Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 89

Thread: Permission to snap public performers?

  1. #41
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Six-GHz View Post
    Another time I was taking a passing shot of my kid's school, which was under construction too. Immediately the sentry uncle came and told me I can't take pics due to security issue.
    you can tell him you can't enter the school compount to take photographs without permission, and you know very well what should and should not be done, both in law and in common sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Six-GHz View Post
    The latest was taking a photos of a coffee shop near my place, also under construction. The boss came over and asked me if I was putting up articles in the papers.
    could he just be curious? or maybe he hope to get interviewed. he may not be interfering your rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Six-GHz View Post
    So has technology stifled budding photography interests?
    not technology. it is simply urban life that has cause some neurotic behaviours from insecurity.

  2. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    BUKIT PANJANG
    Posts
    1,997

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    ts juz relax u would encounter that very often thats wat happen to me be4....
    D800 | D700|16mm f2.8D|35 f1.4G|50 f1.8G|60mm F2.8D|85mm f1.4G|16-35 f4G|70-200 f2.8 VR2| SB900

  3. #43

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    I see that some look towards at the general public spaces stand: No need to ask in a public space, of course private property is a must ask for permission. Hence, one must be prepared to happen to get into someone's photo.
    Or the stand that there should be a asking culture but it does defeat the purpose of candid photography.
    Or that we should take into account the feelings of all these public performers (assuming that in this case he was licensed) of being in a public space and not wanting to feel like a freak show.

    Let me look at it this way. With the advancement and miniturisation of digital technology, taking pictures is so much easier than ever before, enabling just about anyone to shoot things. In the past, photography was not only an expensive but also time-consuming and skill requiring endevour. (Think of having to use manual cameras and process your own film in a darkroom) Even with the popularisation of the 35mm film format, it was still limited to one camera per family and used for holidays, and grand festivals only. Hence the photographic work of surveying, shooting weddings, portraits were best left to studios and professionals who could churn out generally consistent high quality. It was considered a privilage to be a photographer and have your work exhibited and observed as art. (Some of you guys here might even remember you parents saying not to waste money on photography and film.)

    Today, cameras are avaliable cheaply in just about every mobile tech gadget. Teenagers like to camwhore... increased use to take photos stealthly resulting in worldwide reports of the wrongful use of cameras to outrage modesty, prey on little children for sexual objectives, record areas in sequences to plan bombings etc... In Singapore, there was the Yishun MRT videos by JI members (who got arrested thankfully).

    Coupled with the advent of online portals such as STOMP where people can snap and upload at the press of a button, influence from media reports upon the wrongful use of cameras and even movies in general, I believe that the old prestige of being a photographer has been degraded severely in Singapore. There are complaints amongst our community of double standards. (EG. Why security guards tend to target locals with DSLRs more than ang-mohs or others with PnS) There also frequent reports of being stopped by guards for shooting construction sites in public (Its a necessary procaution).

    If you have watched enough movies, read enough reports, I think you can see that after being weary of real life bomb plots etc in news and watching movies that show the bad guy using DSLRs to target locations, somehow everyone with a DSLR is a bad lot.

    I find it stupid to think that terrorists would plot bombing plans with DSLRs when more stealthly PnS and video cams are avaliable. Portals like stomp also degrade photography from an artform of light to a show of the dirtest side of people in full public show. Of course then most people would think of photographers as people who snap shots for self gratification of shaming humour later, post it online for everyone to laugh at etc...

    Instead of discerning the symptoms of the increasing disregard for photography (which is the arguements that most have put forth here), I want to show how instead the professionals and advanced enthuasists are being misunderstood. We are artists of the light in our own right. (Refering to the community of amatuers and professionals) Other artists such as baskers (assuming they are really in it for art) have misunderstood what we do and assume we look at them as freakshows (not all do but from the replys this is one of the arguements). Infact, we have been looked upon us as people who block parade views, organising authorities usually give not more importance to event photographers than a pass to walk around but with instructions to do walk here and here and here and just about everywhere, associated with the subject of crime and easily targeted by guards tasked to tell people not to photograph anything.

