Dria Loc: Ohio

We had Halloween here Thursday evening-- (weird- I know)
Hubby (was Woody)and I (Peep)were handing out the candy-- the parents were following their kids around taking pictures of them getting candy. Oh the fun!

I have taken pics of kids coming to the door to get candy BUT in our neighborhood we all know each other anyway and I e-mail the parents the photo files. Parents LOVE it-- they get their kids pics from a different perspective.

ole sarg Loc: south florida

If the children are in costume and not recognizable I would say no you are not in trouble. If their parents are with them I would inform the parent(s) that I took photos of their kids and would like to send them a print.

As a non-professional we have to be smart. I shot for the Miami Herald way back when and have been chased, had more than one camera destroyed, etc. People take their personal and their spouses' and children's privacy very seriously. Also, at political rallies be very careful because many there can be very emotional.

I would rather use great caution than be laying in a hospital bed and discussing suing someone who put a good whooping on me because I didn't ask for permission.

George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York

Krysten,
Without a doubt he should have asked, especially when children are involved. Too bad you did not approach him and ask why he was taking the photo.

Since this was a public place he has the right to shoot but he should not have made your son the primary subject of his photo.

George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York

Opal,
In a public place you can take photos, now if you make an individual the primary point in the photo, you need a release.

JKF159 Loc: Arkansas

I believe the law is clear. If you are in a public place then you can photograph anything that you want to. Model releases are needed depending on the use of the photo.

In the real world I think that it would be polite to ask permission first, depending on the situation. If you are the only ones there then ask. If the kids are riding a float in a parade then dont ask. If you are walking down the sidewalk and the kids are in their own yard then ask. If they are playing baseball at the city field then dont ask. As you can see, there are mitigating circumstances that each of you have not only witnessed but taken part in yourself.

It seems the question is not should you ask permission but when should you ask permission. It always seems that when a question of ethics or morality or politeness comes up the answer is always arbitrary, based on what the person giving the answer does him or herself. Sometimes the answers are just spur of the moment comments based on little forethought which is often the result of the question being asked in a leading way in the first place.

My personal opinion is if you have your kids out in public for everyone to view in person, I dont see the big deal if someone wants to photograph them. Now if the photographer in question is wearing a trenchcoat in July and is hiding in the bushes snapping photos then I would be worried... This is just my opinion.

George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York

Larry,
As a working pro I know you are correct, but I think he made her son the primary focus of the shot. No this is not a random photo so he would not be covered under the random individual in a public place ruling. Now if he sells this, he has to have the release or no photo editor worth his salt will publish it.

Cecil Loc: United Kingdom

Opal, I think you may be wrong, because in a 'PUBLIC PLACE' there is no restriction on people taking photographs. Having said that, I personally think one should get permission prior to photographing Children because of the prevalence of paedophiles. What a sad state of affairs we have come to!
Cecil

George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York

Larry,
I agree with most of what is said in the recommended reading. What it does not address is primary focus of photo and that is what is in question I think. Now as a working pro, I would have asked the mother to look at the shot and then ask her if I could publish it. She says yes, then the required model release is called for. I have thousands of pics where peoples faces are recognizable but they are not the primary focus, just part of the scene, that is what the posted piece alludes to.

George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York

Chuck,
They can be in a pic, you make them the primary focus of the photo and we have another issue. If you sell it, you need a model release, photo editors would require it.

JKF159 Loc: Arkansas

You can take any photo that you wish to take in a public place. It is the use of the photo that determines if a model release is needed.

If you are at the public park and there is a child there swinging on the swingset, you can photograph this child. You can then publish this photo in the local newspaper with a caption that reads "Beautiful day for swinging". This is legal. It is editorial use and does not require a model release. Happens every day.

You cannot take this very same photo and sell this photograph to an advertising company unless there is a model release signed by the childs parents. This would be commercial use.

The primary subject of a photo becomes an issue only if the photo is used for commercial purposes. If you are at the county fair and you photograph the merry go round and there is a child on each horse then the children might be considered incidental to the photo of the ride and model releases may not be needed. If you zoom in on one child to show the elation portrayed on his face, then that photo would probably be construed as a photo of that individual and a model release would be required. Either photo could be published in the newspaper without releases.

George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York

DJ,
If you sell the photos, you could be.

George H Loc: Brooklyn, New York

JFK,
More than likely in a newspaper it would be published as part of the story, then again I would try to get the release from the parent, I think the parent would realize why it was needed.

frank bruce Loc: Albuquerque,N.M

i think if it's in a public place u can shoot @ will and on private property it's against the law and therefore need to ask! frank bruce

EHPhoto

In th US, members of the public have virtually no privacy rights when they are in public places. Basically, anyone can be photographed without consent except when they have secluded themselves in places where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy such as dressing rooms, restrooms, medical facilities, or inside a private residence. This legal standard applies regardless of the age, sex, or other attributes of the individual. [If you believe Wikipedia, that is!]

saichiez Loc: Beautiful Central Oregon

I think if you recheck that information, you will find that the only time one needs a signed release is if the photo is intended for commercial use.

That does not alter the fact that I too would have been less offended if the person took pictures without asking first. However that is a courtesy and not a requirement. We are allowed to capture images of people in public places, as I understand the law, if we are not going to sell the images commercially for use in magazines and such.