I’m wondering what you think about news broadcasts, since they don’t ask permission to record and post people to their hometown in real time… is something unethical if its necessary and is it then immoral to not do what’s necessary?

I still don’t understand how people who have no right to privacy, love to argue it as if it was a major part of the Bill of Rights. 😂 You’re in public, it’s called public for a reason, it’s literally the opposite of privacy. It’s also weird that they have no problem with every corporation & retailer literally filming them inside of every “private business” & in many cases, saving that footage for periods of time. Somehow someone making art from the mundane is offensive & dangerous

Great video ! Indeed, in most countries you are allowed to photograph or film everything in public, but there is a difference when you want to post them online.

I have certain rules I follow with my street photography, along with the legal limits of course. 1) no photographing homeless people. I don’t feel comfortable doing it because it seems too close to exploitation. 2) no photographing children without the parent's permission. Obviously could be seen as creepy despite good intentions. Everyone who does street photography must decide for themselves what lines they won't cross and then work within those line. My advice is to think compassionately when deciding those lines. For example, compare the styles of Garry Winogrand and Bruce Gilden.

Love this!!! You got a new subscriber from me!!! I personally don’t ask for permission, but I also don’t show identifiable faces very often.. When I get direct eye contacts, all I do is smile back and give them a thumbs up and it just always works, which shows them your good intentions

i only pickup photography recently and it's totally different from phone photography. you need to learn a lot. about the camera, the weather, the color etc. but, it's really fun. i really like street photography or when i go for holidays or just nearby parks etc. taking photos of things is one thing but, to take a photo of someone, i realized i need a good long-range lens like recently my 50-250mm. i felt like a spy, taking photo of this lady and waited till she looks my way. lol

Where'd you go? You not posting no more? I like your nuanced take on this polarizing subject. I just came out with my take on the ethics of street regarding telephoto lens voyeuristic work vs wide angle close up work like Gilden's. I jokingly titled it "photographers are creeps!" Sad I just found you now that it seems like you're done with KZbin. Hope you're still snapping out there! Good luck and god speed!

Great video. Thank you. Why do you avoid photographing kids? I'm writing an article on the ethics of street and documentary photography atm.

Dont expect privacy in the public! theres security cameras everywhere from outdoors to indoors! if you dont want cameras on you go tell the stores you visit to not take a picture of you and report back to me with the findings. street photography is fine in my book!

Asking this question, is typical of our society restraining more and more every liberty. I travelled around the world and took pictures of people without asking and asking. Bruce Gilden is a good photographer and for me people criticizing Gilden are the ones who haven't the gut to do it. Very strangely in our cities, you are constantly monitored, filmed an no one says anything...

Can't speek 4 every1 everywhere in the world. But in the USA,... It's not "a law",... Photography/filming in public, from public, of public, is 1 of many inallienable Constitutionally protected Rights/activities.

I was walking around in the city with my camera looking for inspirational shots. A person on a bike comes up to me and asks to take his photograph, i was surprised as i was carrying a small camera with a 16-50mm lens exactly because i don't like attracting attention. I never ever take intrusive surprise shots of people like in the beginning of this video.. It's just too weird, intimidating...I respect peoples boundaries at all times. I sometimes do get people in my shots while on the streets but its more accidental and people sort of sense it. I think if i chose to take a picture of someone specifically, i would probably ask them afterward if it they are ok with it. If not i will delete. No one has ever asked me to delete anything, nor shout at me. If you're at a square or other busy place and there are lots of people around look out for security and introduce yourself, that's what i do.

Yes. I prefer street art photography. If anyone inside the frame its their fault. Im not taking photo of them but their sorrounding

I rarely see anything resembling art in this genre and certainly not photos that are pleasing to look at. Aggressive photography doesn't capture true life; it captures people who are reacting to aggression.

I like street photography, and I do that as well. Im just not a fan of Gilden and his works. I enjoy the moods in street photos, not the people. So even if an empty street without anyone, if the mood is strong, then I like it. Street photography is supposed to be about the streets anyway. Posed people on the street would be better categorised as human interest photography in my opinion.

It strikes me that Gilden's approach is unnecessarily rude and aggressive - deliberately setting out to shock and offend, rather than capture a cool/interesting street portrait or scene. Of course, like any narcissist this is all about him (attempting to be notorious) rather than the people he ambushes with his camera. But then I guess there has to be at least one Gilden in the world in order to show the rest of us how NOT to do street photography.

One of the best youtube video about this theme. Maybe I feel so because I do totaly agree with you ;-) Street life photography are like a Time Capsule. They will talk about us when we're dead.

You can’t profit from a person’s image without a signed contract with them,otherwise it is legal but you have to be ethical or you may end up been punished in some way.

people find everything offensive these days

Aggressive photographers are no better than paparazzi. But like you explain, street photography is documenting life on the street. So important!

I do mostly street photography. Don't see anything that's not ethical (there was a rear window ethics as well). On the contrary, that's a real thing. A real thing as it is. Just like undisturbed quantum mechanics insight :D

youre a week photogher then. If someone holds strong to some principals, ethics or an ideology and then ws shouted and frowned at does that mean they should change there beliefs?

그건 폭력이고 예술도 아닙니다. 기록을 남기는 것이라면 멀리서 찍으면 됩니다. 찍히는 사람의 얼굴이 정확히 보인다면 그 사람의 의견을 존중해야 합니다. 반대로 누군가가 스트릿 포토그래퍼에게 그렇게 카메라를 들이댄다고 생각해 보세요. 그리고 그 사진을 인터넷에 퍼트린다면요? 이 세상 누구도 그런 행위를 좋아할 사람은 없습니다.

