I've always wondered...

[DD3]

Austin American Statesman article said a photographer was walking around downtown and shooting random pics. After taking a shot of 2 skateboarders he was asked to delete the photo and refused. Apparently one of them then took the photographer's sunglasses and hit him upside the head with the skateboard. Assault and theft charges were filed against the 2 men. Over the top situation but....I've often wondered about taking pics (even at weddings) without a persons permission. Anyone ever had anyone ask them to delete a shot? I for one love to hide behind a camera but HATE having my picture taken!!

[Phisch]

I'm not sure how it works, but I thought it was ok if the people were in a public area and the picture was used for editorial purposes. But even then, I think newspapers make every effort to get the names of people pictured.

It would be polite, however, to take off a photo if someone didn't like their picture getting taken.

[auddii]

I do understand about street photography, and I think it's generally accepted, but I think that in some cases when the subject requests that the photo be deleted, it's best to honor their request. (I have no idea what they would do if you were shooting film.)

I just saw a documentary about a man who was horribly disfigured by neurofibromatosis, and he traveled to the US to have the fibromas removed and his face reconstructed. People pointed at him and took pictures of him, treating him as a freak show. He had a very protective and loving sister who got very upset by these photos and asked that they be deleted. I completely understand her response, and I hope that the people did honor her request.

[pbyd]

Audrey,
People, (you and I are included in that group) have privacy rights under US law. I am no lawyer, but have been in the photography business for a long while. I do not mind someone correcting me on the following.

A person’s image can be used for education and news without a signed consent, only. When we put a person’s image up on our website the image is published to the site. We must have a signed model release if an image is published. Yes, I and other photographers put wedding and reception images up online for most every wedding or event and if is not possible to get every guest to sign a release. If you talk to the legal people at PPA they recommend having your images password protected on-line, and give the guest a notice that you will remove the images if requested.
This is what is on the cards given out to guest at both events and wedding receptions along with the password to the site:

‘The photographers are capturing images for the bridal couple for viewing on the World Wide Web. If you would not like your image to be viewed, contact
Studio Name
Web site
Email and phone”

This shows you are making a good faith effort to protect their image. It will not keep you from a lawsuit, if someone wants to sue you. While working on my MFA we had an art photographer that had done a book on people in Texas prisons come talk to us. He even had to have each person in each image sign a release, if one of the prisoners was wanted in another state and that state saw the image of him and used that knowledge of his location the photographer could be sued for publishing the image.

I have had people call and request their image be removed from an online site and I do it with out any questions, I would never argue with anyone whose image I had captured without a model release.

There is a photographer in the Dallas area that can tell you what happens when you put an image online without a model release, it took him over a year in legal battles to win, and the cost to him was very high.

Wayne
Photography by Design

[bryanlindsey]

Originally Posted by pbyd

I would never argue with anyone whose image I had captured without a model release.
Photography by Design

Great sentence there...

[jeffro20]

Originally Posted by DD3

Austin American Statesman article said a photographer was walking around downtown and shooting random pics. After taking a shot of 2 skateboarders he was asked to delete the photo and refused. Apparently one of them then took the photographer's sunglasses and hit him upside the head with the skateboard. Assault and theft charges were filed against the 2 men. Over the top situation but....I've often wondered about taking pics (even at weddings) without a persons permission. Anyone ever had anyone ask them to delete a shot? I for one love to hide behind a camera but HATE having my picture taken!!

I was shooting a wedding reception and snapped a picture of a server delivering a beautiful tray of nicely done snacks to the guests. I certainly caught her image and HER attention. She promptly came up to me and requested that I NOT take her picture. She was not pleasant about it. I let it go and thought she was a bitch for the rest of the afternoon. I respected her wishes and decided not to push the issue. She basically acted like she didn't even want to be there.

[pbyd]

Originally Posted by jeffro20

I was shooting a wedding reception and snapped a picture of a server delivering a beautiful tray of nicely done snacks to the guests. I certainly caught her image and HER attention. She promptly came up to me and requested that I NOT take her picture. She was not pleasant about it. I let it go and thought she was a bitch for the rest of the afternoon. I respected her wishes and decided not to push the issue. She basically acted like she didn't even want to be there.

Jeff,
You did the right thing, I know it can really P*$$ you off but such is life. I had a lady with her child pose for an image at a wedding reception and then called the studio all mad because the image was up with the on-line proofs, I removed it at her request.
To quote The Doors "People are Strange"
Wayne
Photography by Design

[Tsladaritz]

I believe Wayne is correct.

When I worked for a very small paper, my editor explained it to me and I looked up the info for myself.

When people learn you work for a publication, they are thrilled to help out. But if they find you are private sector, they become very upset. I think it is because they don't feel they have control over what you may or may not end up doing with that photo.

But a lot of people like seeing their face in the newspaper and being famous for 10 minutes.
I certainly never take anyone's photo without consent if I can see their face clearly. And I don't mind offering a free 5x7 or 8x10 mailed to them.

[auddii]

Originally Posted by pbyd

Audrey,
People, (you and I are included in that group) have privacy rights under US law. I am no lawyer, but have been in the photography business for a long while. I do not mind someone correcting me on the following.

