Davethehiker Loc: South West Pennsylvania

I was at church picnic this past Sunday. I had my camera and a couple good lenses. I used my 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 lens hand held, and got several candid shots of interesting looking people. At one point they asked the children to come up and join the minister in prayer. One angelic looking boy of about 12 years was participating in the service. I zoomed in tight with my 300mm lens and got a surprisingly good photo of him. I have no idea who this kid is or who his parents are.

A little voice in my head is warning me not to post this kids photo on the Internet because I could get in trouble. Is the voice correct?

I feel safe posting a photo of the minister and think it's an interesting picture. He one of several minister who did a bit of preaching this past Sunday. I don't know him and did not get his permission to post his photo. I'm not making any money on these photos.

If I'm breaking any laws, please let me know.

(Download)

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

I THINK you’re ok taking photos in public, but I’m not sure this qualifies as a public event. Perhaps the pastor could direct you to the child’s parents.

BudsOwl Loc: Upstate NY and New England

I never take or save pictures of kids without the parents permission and would not post them anywhere without WRITTEN permission from the parents to do so. As far as that minister goes I am not sure. My philosophy "better to be safe than sued."
Bud

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

Public event, you're LEGALLY okay. Private no. If it's part of your practice to take and publish photos of people, you are on much more solid ground. Still, in this hyper charged climate, someone might exercise their right to get all-offended. What is your intent?

Davethehiker Loc: South West Pennsylvania

Thank you for looking and responding. Three different Presbyterian churches got together and had a picnic and church service in a local public park.

I'm really not that interested in finding out who the kid or his parent's are. I'm just curious about the law.

jdedmonds

I think the line is drawn between taking the picture (O.K.) and posting it on the internet (not O>K>); If you take your children out in public, neither you nor the child has any expectation of privacy.
But you and the child probably do have an expectation that the child's image will not be made available to everyone. I'm a retired lawyer who practiced criminal defense law so nobody should take what I've said as a basis upon which to act. I'm relying on memory from a first year law school class in torts more than fifty years ago.

Davethehiker Loc: South West Pennsylvania

I can argue the the church has a sign up that says "everyone is welcome to attend." I think that makes it public. That minister looks like a man who can take care of himself. It is a hyper charged environment. One of the ministers had a particularly pretty wife and I was tempted to take her photo but was worried that someone might take offense. The church likes my photos and keeps asking me to take photos at various events, but I worry a bit about the legal ramifications.

ecobin Loc: Paoli, PA

Aside from any legal issue, it just isn't PC without permission (imho).

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

Rongnongno Loc: FL

There is nothing about being PC or anything like it.

Taking captures of kids because they are 'pretty'???

Sorry I do not and will never condone anything like that. It is wrong regardless of circumstances. Then post them in the internet? Wow!

Davethehiker Loc: South West Pennsylvania

I think I found a way that makes me feel safer about this.

I'm sending the following to the minister of the church where I have been requested to take photos:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Minister #####,

Some “Church ladies” have requested that I take photos at this week end’s 200th annaversery event. In this environment of hyper litigation I think there might be danger of being sued if a take a photo of someone who does not want to be photographed.

My understanding of the law is that if it’s a public forum I’m safe taking photos but if it’s not public it’s not clear what the law is. I think that I would be in a much safer legal position if I could produce an e-mail from YOU requesting that I take photos of the events at YOUR church events this week end. A word of mouth request request from a church lady would not provide me the same protection.

Please email me a written request to take photos at this weekend's events. I’m particularly worried about taking photos of children. I don’t want to chase every child's parent down to get them them to sign a waver.

Thank you,

Dave
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If for any reason the minister does not send me the letter I requested, I'll not take the photos.
If I do get the email I requested, I'll provide a thumb drive to the church with the images and let them do what ever they want to do with them.

Charles 46277 Loc: Fulton County, KY

Whether the use of a photograph is right or wrong will depend on the relevant issues. If you want the law (as you seem to do), the only authority to ask is a lawyer (not me), and even then you will possibly get different answers, with no guarantees. There are books on this. The law looks at the intentions of the photographer and the interests of the parties involved--and their rights--in deciding how to resolve conflicts. Certainly under freedom of the press, one can photograph anybody in public view whether they like it or not, and you do not have to work for a news agency to have rights such as freedom of the press. But of course any picture that may harm a child is not freedom of the press (it takes away the freedom or rights of another). A picture of a public crowd may not violate anybody's rights--but in some cases it could, if it singles them out and especially if it shows them doing something private such as cleaning their nose or picking their behind, or if it is used for profit without due compensation

If you want to know the right thing for etiquette, ask Miss Manners. If you want to know what the parents think is right, ask them. A church gathering, like a party at your home, is on private property, and the owners can say what goes on there, so long as it does no harm to others. If you give a party, you can say whether people take pictures there, or not, and churches can do that, too. If you are trusted, a church might well let you take pictures and give or sell copies to the members. Other uses are negotiable.

Haydon

I still would (out of courtesy) ask the guardian for permission prior. It's no different that saying please, thank you or excuse me. It's etiquette which seems to be a dying art and with everyone looking for an excuse to release pensive frustration in society. it's in your best interest. Besides having a photographer unnecessarily singled out that could be avoided, frowns upon the community in general.

Getting a lawyer involved creates a complicated situation that could have been handled with common sense (another dying attribute). Although a release form is in your best interest.

krl48 Loc: NY, PA now SC

Anyone attending an open event in a public park has no expectation of privacy. Legally, you are OK taking anyone's picture.


As far as what you do with the images, that rests with your personal sense of propriety. The only thing you can't do is to allow a third party to make commercial use of any of the images. For that, model releases would be required.

artBob Loc: Near Chicago

I have no idea who this girl is. She was at a public football game, and I loved the feeling she showed. I never plan on using it to sell pom-pons, nor raingear, nor anything else. I have shown it in exhibits. I am comfortable with all this, because I photograph for art, not PC, and the image is not harming anyone, but rather giving us a glimpse into ourselves, a role of Art.

(Download)