    If anything is to be changed, we society itself to clean up the sterotypical and bad image of our artform. We need to have photography return to its prestigious honour of being an art of light. We cannot have everyone looking at photographers and thinking that their picture will be up on stomp or something. (hence I look upon stomp with much disdain; public reporting though has its good intentions is also being spoilt.) Well, here ends this long post.
    5D MII w/16-35L,Sigma 28-70&Nikkors(35f2,85f1.4,105f2.5,180f2.8ED)

  4. #44

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Quote Originally Posted by zoossh View Post
    not technology. it is simply urban life that has cause some neurotic behaviours from insecurity.
    Yeah, very true. The allergy of STOMPhobia!

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshSiao View Post
    If anything is to be changed, we society itself to clean up the sterotypical and bad image of our artform. We need to have photography return to its prestigious honour of being an art of light. We cannot have everyone looking at photographers and thinking that their picture will be up on stomp or something. (hence I look upon stomp with much disdain; public reporting though has its good intentions is also being spoilt.) Well, here ends this long post.
    from guitars, cars to dslr...

  5. #45

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Ang View Post
    Let's ambush this guy one day. Like 20 of us, suddenly flash out the tuo leng kong with multiple strobes and start flashing away. I bet he will run away!!
    LET ME IN !! LET ME IN !!

  6. #46
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Quote Originally Posted by JoshSiao View Post
    I see that some look towards at the general public spaces stand: No need to ask in a public space, of course private property is a must ask for permission. Hence, one must be prepared to happen to get into someone's photo.
    Or the stand that there should be a asking culture but it does defeat the purpose of candid photography.
    Or that we should take into account the feelings of all these public performers (assuming that in this case he was licensed) of being in a public space and not wanting to feel like a freak show.

    Let me look at it this way. With the advancement and miniturisation of digital technology, taking pictures is so much easier than ever before, enabling just about anyone to shoot things. In the past, photography was not only an expensive but also time-consuming and skill requiring endevour. (Think of having to use manual cameras and process your own film in a darkroom) Even with the popularisation of the 35mm film format, it was still limited to one camera per family and used for holidays, and grand festivals only. Hence the photographic work of surveying, shooting weddings, portraits were best left to studios and professionals who could churn out generally consistent high quality. It was considered a privilage to be a photographer and have your work exhibited and observed as art. (Some of you guys here might even remember you parents saying not to waste money on photography and film.)

    Today, cameras are avaliable cheaply in just about every mobile tech gadget. Teenagers like to camwhore... increased use to take photos stealthly resulting in worldwide reports of the wrongful use of cameras to outrage modesty, prey on little children for sexual objectives, record areas in sequences to plan bombings etc... In Singapore, there was the Yishun MRT videos by JI members (who got arrested thankfully).

    Coupled with the advent of online portals such as STOMP where people can snap and upload at the press of a button, influence from media reports upon the wrongful use of cameras and even movies in general, I believe that the old prestige of being a photographer has been degraded severely in Singapore. There are complaints amongst our community of double standards. (EG. Why security guards tend to target locals with DSLRs more than ang-mohs or others with PnS) There also frequent reports of being stopped by guards for shooting construction sites in public (Its a necessary procaution).

    If you have watched enough movies, read enough reports, I think you can see that after being weary of real life bomb plots etc in news and watching movies that show the bad guy using DSLRs to target locations, somehow everyone with a DSLR is a bad lot.

    I find it stupid to think that terrorists would plot bombing plans with DSLRs when more stealthly PnS and video cams are avaliable. Portals like stomp also degrade photography from an artform of light to a show of the dirtest side of people in full public show. Of course then most people would think of photographers as people who snap shots for self gratification of shaming humour later, post it online for everyone to laugh at etc...

    Instead of discerning the symptoms of the increasing disregard for photography (which is the arguements that most have put forth here), I want to show how instead the professionals and advanced enthuasists are being misunderstood. We are artists of the light in our own right. (Refering to the community of amatuers and professionals) Other artists such as baskers (assuming they are really in it for art) have misunderstood what we do and assume we look at them as freakshows (not all do but from the replys this is one of the arguements). Infact, we have been looked upon us as people who block parade views, organising authorities usually give not more importance to event photographers than a pass to walk around but with instructions to do walk here and here and here and just about everywhere, associated with the subject of crime and easily targeted by guards tasked to tell people not to photograph anything.

