It's really kind of sad. And also ironic, when you consider how cameras (phones) and video cameras are literally everywhere now. It is difficult to go anywhere without being captured on someone's security camera. Yet we can no longer capture each other living life in candid moments. The world is getting a little uglier somehow.

Right. I think we may be getting into the weeds a bit here. I will come an understanding with our client re: legal implications and proper usage prior to beginning the project work. My main purpose for tossing out the question here was to gather some potential knowledge from those here who had prior experience with projects shooting the public for public usage. I already have a reasonable idea of what is and is not usable. I guess I was just looking for confirmation and also whether there were any exceptions or loopholes for certain types of images and usages.

What a perfect world that would be. LOL!

Right. This is exactly my reason for concern. Better safe than sorry. I can tell you now, ain't nobody getting paid. If I can't get them to sign a release for free, we won't use it. But the truth is, I just don't have the time to go running after random citizens trying to talk them into signing something when they have better things to do than question my motives. It's not going to happen. So I'm probably looking at a lot of Photoshop work to alter and blur people out.

Possibly. It's worth looking into anyway. I think after I advise them of potential problems inherent with using photos of the public in this way they may kick it back to their legal department at which point, hopefully, I get a more definitive answer.

Well, this is where it gets a bit tricky. You see, this client is a government agency providing public services -- transit to be exact. Most, if not all of these images will be used in marketing campaigns that are aimed at public education. How to ride transit, New bus lanes, Changes in services, Project information for a public meeting, etc. I don't know if this qualifies as a commercial usage or not. I tend to err on the side of caution in such cases. Just not sure.

Thanks for the advice, unfortunately my company is not big enough to have a legal department. When it comes to questions of this nature, we need to do our own research. Lacking anyone here with some good advice, I am going to stick with my current plan: Only show faces in large groups if you can't get the model releases. Option B would be to just go ahead and provide the client with what they want and add the disclaimer on shots showing people in close up or prominent, "Not Model Released. Use at your own risk."

Thank you Earnest.

Thanks Bob.

So, I would like to tag onto this topic with a related issue/question: I am new to group and also kind of a newb to professional photography. In my job I am a graphic designer for a marketing agency. Some of my work requires me to do photography. I currently have an upcoming project working for a city agency in Baltimore that requires me to take quite a few street shots in and around downtown Baltimore. This is actually a repeat project. I did this for them once before in 2016 and they have decided to update their library with some new images. So out to the streets I go again.

My question involves rights of use. Last time I did this, I was aware of the need for model release forms when capturing people that may end up being used in advertising and other public forums. But that can be quite difficult when you are just walking around grabbing shots of random people. Previously, I erred on the side of caution and restricted most of my images to catching people from the rear. I avoided capturing faces. When a did get a face that featured prominently in one of my images, I would blur it in Photoshop. Now the client is telling me they want me to capture more people and see faces this time. I'm wondering if any of you know more about the rules for this sort of thing?

I've gotten some advice that says you can use a crowd shot that has many faces as long as you don't have one or more people featured prominently (as what you would call the subject of the image). If you want to feature faces prominently in an image, you need to get them to sign a model release form. Is this correct and/or what else should I know?

Hello all,
Thanks in advance for allowing a newb to join in. I am a graphic designer and creative director at a marketing company. I do some professional photography as a part of my work, but I would consider myself an amateur photographer in terms of skills and experience. My strengths lie more in the areas of illustration, design and software apps, like Photoshop. But I would like very much to improve my photography skills. I have much to learn, which is my primary reason for joining this group. Hoping to soak up lots of great tips and info from all of you. Please go easy on me until I learn the ropes. Thanks again and I look forward to seeing you all around the forum.