts, and also open up for discussion to the rest of the street photography community.

“I have no ethics”

I’d love to start off this article with a quote from Bruce Gilden from this video in which he says, “I have no ethics.” If you see his in-your-face style of shooting in the streets, this quote may not come to any surprise to you. He is famous for getting extremely close to people and taking photos with his wide-angle lens and flash. If you look at his images, he takes an array of photos of people in society from Japanese Yakuza Gangsters to people in Haiti.

1x1.trans Are There Any Ethics in Street Photography?

JAPAN. Asakasa. 1998.

When people watch videos of Bruce Gilden’s in-your-face street photography, the majority of people feel offended. People think questions along the lines of, “What right does he have to get in people’s personal space and take unsolicited photos of them?”

However I see the issue much differently. Bruce Gilden is not a “creep” nor does he intend to. In this interview with American Suburb X, he says ” I love the people I photograph. I mean, they’re my friends. I’ve never met most of them or I don’t know them at all, yet through my images I live with them.” This shows that Gilden isn’t out on the streets with any ill-intent to “exploit” people in any way–rather to become closer to them (mentally and physically).

1x1.trans Are There Any Ethics in Street Photography?

Plain-du-Nord, Haiti. 1985.

When Gilden blatantly stated “I have no ethics”, I think he didn’t intend to tell the rest of us that he is a blatant asshole. Rather, he doesn’t let the sociological concept of “ethics” get in the way of him to capture the souls of the people around him. If you do a simple google search for “Bruce Gilden“, you can see none of his photos “exploit” his subjects. He doesn’t simply take photos of homeless people and frame it. Rather, he is sensitive about the context in which he captures his images. In a photo assignment in which he shot photos of downtrodden homes in Detroit titled: “Detroit: The Troubled City“, he took images of the local people in such a way to highlight the difficulties they were going through in a tasteful manner. Which gets to my next point…

Photos of homeless people isn’t art

1x1.trans Are There Any Ethics in Street Photography?

Kirsten Bole. A photo that looks a bit "snapshotty", but sends a strong message.

I see many aspiring street photographers on the web who merely take photos of homeless people down on their luck and label their images as “street photography.” I feel bad for these aspiring street photographers, as they simply use images of people who are experiencing poverty as a crutch for their own photographic shortcomings.

Don’t get me wrong– I do not believe that all photos of homeless people are distasteful. Sometimes it is necessary for there to be images of homeless people to raise awareness of some of the atrocious conditions that people live in. Therefore what I am stating is that if you have good intentions about helping take photos of the homeless, that is okay by my standards. However if you are shooting homeless people to simply be “artsy,” shame on you.

If you decide to take photos/portraits of homeless people, try to get to know them as human beings. Don’t look at them as “different” or strange, but someone equal to you. Have a conversation with them and lend an ear to them. I have had many conversations with homeless people on the 3rd Street Promenade in Santa Monica, and many homeless people just have made some poor life choices or lost their lives due to health problems, family issues, or even mental problems.

Taking photos of children doesn’t make you a pedophile

1x1.trans Are There Any Ethics in Street Photography?

Eric Kim. I shot this from the hip with my 24mm while in Venice.

Nowadays in America with all of the scandals within the church, within the classrooms, and in public– the public is hyper-paranoid about the threat of pedophilia. If you are a male street photographer, you might have hesitated to take photos of children in the street–worried that by-standers might call you a creep, pedophile, or even call the police on you. Trust me, this is not a crazy concern. Recently I heard in the news a story of a father who was taking photos of his kids at the park who was reported to the police of being a suspected pedophile.

I personally love taking street photos of children. They have a pure soul and are seemingly oblivious to the camera. In-fact, Robert Doisneau also loved shooting photos of children in the streets of Paris, having all sorts of fun (and trouble).

1x1.trans Are There Any Ethics in Street Photography?

Robert Doisneau. Shooting a photo like this can now get you jailed.

However how can you deal with the issue of being suspected as a pedophile when shooting in the streets?

  1. Ask. If you want to play it safe, you can always ask the parents for their permission and explain that you are a photographer (even offer to email them the photo).
  2. Don’t dress like a creep in public and shoot with a telephoto lens. If you are wearing dark clothing, have a scruffy beard, and a 70-200 lens, don’t expect if people think you are a pedophile.
  3. Act calm. Shooting street photography is 80% mental. Have the mindset that you are shooting to capture the pure emotions of children, rather than trying to be a creep. This will have a dramatic effect on your posture, pace of walking, as well as your other body motions. You will be surprised how less threatened people will be around you when you do this.