    If anything is to be changed, we society itself to clean up the sterotypical and bad image of our artform. We need to have photography return to its prestigious honour of being an art of light. We cannot have everyone looking at photographers and thinking that their picture will be up on stomp or something. (hence I look upon stomp with much disdain; public reporting though has its good intentions is also being spoilt.) Well, here ends this long post.
    actually you raise a very good point. and i see the problem not in photography but the lack of law on publication and broadcast. instead of working on the actual problem, they did a carpet paranoia. photographers suffer while paparazzi's get away with it.

  7. #47

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    personally I shung away from shooting photos of the unfortunate.
    To me it feels like a rip off, they already suffer a lot, why further inhumiliate them in a photo!

  8. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Kembangan
    Posts
    151

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    It may not be illegal to take photos in certain places but sometimes I felt irritated by people who seem like taking pic of my direction.

    Legal issues aside, I think as photographers, we should also think of how the subject is feeling.

    If the subject doesn't like it, why do we have to satisfy our own photography passion and use laws as a reason to say that we have the rights to take photo in that place?

  9. #49
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Quote Originally Posted by JillValentine View Post
    It may not be illegal to take photos in certain places but sometimes I felt irritated by people who seem like taking pic of my direction.

    Legal issues aside, I think as photographers, we should also think of how the subject is feeling.

    If the subject doesn't like it, why do we have to satisfy our own photography passion and use laws as a reason to say that we have the rights to take photo in that place?
    what advice do you have for candid and streets photography before the subject express the wish not to be photographed?

    and supposedly after the subject express the wish not to be photographed after being photographed, and the photographer stop taking any more photos, do you think that is already a completed set of appropriate behaviours, or does the photographer still need to do more, and does the photographer still have to be accused of inappropriate behaviour?

    to be fair, all judgement of a photographer in non-private situations should be left only after a refusal is made known.
    Last edited by zoossh; 17th August 2007 at 12:29 AM.

  10. #50

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    As much as I don't agree on how the guy reacted, I also believe that he has the right to say no. And we should respect that. Fine, the guy is rude, but if we all go back there to agitate the person, who will be rude then?

  11. #51

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Quote Originally Posted by zoossh View Post
    not technology. it is simply urban life that has cause some neurotic behaviours from insecurity.
    You know, I have a tendency to agree with you. Just ask the taxi uncle the next time you take a cab; most of them have horror stories to tell of neurotic and socially retarded singaporeans.

    I think urban loneliness has driven some of us quietly insane.
    JohnnyM Photography - Gallery
    Shanghai pics - Contact Sheet

  12. #52
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    708

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Just keep shooting. If you want to avoid such a situation while taking a candid, get a longer lense. But I know how you feel. I got into an exactly same situation a few months back. Just walk away if they scold or give them some coins for their efforts and ask for permission (before they get pissed). I doubt they will say no.
    A camera cannot teach you how to see.

  13. #53

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Imagine if you are going out with your pretty girlfriend and someone keep using his camera shooting both of you and because it is a public places where you cannot say "photography not allowed" how would you feel???

  14. #54

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Potter View Post
    Imagine if you are going out with your pretty girlfriend and someone keep using his camera shooting both of you and because it is a public places where you cannot say "photography not allowed" how would you feel???
    I don't know about you, but I get a kick out of men beo-ing the women I am with when we go out. I'd like to think that my female companions'd feel a sense of pride too when other women check me out.
    JohnnyM Photography - Gallery
    Shanghai pics - Contact Sheet

  15. #55
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    East of Singapore
    Posts
    26

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Potter View Post
    Imagine if you are going out with your pretty girlfriend and someone keep using his camera shooting both of you and because it is a public places where you cannot say "photography not allowed" how would you feel???
    OT

    Do you think the photog will still take pic if he/she see a "dirty" finger (middle finger) sharply pointing at him/her?

  16. #56
    Senior Member zoossh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    8,725

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Potter View Post
    Imagine if you are going out with your pretty girlfriend and someone keep using his camera shooting both of you and because it is a public places where you cannot say "photography not allowed" how would you feel???
    apart from tourists, most local photographers do not do that. i'm not so sure about those who only go for showgirls only which tend to be of a special group, and maybe someone can speak on their behalf. still that dun seem frequent.