Generally speaking, a photographer has the legal right to photograph any PERSON, PLACE, OR THING if it meets two criteria: the photos are taken in public spaces and you do not exploit the image for commercial purposes. My style is not aggressive, I use a flip screen to avoid eye contact and I will comply with a persons wish to not be photographed. Also, I use a 35-150mm zoom lens to get things that would be too intrusive, like accident victims. It's the reason I have photos of firemen working to revive an arsonist who died in the fire he started. Those photos were not published by the papers because times have changed. But a dramatic, 1960's photo of a woman and child free falling from a collapsed fire escape during a tenement blaze won a newsman the Pulitzer Prize.

difference is you should ask people and then take the pitchure if they are ok with it

Today people take pictures everywhere. Special in hot vacation spots I am sure, I am on hundreds of pictures. Street is an Art form and covered by most western constitutions. Taking street in less self centered societies is not a problem at all. Only western communities have the modern over morality, and feeling of self importance. But hey, we are all going to die, may we survive on a nice shot.

great video, i wanted to ask if you always ask permission to post photos of people after you took them so they are still candid but ethical. I know it's the best way to do it, but it just seems like a lot of effort and quite honestly it would be very akward. whats your opinion?

moral's vs law's .. as human we need to follow law's but with morals

It’s all about energy that the photographer emits. Ive done couple of times where the person even blowed me a kiss in the air, while shooting, I never ask about permission, due missing the moment. Received so much smiles and never had a problem with the people on streets. Just smile…be cheerful and you will have so much fun

Thank you very much .. This is very helpful. I appreciate it.

The info on this video is flat out incorrect. In most countries in europe and asia, you are NOT allowed to just take photos of people in public. Mate, get your facts right.

I love street photography and have never had any issues, but I also never get in someone's face. I photograph the street and people's interaction with it, but not the individual. Street celebrations and events are expected to have photographers there because it's out of the normal street environment so it's easier to be accepted as a photographer. I also don't use my "big" camera I use for wildlife. I use a smaller unassuming one.

Very well done and thought out.

Great content.

I'm a hobbyist photographer and get tons of nice close-up street photos without annoying anyone (well, except random drunks, and a 12 year old traveller kid who punched me in the back of my head because I photographed their 25 horse and carts that they parked in a city high street). Too many street photographers either 1) do really boring framed scenes full of leading lines, dark shadows, and excessive Clarity settings or 2) obnoxiously thrust their camera into faces. Regarding the latter, they keep capturing lonely/tired/sad 'resting faces' but I think it's all a bit false, as most of us have such faces and it doesn't mean we're actually lonely, tired or sad. And then they heap-on the B+W, deep contrast etc. I think it just plays into a boring stereotypical narrative about the lonely city. People love to claim that city life de-individualises us, ignoring how people aren't generally any more individual or less lonely in the countryside nor were prior to cities being built. I moved from the countryside to the city decades ago because I was bored rigid. There are so many stupid narratives around city life. People love to watch sci fi about city life ('They Live' etc) and say they're "more relevant now than ever" even though they're usually far more "of their time". Everyone's an armchair sociologist, except they're cr*p at it (at least I have a degree in sociology). When I see the above two kinds of street photography, I think it's in the same lazy space of 'this is that life is' even though they're twisting it quite hard. There are some great street photographers, though. They ones who actually witness things being done, socialising happening, surprising subjects, kind faces etc.

Taken Photos in Public is perfectly fine. Flashing in someone Face. Is an attack! That one photographer that went up to that girl and Used Flash into her eyes should of gotten smacked! One, Flash hinders peoples sight for at least an hour. Also some people it hurts! Some might even get a sezuire from the Flash. And as good as Cameras are now. You do not need to use a light or flash.

Street photography sucks, if you shove your camera in people’s face you deserve to get beat up

Bruce Gilden didn't like the last part 😂

Interesting points of view, also practical for for most. It does seem to me that in the states that that street photography is far more dangerous than it was twenty years ago. When I was photographing on the street and someone would get mad or yell at me I would stop and move on. Today I feel the of street photography is very risky because of the massive amount of guns on people.that someone gets anger and instead of yelling they shoot. So I have stepped away from street photography

If you will not threaten the city, state, and government about taking your pictures and having you on video, then why come to me about taking your pictures? Is it because you think you can bully me and shower me with your opinions? Who said I need to listen to you or even talk to you? I follow the rules and I do respect the culture. All that stuff about kids, women, and the homeless, that makes no logical sense because if that's the case, then EVERYONE has the same rights. By that dumb logic, you're saying that if I am an adult male who works and makes a good living,I have less rights than the homeless????HUH????

Thanks, an intelligent commentary.

Shots of people in public is okay , say a busy sidewalk or a crowd at a food truck, but not a close up head shot like that asshole shoving his camera into someone’s personal space. Don’t care if it’s Gary winogrand, bresson, who the fuck ever. Be respectful and if you need a headshot get consent or signed release. Most Street crap, and it is crap -repetitively boring derivative tripe - ends up on instabook eventually.

Great work brother 👏... really appreciate your work 🙏

The people who took a lot of those photos-such as from the jim crow era-probably didn't realize they were taking photos of history. I feel that's important to think about.

Super helpful!!

Inspiring and brilliantly argued

i would said it's easy to said "nothing wrong" for viewer rather than the victim, especially this people just taking picture right in front of peope face with flash, trust me this world ain't rainbow and sunshine, everyone got their own problem to handle, and out of nowhere these people take you face pic with flash and trust me all of this people said that "nothing wrong" will be piss too if that happen to them

cool photos man

It's sometimes less obtrusive just to take the photo than to engage in conversation I've found and yet sometimes you have an amazing conversation. I try to develop an ethical meter based on the context, distance and environment. I try to stay out of the way, some circumstances require asking permission, most require not wasting time.