Only you can define “ethics”

1x1.trans Are There Any Ethics in Street Photography?

Matt Stuart. Do you think this is an "ethical" shot? It's your opinion.

For everybody “ethics” means something else. If you ask an lawyer what “ethics” means, he or she would probably bust out a legal book and give you a very lengthy and official answer. However ask it to the average person, and they would give you an answer which co-incited with their personal upbringing/culture/heritage.

Ethics is in the eye of the beholder. If you take images which you feel are exploiting of other people, it is. This is because you are the final person in determining what is and what isn’t exploitative. Do you get up in peoples’ faces like Bruce Gilden and take photos of them when they don’t want you to but don’t think it is exploiting? If your intent is to showcase the people in your everyday life doing ordinary things, it isn’t exploitative.

So the next time you are shooting on the streets, think deep and hard about your mission as a street photographer. Are you trying to exploit the people in the street, or capture the their beauty and soul? You always have the final say.

So do you think that there are any ethics in street photography? Leave a comment below and give us your 2 cents!

  • http://stevefoonphotography.blogspot.com SteveSFO

    Good piece Eric. One of my mentors shot for over 30 years with the San Francisco Chronicle. We had a conversation over this and what the paper did with the images shot. One rule of thumb that I got from the conversation is that as long as the image is to convey or move the story forward and is not intended to make an ordinary citizen become exploited, it was good to go. Of course they also had lawyers there to consult.

    I joined the National Press Photographers Association early on and one thing that they make clear is that members must adhere to a set of guidelines the organization has in place.

    There have been a couple of shots I posted of homeless people. I am very sensitive about it and make sure that I make certain that my subject isn’t being ridiculed or embarrassed. Rather, I want to make sure that whatever social commentary I attach to the photo, it is intended to move the story or have the reader/viewer sit back and think for a moment.

    Your tips about photographing children is spot on. Kids make wonderful subjects – the world is a wonder to them and their expressions are pure. But you’re right with your tips. As long as you shoot openly and your intentions are clear and honorable, I will shoot.

    From what I’ve seen and read about Bruce Gilden, it’s his style and frankly, I don’t have the amount of moxie that Bruce has.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Are There Any Ethics in Street Photography? — Eric Kim Street Photography -- Topsy.com

  • http://www.as-photography.co.uk/blog/?feed=rss2 Andy @ Wedding photography Buckinghamshire

    Great post. I myself do not have the nerve for street photography. I have always wanted to make a great street photographer but when i am out there the idea of getting up close and in the face of strangers is hard. Saying that, as a wedding photographer i am happy to shoot anyone at the event, to ask them to pose or to catch them off guard. As you said – Its all mental.

  • http://nansid.net/ Sonia Nansid

    I utterly agree with everything you say in this article, Eric. I’ve left some comments on your Facebook page regarding Bruce Gilden and I still can’t understand why people gets so angry and aggressive about his methods. As I said, after all he is taking pictures and not hurting anyone.
    Ive seen as well many blogs where the ONLY subject is human misery, physical and mental, and that really upsets me.
    But, as you say, only the photographer knows whats behind his images.
    It is very important too to separate legality from ethics. Here in Sweden it is legal to take and publish pictures of people as long as they are not disrespectful but my ethics have stop me from taking many shots. In the other hand I would easily consider breaking the law if my ethics tell me that this shot should be taken.
    Thanks again for the article.

    • Richard

      “not hurt anyone”? eh?
      I guess my old fashioned idea of hurt is different than yours.
      perhaps you did not notice the look of a fear in the eyes of some of his victims when the flash goes off.
      Is that funny to you?
      Would you like someone to do that to you?
      Some of these folks are elderly and this sort of action is unwarranted, but then
      again i have a sense of empathy unlike those that find Gildens images worth the cost.
      BUT his photos of Coney Island is another matter altogether as well as the Yakuza.
      Sometimes I think people admire him more for his cajones then the images he takes.
      except that lady that beat him with her pocketbook…I am SURE THAT image was worth
      the assault.
      IMHO

      • http://nansid.net/ Sonia Nansid

        I’ve seen kids being slapped in the face and kicked by their parents, men beating up their wives, people being pushed on the subway tracks, old ladies being dragged on the streets for meters when someone grabbed their purse on a mopped, tourists put on fire to have their things stolen, knife stabbings, people shooting heroin and smoking crack, bombs detonated a few meters away from me, young ones knocking around homeless people and many other things, in public places. And all this in a city in Europe, Barcelona. And most of the people witnessing that, often just look the other way, but of course, if someone takes pictures in a Bruce way, then yes, we break his camera and kick his butt.
        So yes, you can say that my idea of “hurting” is different that yours.