  17. #57

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Yes, photographers should be sensitive to the feelings of others. This is however, not possible to express clearly in a written law. In the law, things can either be banned or allowed outright with quantifiable and definite circumstances. The law cannot say, photography is not illegal in public, but persons taking the pictures should be sensitive to the feelings of others. Such laws would not be clear cut enough and result in endless court fights over the meaning of sensitive as it cannot be quantified. However, restricting photography in places such as army camps, military installments and private property is clear cut. The court need only battle on where the property boundary was etc...

    Being sensitive to the feelings of the people in public boils down to the basic courtesy and moral educations that civil people should have learnt long ago. Also, the public should be more aware of what real photography is about and hence have a consideration for our art works as well.

    Hence, we can draw 2 conclusions from this:
    1. The public is having a eroding image of what we amateurs and professionals do. (Why they are is in my previous post above)
    2. There is eroding moral and social values in today's public culture. The courtesy and public behaviour campagin needs to be brought back!

    These 2 problems coupled together results in the symptoms that have plagued us. Eg. Public performer does his stuff for the love of art. He does keep up with news etc... and see how people can easily take and post pictures online and on blogs for being laughed at etc... performing in public, he is now wary of people taking pictures. Having his picture snapped manny times irritates him as he may think his pictures are used negatively. He does not want to feel like a free show etc... Next person he sees carrying a camera and snapping a picture he want to scream at the person. Easiest targets are we photographers lugging about big camera bodies and lenses that scream picture man. So he shouts at you, the unwitting photographer who was taking to concentrate on capturing the life of the city on stills, not knowing your artistic purposes and not caring a hoot for your own feelings.
    5D MII w/16-35L,Sigma 28-70&Nikkors(35f2,85f1.4,105f2.5,180f2.8ED)

  18. #58

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Quote Originally Posted by dRebelXT View Post
    personally I shung away from shooting photos of the unfortunate.
    To me it feels like a rip off, they already suffer a lot, why further inhumiliate them in a photo!
    I think it really depends on your motive when you take the photo & what you going to do with the photo. In some cases photos does help the unfortunate. I remember reading an article or how a photographer took pictures of a crying kid whose lamb/cow (sorry i can't remember) got ran over by a truck. The photos & story were published & becasue of that many readers poured in their donations to help.

  19. #59

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Quote Originally Posted by dot1q View Post
    OT

    Do you think the photog will still take pic if he/she see a "dirty" finger (middle finger) sharply pointing at him/her?
    That will make a really good reaction shot. It will be pricelss.
    But lets not do that... its asking for trouble...

  20. #60
    Senior Member redstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Beyond the outer limits
    Posts
    2,898

    Default Re: Permission to snap public performers?

    Quote Originally Posted by Six-GHz View Post
    Yeah, I learnt that too... especially you're carrying a camera bigger than a P&S!

    Just the other day I was taking some construction at my place. My aim is to keep a momento of "before" and "after". The next moment a guy came up to me and asked why am I taking photos. I told him about my intention and cleared the air.

    Another time I was taking a passing shot of my kid's school, which was under construction too. Immediately the sentry uncle came and told me I can't take pics due to security issue.

    The latest was taking a photos of a coffee shop near my place, also under construction. The boss came over and asked me if I was putting up articles in the papers.

    Can't I just take candid shots? Or do I need to ask permission everytime for such photos? I believe general public are wary about pics put on Stomp. So has technology stifled budding photography interests?

    Standing on public grounds taking photo of a building is not an offence unless it's a Protected Place / Protected Area which will have the large sign in red saying so.

    Few years ago I was shooting a row of crumbling shophouses in preparation for demolition (moving out furniture, hoarding up the place) from the inside alley (the alley was being hoarded up as well) Then these 2 foreign chinese workers came out and scolded me this and that. blah blah blah, call police, etc. I didn't want to kick up a fuss and just walked away.

    Then round the front I met the supervisor (or foreman, or head). I told him I was doing photography and he just smiled and walked into one of the houses.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •