Candid photography

Hi all,
I haven't been able to post until today so these remarks are a little behind everyone elses on the subject. The forum site seemed to be down when I've tried and my digest was totally up the wall. All messages were repeated umpteen times...
Do you really need to hear all this :-

To the point, I've always thought that candid photography was by definition without the subjects consent, indeed if you get that first then it can't be candid anymore.
I was inspired to look up the law and ethics on this and turned up an interesting document. It is something of a can of worms but basically it boils down to "if a reasonable person couldn't be very offended by publication" and as long as you will not profit from it then it's ok in public places.
The url is below, there's a pretty good summary at the end of it. < http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/lester/writings/chapter5.ht ml>

I may well miss the challenge 17 as I would have to go some distance to get anywhere suitable, ho hum, we'll see.

Tel.

Thanks for your research. After someone (Jodi?) mentioned that one had to be especially careful when photographing children unbeknownst to them or their parents, I was somewhat worried as my entry in Photo Challenge #17 was of three children who didn't know I was snapping them.
Anne

What is that about? My entry is of children unbeknowst to me. And a few others.

Anne, nope, wasn't me...my shots are all children (xept for some teens who would not like to be called children)...candidly...10X zoom.

That was me Anne. It's where I would personally draw the line. There aren't any legal restrictions as long as you aren't making money out of it - in which case a model release would be a wise move (iirc privacy and use of personal images is an area where the law in different jurisdictions differ.) Some parents get a bit upset about having images of their children spread around the internet (I know my husband is not overly keen on me posting pictures of my children, which is why I only post the reallly cute ones....).

Susan S.

Many parents do not want their children posted on the internet...even in a harmless environment as this one. I removed one of my entries a few months ago because of parental objections. Fear of misuse by those with the wrong intentions...

I will not feel guilty now for posting the pics

I will not feel guilty now for posting the pics
I will not feel guilty now for posting the pics

I will not feel guilty now for posting the pics

I will not feel guilty now for posting the pics

I will not feel guilty now for posting the pics
I will not feel guilty now for posting the pics

I will not feel guilty now for posting the pics

got to keep tellin myself that....ya think i should ask Grant to remove them ??

Hey, we are all at a far larger danger with driving in our cars with the crazies on the road than we ever would be with our kids and grandkids on the web. We don't advertise our sites, and we don't let our kids out of our sight. Dont worry about this, there is far far too much on the web for anybody to target our pictures or our kids. God help them if they did. I think that this is blown way out of proportion in the news. Car and bicycle accidents are what we need to be more alert to.
Jane

I agree with Jane! Just said that parents had requested I not use pics.

Jane, you are right. What harm can be done to children if their images are on the internet? In my opinion this hype is utterly nonsense.
Just recently I noticed in the UK it is not allowed to take images of sporting children any more. How mad can this world become/

Leen

How mad can this world become/

We seem to know no limits in this regard.

This was an issue between my former girlfriend and I regarding images of her very photogenic daughter. I just don't get it.

I live in the UK and, as I understand it, we have have to get parental permission before taking *any* pics of children - a nightmare at any of our church events as, by the time you've got your permissions, all the kids have got bored and gone off somewhere else.