        • Richard

          Sonia,.
          The subject matter of THIS thread is ethics in the guise of Bruce not the world in general.
          I am sorry , truly, that you have had such traumatic life experiences and I hope, sincerely, that you have sought and received some
          counseling but please remember that we are NOT discussing bombings, stabbing et al…
          I can discuss THAT too if you like but certainly you would agree that THIS forum is not for that sort of discussion.
          And I NEVER EVER EVER said that ANYONE should use violence..I mentioned what was in the video..did you read what i wrote and see the video?
          Please let em know where i advocated violence…..????
          I understand you must feel that i attacked YOU,,,I gave a criticism of your POV, NOT YOU>>>
          Can you not argue on the merits of your POV without bringing in bombings, really?/bombings???
          My goodness, what an over reaction..
          This is one blog of millions, one comment of tens of millions, Why do you care what i say?
          Argue/discuss WHY you think his ethics are justified in your mind ..
          One can agree that some of his methods are intrusive yes?
          Is the end result worth the discomfiture that are plainly visible on the faces of his victims, I mean, subjects?
          Would you like someone to do that to grandma?
          YOUR grandma?
          for what end?
          By the way, I was a Peace Corps volunteer in Korea many years ago and have been fortunate that have never been the victim of a bombing. though i have seen a lot of nasty things in my life.
          I am thankful, very thankful, that you were not injured in that bombing…May God bless….

        • Dxc

          it’s still rude and hurtful and it reflects on the kind of person you are to do such a thing

        • Dxc

          if you can say that then stealing is not bad at all compared to murder

          they are all pretty shitty things. less-wrongness is NOT justifiable

    • Dxc

      because he’s a rude asshole

    • Mae Smith

      When people say “He’s not hurting anyone” that’s wrong. How would you know? I would be humiliated if someone took my picture and posted it somewhere. It doesn’t matter if it isn’t “embarrassing” it may embarrass that person…..or victim.

  • Pingback: Tweets that mention Are There Any Ethics in Street Photography? — Eric Kim Street Photography -- Topsy.com

  • Pingback: Ethics and Street Photography [Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law]

  • Richard

    I just think it’s important to be direct and honest with people about why you’re photographing them and what you’re doing. After all, you are taking some of their soul. ~Mary Ellen Mark

  • http://www.juwandickerson.com Juwan Dickerson

    I totally agree with you in this article. Bruce Gilden is one of my heroes because of his fearless and “gangsta” style though I won’t be adopting it. I feel as though I have too much ethics as I’m still trying to get over my street photography shyness when it comes to shooting people. I have taken pics of the homeless before but sparingly as I don’t want to be that kind of street photographer. But I agree that as photographers we have a responsibility to portray, not exploit.

    • Richard

      So, you admire his TECHNIQUE?
      How about the end result?
      Are there photographers that get the same or better results without his “gangsta” style?
      It seems to me that some of the folks here love his cajones but neglect to think about his victims.
      the test is simple..Would you like someone to do that to you???

      • Dxc

        yes! “would you like someone to do that to you”

  • http://www.fokkomuller.nl fomu

    Good article Eric. It makes me think about ethics.

    The last couple of months I have been in Paris a lot. There are a lot of homeless people there. I find it really shocking. Last Tuesday I took a picture of a homeless man who was warming himself at the Gare du Nord. Not to exploit him but I felt the necessity to show how he needed some warmth because it was cold on the street. On the other hand I also liked the photo very much. So that it a bit double perhaps.

    Thanks for your article.

    About taking photos of children on the street I try to avoid that. Last time we had a meeting with the Urban Photo Collective and I discussed this issue with a female member of the Collective. She understood my hesitating. She did not have any worries about taking pictures of children herself. I think for a woman that is more accepted. It is sad however because children are such wonderful subjects for street photography.

  • http://www.john-roy.com John O. Roy

    Thanks Eric. I am going to share this with my fan base an start taking a different approach when I am shooting.

