sv3noKin51E

Jane, without debating Amendments, right or no right to privacy, after a lifetime of photographing for a living, I look at it from the prospective subject's point of view. These days no one thinks twice, they just act on an impulse no matter what the situation. Whether it's kids on the street or a media twit personality with a camera crew invading a greiving families space, too many people act like morons, sticking a phone or a camera into something; just because they can, or because 'everyone else does it.' You're right to ask this question even though it's been debated and thrashed about countless times.

As others posted, you want to chance the odds that someone won't shoot back (with a camera or a gun), and you absolutely can't live without that subject's mug hanging in your room, it's your moral choice to make, even though it may be rude and thoughtless. When we used to go out to shoot some street photography, no matter where we went, if people were in the shot we always asked first and/or obtained a release from the subject. There's nothing better than having good manners and being polite. When someone objected, we thanked them and then made our way to the next oportunity; there is always a better oportunity coming up somewhere.

I've gotten scads of good shots from a car, but not at a traffic light. A family of deer was grazing by the road so we pulled over and I got out to take some priceless shots last month, but then deer usually don't take offense or pull out a gun, while people really tend to get crazy these, regardless of how one thinks about their right to shoot anyne and anything in public. It's never the same thing, but in concerts, just as in public 'demonstrations' instead of watching or enjoying them, everyone just has to hold up cellphones.

It may be the thing for some people to do, and doutless there are more than enough people doing so, but whatever you decide to do, above all choose to be safe and try to picture yourself in the prospective subjects place; would you appreciate some stranger shoving a camera lens in your face and driving off, not knowing who the shooter was or what they were up to, and then they don't know where their photo is going to wind up; on facebook/online or merely on a wall? Surely the government has lost all common sense and it's way and yes, they surveil everyone 24/7; that doesn't make them right and doesn't make us any safer. Merry Christmas and happy shooting.

gator55

I've been a private investigator for 37 years and do it on a regular basis to defend bodily injury lawsuits. There is no problem doing it, just be discreet. I certainly do not ask permission. My quarry never knows that I am there and if they did I would not take the photo/video. It is perfectly legal. I enjoy it, it is akin to hunting for a living. I spend a good amount of time in the woods dressed in camo but do not trespass on private property.

Hint: Do not use a telephoto through the windshield. They are curved and the image will always be out of focus.

Jaackil Loc: Massachusetts

You obviously have a problem with comprehension. My first reply was to the Philidelphia Lawyer who wrongly stated that Private citizens do have a right to privacy in public. I actually never said anything about what people could or couldn’t say. What I did was comment on stupid comments. Big difference there Barney. Everyone is certainly entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Do you visit there often, or is you responses typed from that location. aka, the sewer

GeorgeH Loc: Jonesboro, GA

If you had followed this thread from its inception you would have noted that I posted early on a link to Bert Krages and his very handy precis of photographers' rights. Since you apparently missed that post here's the link: http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm I carry a copy in each camera bag, just in case.

I admit a certain horrified fascination with the Attic, aka the Sewer. It is sad how often topics introduced elsewhere somehow sink into The Sewer, usually but not always occasioned by personal abuse visited upon posters, often by a "cadre" of abusers. We all know who they are. One or two have been banned by admin but they return, their behavior unchanged.
Many topics ending up in The Sewer would be interesting if folks at least tried to be civil with each other, but that seems impossible for many.

unanchored Loc: san diego ca

sv3 .....thank you for the insight - well stated

have a great holiday season

( did not mean to set off a firestorm - just wanted a perspective or two which I got

jane

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

My responses to these posts up until your negative one has been my honest approach to the topic at hand. I had been a high school principal for years and yes I was very aware of students rights to privacy. Those rights extend to adults also.
Judges determine their cases based on "what a REASONABLE person would do". And according to them folks have a reasonable right of privacy, even in a public space.
If a person comes up to you in public and puts a camera in your face you have the right to turn them away and further you can request they not take your photo, and if they persist and take your image without your permission you have rights to recourse (if that person wants to go that route)
I have been very animate about this on this site, if you have read my posts, I am trying to educate folks that citizens have a REASONABLE expectation of privacy even in public, it's not me saying that, it's the judiciary saying that.
The law of the land is based on what a REASONABLE person would do. And a REASONABLE person does not go around in public sticking their camera in folks faces of private citizens and forcing to subject themselves to being photographed when they do not want their image taken.
PUBLIC officials and movie stars do not have that REASONABLE expectation of privacy.
Many on this site think they have the right to go out in public and take what ever images they want without considering others rights to privacy. This practice is not acceptable to the public.
I will maintain my stance and I will continue to correct others who post false hoods about this subject.
You original post was to my correcting yet another poster who does not consider other folks REASONABLE expectation of privacy.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Yes they just might start shooting.
But do as you please.
I have worked in some of the worst places in the USA including I re-did the burned out CVS in Baltimore that was burning prominently on national news.
There you could be dead in a second for doing as you propose. But again it is your life, I do not care a whit about your safety but of others reading this.

GeorgeH Loc: Jonesboro, GA

Please cite my negative post.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

You are right. It is also the moral thing to do.
I always ask if specifically photographing someone.
A city scene or public space with people is different as they are part of the scene and not specifically singled out. But there are many time there are interesting people and I ask and generally get a yes.

Brian45 Loc: Melbourne, Australia

...that was another thought from the OP.

Ron Krause

When I was a Real Estate Appraiser I had to take photos of peoples houses and there was a few people who didn't like there house being photographed so I had to be very careful as I wasn't in the best neighborhoods sometimes. As an appraiser it was all part of the job and legal but some of the people actually wanted for me to go up to there house and ask to do it.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Remember the line from Mrs. Doubtfire? "I think it was a drive-by fruiting."

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I've thought about that. If my camera has two SD cards, would the picture be deleted from both if the second one is a backup?

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

That was the OP.