[Leica] Photojournalists and permission

[tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant)]

Once again we as a crew have fallen into the abyss of theory, feelings, 
unfounded rules and all the other things offered over the past few days. And 
as I see Karen has offered her last post on this topic I can understand why.

Well for me it's evolved into a completely non-satisfying to anyone and no 
one person is correct and everyone else is wrong. As I've suggested many 
times in the past, there are topics that can be discussed quickly on the 
internet and those much better done around a table with a couple of jugs of 
beer and face to face.

Then there are those topics, such as we've been going through with 
"Photojournalists and permission" where it evolves into a week or weeks long 
discussion with nothing more than a considerable amount of key board time 
and nothing resolved. Interesting without question, however unfortunately 
never the twain shall meet!

So with that, good evening or good morning, whichever, when you read this. 
And like Karen I too shall pass quietly into the night !
ted










----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Karen Nakamura" <mail@gpsy.com>
To: "Leica Users Group" <lug@leica-users.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 5:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Leica] Photojournalists and permission


>
> This will be my final post, since there's no progress in this discussion.
>
> I think we would all agree that we should ask doctors, nurses, and 
> patients in a hospital (public or privately funded) whether we can take 
> their photograph if we're doing a project on them. We can't just go around 
> public waiting rooms and take people's photographs or go to the maternity 
> ward and take all the photographs we want to of all of the cute babies 
> without asking the parents' permission. If you barged in and claimed that 
> you had a RIGHT to take photographs because you were a photojournalist, 
> you'd get immediately thrown out.
>
> We'd also agree that we'd feel uncomfortable if our company hired a 
> photographer to come by all of our offices and take our photographs 
> without our permission and without telling us how the company is going to 
> use the photos. Especially if the photographer insisted that we should not 
> pose and wanted to follow us around all day long to get us in our natural 
> condition. I think we would agree that  we have a certain right to privacy 
> even in the workplace.
>
> If we have that right (many lawyers would call it a moral right to our own 
> image), then what gives us the authority to claim that homeless -- because 
> of their circumstance -- have given up all moral rights to the use of 
> their own image and privacy?  Because they are poor? Because they are 
> living on the street?
>
> To me, this is class exploitation and a double-standard applied to one 
> class of people (rich people) and another (poor people). If you are happy 
> with that, fine.  This is my own feeling and why I try as hard as possible 
> to make sure that I have the consent of the people I photograph, 
> especially those in dire economic straits. Like HCB, I don't like to be 
> photographed myself, I do want to control how my image is used, and I 
> think other people should have that right too.
>
> Come up with your own standards and be happy with them. There are 
> variations depending on your profession. Fine art photography is one 
> thing, documentary is another, photojournalism is another. But each 
> profession does have its own best practices doctrine which you should 
> understand.  If you don't belong to a professional association that has an 
> ethics standard, come up with your own and be happy with it. Just don't 
> complain  if you are asked to defend it.
>
> Happy snaps as they say!
>
> Karen
>
>
> Karen Nakamura
> http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/
> http://www.photoethnography.com/blog/
>
> -- 
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information