  • Phil

    Why hasn’t anyone recognized yet that what’s “ethical” should be determined by who it’s being done to? History is full of people who thought what they were doing to others was “ethical”. Think Crusades, Holocaust, Racism, etc. If someone does not want you to take their picture, frighten or harass them, then doing so without their permission is UNETHICAL. IMO Bruce is totally selfish, and unethical. He is too lazy to bother with asking permission and simply forces himself on others. He gives photographers a bad name.

    • Richard

      amen

    • Dxc

      ikr i haaaaate bruce gilden so much

      he’s an asshole
      he shoots like an asshole
      end of story

      I HATE HIM

      • Paul

        I kind of agree. As I’ve just posted above somewhere, it’s amazing he hasn’t been arrested with assault or the someone hasn’t had a heart attack or an epelileptic fit from being flashed so close

  • http://www.85mm.ch Thomas Leuthard – 85mm

    You know my style of shooting people in the streets. For me everyone has to define for himself if it’s ethical or not to shoot or not to shoot a scene. Sometimes you have to shoot to document something. I think it’s also about how you make the photo. You can show a beggar in an ethical way. See this photo as an example:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/thomasleuthard/5205598827/in/set-72157625338728965/

    I often shoot people directly into their face from short distance. I don’t ask upfront as it would ruin the image, I don’t ask afterwards because then I would have to delete a good photo. It’s difficult. I think, I’m not ethical at all. I want a photo and I will take it, no matter what. Very seldom I get into troubles. But very often I get really interesting photos of strangers in the streets. It’s up to the individual photographer to decide…

    • http://nansid.net/ Sonia Nansid

      Ive just looked at your web and read your “Washing Instruction”. Excellent pictures and such an interesting manual to read. Superb.

    • Mae Smith

      Thomas, you’re right. You have no ethics. How can you possibly be in the moral right if you refuse to show that person the picture of them. Of course you don’t get Into troubles if you don’t show it to them. Neither to robbers who don’t get caught.

      • sevencardan

        Ah, but if a robber asked you to delete the picture you took of him/her comitting a crime, would you think it was rude not to oblige?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Paul-Donohoe/100000308877053 Paul Donohoe

      People who “shoot” people in their faces from short distances are guilty of assault. How anyone in could beleive that this is the way to get good photos is beyond me. Of course how short is short? I guess it depends but anything closer than a couple of metres is wrong. I don’t recall any images from say Bresson that are closer than that (there are a few but they are ones I think that he had already talked to the subject)

  • http://about.me/backlitpxl Gyula Rusinczky

    This article reminds me of a photo competition back in Dublin, Ireland what was organized by a local photo store a few years ago. Among the submitted photos there were so many shots of homeless people around the city centre. Actually, it was way too much..I had a “wanna win a photo contest, take a photo of a homeless” kinda feeling when I was browsing the winner images and saw people attempts to get the 1st prize.

  • http://bethapayne@aol.com Beth

    I worry about someone who says “I have no ethics” even if it is meant just to shock. I worry about someone who justifies the means by pointing to the amazing photos that came as a result. I worry about someone who focuses on “intent” rather than “impact.” Bill Coleman is well known for his remarkable photographs of a Amish community in Pennsylvania that happens to be where my ancestors come from. According to family members, members of the Amish community were very upset by his photographing – they believe photographs take their soul – and when he wouldn’t stop, they got a restraining order. Was he an ethical photographer because his photographs are so rare, excellent depictions of Amish life and his intent well meaning? If we don’t respect (or bother to even find out) the wishes of the people we photograph, what type of people are we?

  • http://www.foto-rhetoric.org/ Nacho

    Hi Folks, thanks for the comments. Eric, thanks for addressing the issue. I have a first part up, of what I hope is a bit longer post on my blog. Here’s that first part.

    It is worth noting that ethical and/or moral considerations do not come at the end of the process of photography or anything else. We don’t take pictures and then ask ourselves about the ethics of it all. In other words, ethics are not supplemental to the practice of photography, and ethical reflection on what, why, and how we do what we do (and to whom) would be best if it did not come at the end of an “assembly line process of photography.”