A person’s image can be used for education and news without a signed consent, only. When we put a person’s image up on our website the image is published to the site. We must have a signed model release if an image is published. Yes, I and other photographers put wedding and reception images up online for most every wedding or event and if is not possible to get every guest to sign a release. If you talk to the legal people at PPA they recommend having your images password protected on-line, and give the guest a notice that you will remove the images if requested.
This is what is on the cards given out to guest at both events and wedding receptions along with the password to the site:

‘The photographers are capturing images for the bridal couple for viewing on the World Wide Web. If you would not like your image to be viewed, contact
Studio Name
Web site
Email and phone”

This shows you are making a good faith effort to protect their image. It will not keep you from a lawsuit, if someone wants to sue you. While working on my MFA we had an art photographer that had done a book on people in Texas prisons come talk to us. He even had to have each person in each image sign a release, if one of the prisoners was wanted in another state and that state saw the image of him and used that knowledge of his location the photographer could be sued for publishing the image.

I have had people call and request their image be removed from an online site and I do it with out any questions, I would never argue with anyone whose image I had captured without a model release.

There is a photographer in the Dallas area that can tell you what happens when you put an image online without a model release, it took him over a year in legal battles to win, and the cost to him was very high.

Wayne
Photography by Design

I was not particularly talking about weddings as I have no experience about that. The example given in the OP was about a guy walking around town, and the documentary I spoke of were random people with camera phones.

I did coordinate an event for a large local hospital, and they required a photo release for everyone who's picture was taken. They had the releases in English, Spanish, for both adults and minors.

I have assisted at weddings, but only at a very few compared to the experience represented on this forum. I've never seen anyone complain at an event, but again, that doesn't mean much with my limited exposure. I think it is always best to abide by the wishes of the person being photographed.

[suerenee]

Usually folks have reasons...If they are polite I would delete. I have a client who served in the military and he put NO photos of himself on the internet. I would never put an image on the internet of him since he's told that he feels safer for himself and his family by not having images up. (The dude has a cool past in the Marines, BTW). Maybe they were skipping school or work. Who knows...but it's not worth fighting about.

[MicWayWal]

If someone is where a normal person would expect their picture could or may be taken, it is legally permissible to photograph them even if it's on private property, as long as they have no expectation of privacy. Everyone in America expects that photography will be a part of the wedding and their presence grants the photographer permission to photograph them.
For example, it is okay to photograph anyone at any part of the wedding event, but they may NOT photograph them in a sitting room where they are changing clothes and have an expectation that what they are doing is private.

[camera shy]

Originally Posted by MicWayWal

If someone is where a normal person would expect their picture could or may be taken, it is legally permissible to photograph them even if it's on private property, as long as they have no expectation of privacy. Everyone in America expects that photography will be a part of the wedding and their presence grants the photographer permission to photograph them.
For example, it is okay to photograph anyone at any part of the wedding event, but they may NOT photograph them in a sitting room where they are changing clothes and have an expectation that what they are doing is private.

This is the correct information. What you do after you lawfully take a photo is up to you. Delete or don't delete should be the question. I've had someone ask me to delete their image and if they have what I consider a good reason I do it. If I take a great image of the Grand Canyon and you happen to be in it but don't want your picture taken because you are in the witness protection program, I have photoshop.

[todd_a]

Originally Posted by MicWayWal

If someone is where a normal person would expect their picture could or may be taken, it is legally permissible to photograph them even if it's on private property, as long as they have no expectation of privacy. Everyone in America expects that photography will be a part of the wedding and their presence grants the photographer permission to photograph them.
For example, it is okay to photograph anyone at any part of the wedding event, but they may NOT photograph them in a sitting room where they are changing clothes and have an expectation that what they are doing is private.

This is more along the lines of what I understand. In a public location - fair game. If you are not wanting to be seen, then stay inside cover yourself up, or hang out at a private party. I think that is the whole idea behind the legality of the Paparazi photos of celebs. Lots of times they dont like their pics taken but they are in public and, being a celebrity especially, they should expect it everywhere they go. Hey, thats why they get paid the big bucks, right?

I really dont think the skateboarders had any right to expect privacy in a public location, but there are probably other circumstances that were left out of the story, like maybe the photographer got an attitude with them and told them that he did not have to delete anything so **** you! I'm sure if it was handled with tact, then it would have turned out differently... or the skateboarders were looking for a reason to be violent and would have gone off on anyone. When you are dealing with strangers, you can't know what to expect - Ever!

I have never been asked to delete anything. And I did shoot some skateboarders one night at a public skate park and they were cool about it and even did some tricks in front of me for my benefit. I never asked them, just started shooting, and ended up talking to a few of them about how recently some people with some cool video equipment and had made a small low budget film about skateboarding and included them in part of it. I think they liked the attention.

If you are into pushing the envelope, go try that at a biker bar late on a saturday night. lol

[pbyd]

Originally Posted by MicWayWal

If someone is where a normal person would expect their picture could or may be taken, it is legally permissible to photograph them even if it's on private property, as long as they have no expectation of privacy. Everyone in America expects that photography will be a part of the wedding and their presence grants the photographer permission to photograph them.
For example, it is okay to photograph anyone at any part of the wedding event, but they may NOT photograph them in a sitting room where they are changing clothes and have an expectation that what they are doing is private.

Michael,
The issue comes with a persons’ image being published as discussed before. When you publish an image to a web site then it could become an issue, not the photography.
I believe this will change in time because the laws came about before the world wide web and like so much more in this new web world we will have to adapt.
Wayne
Photography by Design

[MicWayWal]

Originally Posted by pbyd

Michael,
The issue comes with a persons’ image being published as discussed before. When you publish an image to a web site then it could become an issue, not the photography...

I understand. But it is still legal to publish it now, as long as the image is part of a creative product.