Should we or shouldn't we

You are right ... this would not fit any better into the G+N forum.

I made the wrong suggestion ... according to my personal beliefs this is an image that I would rather not see on the forum. They may be old-fashioned, but the reason why I voiced them is that they also coincide with the forum policy (that I linked above).

Why do I not like this image? Because I don't like seeing attractive women or because I think my kids could be hurt by seeing it? Not necessarily, either. Compositon and lighting are good, too.

But I find this kind of photography an invasion of privacy that - rightfully so, IMO - the subject would most likely resent. You could say that everyone who goes to the beach can see it, but this is not the same thing as posting it to the internet.

From what I have read on the forum, there might even be places where this image might be subject to legal action. Couldn't find the corresponding thread, however.

Best regards,
Andy

andythaler, i do agree with some of your points that you make. since ric's photo doesn't contain what some consider artistic or technical merit, it would have been nice to at least get some more background on why this was taken. girlfriend? stranger? sister? how about camera body? lens? something that relates to why this particlar photo was posted besides the fact that it's of a person? if it's just a quick capture of a beautiful body on a beach, say so. if you're looking for critique, ask.

we could spend years discussing the particulars of the privacy invasion issue, though.

Right.

However, I would prefer to live in a perfect world where I can take out my camera (with f/2.8 lens) to take an image without everybody becoming suspicious of my motives.

And I see that people will become increasingly suspicious of photographers' motives as long as some photographers keep taking cameras with tele lenses to the beach

Best regards,
Andy

Privacy issues aside, I think this is a lovely candid of a lovely girl and I don't have a problem with it being in this section.

A thought- I think the issues this photograph has brought up have a lot to do with different cultural viewpoints. I think the more "casual" European mentality to sexuality might not consider this photo harmful at all whereas in North America, this shot could stir strong emotion to privacy and nudity issues. Perhaps we should remember the different societal viewpoints on sexuality and privacy. It can be a touchy issue. Like I said, just a thought.

i usually don't raise too much suspicion unless i drag out the big white lens, but i see where you're coming from. i believe in Australia there are beaches with video cameras to watch for the people with cameras! perving there carries a pretty good fine...

Good expression...

Best regards,
Andy

This boggles my mind. An expectation of PRIVACY in a PUBLIC place? The two terms are completely incompatible.

Many public beaches have rules and policies concerning photography. It is our responsibility to follow them, and any applicable local laws. In the absence of any prohibitive rule, it is the responsibility of everyone there to understand that they are in a public place and might be photographed. Those who do not want to be photographed in a bikini should not wear such attire in public places where photography is allowed.

There are moral and ethical boundaries, too. And while I have no use for photographers who exploit people for their own fun or profit, I don't think this image crosses that line.

Interesting subject ... maybe we could continue that discussion in 'Talk about photography'...

Maybe I'm wrong in legal terms, but I do not consider it 'proper' myself to take pictures of people who do not want to have their picture taken. Taking pictures of people 'on the sneak' that don't know their picture is taken would fall into that category for me.

And while it might be OK for me to have my white flabby stomach seen when I visit the beach, I would rather not have someone else take a photo of it and put it, e.g. as a bad example on an Internet forum for Weight Watchers.

Best regards,
Andy

Very nice ric.

I have my own opinions about the "purity" of the image in question, but I'll let the mods do as they wish... I suppose I am a puritan as well. Really wasn't aware that this was a family/kid friendly forum; though it would be nice to have one. But anyway, here is a link regarding legallity to "paparazzying" strangers - (which we don't even know if this image is an image of a stranger, could be a realative, or a friend... I'm making no assumptions, just passing on information.)

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=111034

Peace!

Images taken in public for private use are one thing, and I include this forum as 'Private Use'. Images taken in public, candids, and used for profit are something entirely different. We have to be careful of the expectation of privacy issue, both from our perspective and the subjects perspective. I don't think this young lady had any reasonable expectation of privacy if this was shot at a public beach or even from public land.

To take it one step further though, I would think that we as photographers should consider the privacy of people and places a bit more before we haul out the camera and start shooting. In that respect I think I agree with Andythaler. The internet has brought a whole new dimension to this discussion that just wasn't available 20 years ago. In my mind it goes back to the 'Do unto others...' rule of life.

perhaps the mods will move it there.

It would seem to me that the entire genre of street photography falls into this category.

I understand where you're coming from. I generally don't feel comfortable taking pictures of strangers without their consent, which is one of the reasons I don't do street photography per se. But I would rather support the general right of photography in public. Many great images, taken on beaches and elsewhere, would not exist without such rights.

Nice work. I am so sure that the girl knew her picture was being taken. She might not admit it but she is posing. After working out all year and spending her allowance on a nice bikini, she wants all eyes on her. I am pretty sure thats an all over tan too. I like this type of photography but not necessarily at the beach. People just being people.

Andy, pictures of this nature border on prurience. It isn't prurient, but it wouldn't take much to turn it that way. A very thin line so I understand your position. If she had been wearing a thong, I would have at least thought about objecting. In my opinion photos like this which border on prurience should be put on the Glamour and Nude string.

Ric, this is a very nice picture of a lovely young woman straightening her clothing. If it were my daughter though (and I do have one), as a father it would bother me to see you taking her picture without her knowledge. However, if you got her permission to publish it after the fact, then that would be ok. This is a "Catch 22" situation. How do you get a release from someone you don't even know? You haven't said that she is your cousin, or friend so we are assuming that she is a stranger and unaware of your presence. Since you have more than one picture of her then you were stalking her on the beach. Not cool in my eyes.

What was your motivation for taking that picture, and just how many did you take? Inquiring minds want to know.

...Bob

And with all due respect Andy, just how would you know they "do not want to have their picture taken?" Wouldn't that destroy the "candid picture" concept altogether?
Are candid pictures defined as "on the sneak" pictures in your view?

I have a release signed by Bride and Groom all the time; though I have never had a problem, I like to keep my back covered. Otherwise, however unlikely in this case, legal action (harasment) can be taken if there is no resolve between the photographer & the subject. These laws are really never observed, and most of the time people really don't mind... Believe it or not, tabloids, and other magazines get sued all the time by celebs. Some celebs can't be bothered.

But think of this: A mom see's a freaky guy in a public park taking candid pictures of her 4 and 5 year old children. What would your reaction be... personally, I would rip the camera out of their hands, and call the authorities... it's a sensitive area; Some accept it, some don't. Yet, there are harasment laws to protect individuals against this. If your going to do candids of strangers in public, at least be aware of the laws of your area BEFORE you get in trouble.

If my understanding is correct, it has recently been made illegal, in some parts of California, to have a zoom lens on your camera in public. Perhaps someone who knows the details on this can elaborate.

As tempting as some shots of people in public may be to the photographic artist... sometimes we just have to exercise self-control, holster our weapon and move along.

Peace!