    Pointing the camera, selecting what we want to capture, how we go about it, whether we consult afterwards or not, already presumes ethical assumptions and choices. That applies to any photographic gear, from a large format camera to an iPhone. Those ethical assumptions and choices are the photographer’s to make, but they are ever-present. They are also, by the nature of the fact that we share this world with others, not only about what we want or deem fine for ourselves. So, it is not the case that we render ethical decisions after the fact or alone. We might justify those decisions and their grounding after the fact, but we render them (they find expression) in practice.

    A strongly developed sense of the project, what the photographer seeks to accomplish (of mission and vision), and of the ethical and moral considerations of photographic practice will make it easier to explain to others what we are doing, and might even sharpen our photographic imagination. Some street photographers might not go out with a plan for every (or any) shot, and perhaps the shots might not fit within a project anyway, but the better an explanation of the craft and art and the reasons why “one shoots what one shoots,” the easier it is to make an ethical case for one’s actions. Walking around the street pointing a camera at others is not necessarily understood by the general public as an artistic activity. Besides, the walking around shooting is not what makes it art.

    An aside here: Just because I might consider what I do art does not mean it makes what I do necessarily ethical, or excuses unethical behavior. Artistic endeavor might give us “poetic license” but with that comes… responsibility – which is yet another way of thinking about ethical choices.

    Getting in people’s faces might reveal one’s guts or gumption, especially when they would rather you did not, and might indeed get striking results, but that does not point to the best ethics. Besides, if all you do is catch the moment like that… where is the art?

    Thanks,

    N

  • http://www.foto-rhetoric.org/ Nacho

    I’d like to write a bit more about the ethics of taking shots of children, but it will have to wait! The semester’s in full swing and things are busy.

    But, as a parent and a photographer I will give much more latitude to the parent than to the photographer. In other words, my disposition is far stronger toward protecting the children than toward the photographer. That does not mean I react obnoxiously, but listen, do a quick search in those web sites that allow you to map out where folks with a history of sexual assault live in the neighborhood. Besides, children have less of a chance, power, and ability to express their lack of consent (and in fact, cannot give legal informed consent on their own) — and are more vulnerable. So, a greater responsibility lies with the photographer.

    Thanks,

    N

  • Pingback: Is This Photo Ethical? — Eric Kim Street Photography

  • Pingback: WordCast Conversations 23: Eric Kim Street Photography | | WordCast Conversations

  • writerman242

    everyone has an ethical stance of some kind. The real question is what are your ethics? or rather what are MINE Haha. I agree with Kim: to use vulnurable people to produce “art” is bad ethics and shameful. To take the same pictures with the intention of telling that person’s stgory, that’s good ethics. As Kim says, the key difference lies in the permission granted (or denied). Not suggesting we have to always ask permission. i don’t, but in the case of a homeless person and you are shooting them because they are “exotic” then what’s the harm in asking? The least y ou will do is give a probably lonely person a moment of dignityh in a shitty life. this is not to say that such pictures AREN’T or can’t be art, they may be, but it is intention that is key. My ethical stance is I guess rather Buddhistic in a way. Do No Harm. And always sgtrive to do good. If you follow these guides and continually ask yourself if you are abiding by them, then you can’t go wrong! I am proud tgo be among such people as I have read here.

  • Shel

    So Gilden says he loves the people he photographs, and this proves he has no ill intent.

    Uh huh.

    • Paul

      his way of showing “love” is very different than mine. Sometimes i watch videos of him and wonder why he hasn’t been arrested for assault or that someone hasn’t had a heart attack or an epileptic fit from being ‘flashed” so closely. His street work is NOT photography in my view it is hunting of the worst kind

  • Pingback: How Not to Do Street Photography: My Thoughts « Professional Photographer « Professional Photographer

  • lskalstad

    When I was homeless as a disabled veteran years ago I found myself on the front of a fella with a leica and a 135mm Sonnar, I played along with him helping him to be able to say that the shot was candid. I have always enjoyed photography starting at the age of eight in 1956. After the shot I looked up to ask him a question about his work but he elected to tuck his gear and scramble away like a spooked deer without uttering a word. I wish that more photographers would immerse themselves into social issues by spending time volunteering at a meal or shelter and really getting to know people as real human beings. That viewfinder has a bad habit of allowing us to be detached.

    • Paul

      right on brother!!! I think this suggestion is the best thing I’ve read on this thread. I’m taking it to heart and if you read my posts you will see I’m halfway there in terms of attitude anyway. And by the way, thanks for your service to us all (hope you don’t mind me saying)

  • http://www.frui.co.uk/courses/ Joanie

    A question – two photographs of, say, a homeless person, exactly the same photograph – but one taken in an exploitative manner, the other taken purely with artistic intention. An observer not knowing the background of either picture has to pronounce how ethical it is. How can s/he know this without the background story? Is the final product or the events that led up to it more significant here?

  • Pingback: What is Important in Street Photography: Style, Technique, Or Something Else? — Eric Kim Street Photography

  • Pingback: What’s Important in Street Photography: Style, Technique, Or Something Else? — Eric Kim Street Photography

  • Joe Philipson

    I get yelled at by parents, lots of times. In fact, I was yelled at by a parent the other day while working a story at a children’s museum. I took a photograph and had a dad on me in half a second, spitting, yelling, calling me a pedophile. He made a threat so I notified security and he was escorted from the property. I’m sorry, but if you are in the public, and do not have the expectation of privacy, then you have no right to get upset. It isn’t a license to be a dick, I still respect people if they say “please don’t take my picture.” But I will never apologize for taking a photograph, and I will never delete a picture.

    Taking pictures of homeless people is what freshman in photography school do. So unless you’re going to do what @Iskalstad suggested and maybe make a meaningful portrait with a story to go with it, that tells something about the individual your photographing then what value does your photo have? Great you made another photo of a homeless man. Who cares.

    Bruce Gilden, I don’t particularly care for his work, I think he makes people look ugly and casts his subjects in a bad light, but at least he admits that and I respect him for it. That doesn’t mean I’d like him to take my picture.

    People these days are too sensitive, and too hyper aware of photographers. It’s funny that everyone is up in arms about having their photograph taken and nobody cares that police departments are trying to get permission to fly drones over our houses so they can take infrared images and see what we’re up to.

    THAT’S THE KIND OF PHOTOGRAPHY WE SHOULD BE WORRIED ABOUT.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-drone-faa-20120430,0,1969574.story

    • Paul

      I have once been called a pedofile, and that was by some punk zipping by in his hotted up car, just stirring me. I have had parents ask me to send them the images and have even been thanked..several times..for photographing their children unasked..maybe I’ve just been lucky LOL

    • Mae Smith

      If someone wants you to delete the picture with them in it-delete it. Otherwise that is just plain and simple rude.

      • sevencardan

        Once you make an image it’s your intelectual property. To demand that someone destroys (or deletes) their property might also be considered rude.

  • Paul

    great article indeed. I think ethics as you say is an individual choice. One point I can make about this piece is when talking about Gilden. You are right: he is not a creep, he is I think a very decent and good person. However, when he gets a camera and a flash in his hands on the street, he becomes a different thing alltogether. That’s not my point though. You use the words “capture the souls”. This is where I have trouble. When I am in the street I try to “connect” with the people I photograph, whether they know I’m there or not. I just read of a photographer (I have to look up his name and I will post it here when I find him) who talks about SP as a spiritual expereince. It’s an activity in which you connect with other people and behave in a grateful and accepting manner. They are “offering” themselves to the photographer. Remember Eric one of your workshop people in Berlin said that in German you say “making” a photo not “taking” I liked that very much. There have to be rules in SP but they can only be rules the photographer sets him or herself. I rarely photograph homeless people, but I have done so. But only if it seems the right thing to do at the time and I do it in humility and love. But it’s not a habit. One extra thing I will say is this: If we behave with goodwill and love even, compassion too, then we shouldn’t have to explain our actions to others as in not having to defend ourselves if you know what I mean. I once was an invited admin for a group called “no rules street photography” on Flickr. One day I rejected an image that I thought shouted crude sexism bordering on porn. Blimey, what a fuss that caused, I left the group then but others defended the image. I had imposed MY ethical standard on that image, others had different ideas. Last thing: We must never use the concept of us all having a right to our own standards as an “excuse” to do what we like or to hurt people or to ride roughshod over others. Sorry to go on but it’s a subject close to my heard

  • http://twitter.com/filmdevelop BelieveInFilm

    I think 99.9% of it is exploitative and gross. I have thought about writing an article about why I hate street photography. Culturally, I just don’t understand any of it.

  • Pingback: Year one essay: Is photography ethical or unethical « trickoflightphotography

  • Pingback: Ethics of photography in development | seekingthequestion

  • Pingback: Ethics in Street Photography | x, y and z

Previous post:

Next post:

"Like" me on Facebook!