Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Non-Romantic Relationships
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-26-2015, 06:31 AM
 
Location: 39 20' 59"N / 75 30' 53"W
16,077 posts, read 28,497,719 times
Reputation: 18189

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by L0ve View Post
I've been on the internet since the internet began. I did not go around taking pictures of myself and plastering them all over the internet back then, and I sure don't see a reason to do it now just because everyone on FB does it. I've always found it kinda creepy, narcissistic, and weird, especially selfies.

I love the people who are ultra controlling about their fake FB photos... the ones who only upload a few select images of themselves hiding their true weight and using lens filters for airbrush effects...these people seem to have no problem publicly posting 100s of unflattering pictures of everyone else bending down at a bad angle while eating a piece of cake with a full mouth, etc.

I have had people take very unflattering candid pics of me, then post them on FB publicly and tag my full name on the pics for the world to see - at work, covered in sweat after working out, etc. No one can tag my name now w out my permission, and if they still post pics publicly, they are contacted to remove them.

I think an obsessive need to plaster your pics all over the web is borderline sick, but I suppose really young people probably grew up knowing nothing different. I don't remember people ever running from cameras back before social media; photos used to be fun, and something kept in books to share privately with family and friends, not plastered all over the web for 300 million strangers to see.
Kind of a sweeping statement 300mil. FB can be filtered; isn't that correct. Not everyone posts pics of family and friends at awkard moments. If someone posts a pic of me I don't like, I ask them to remove it, in return, I offer the same respect. I would never want anyone to feel uncomfortable. I've become a photo buff and love sharing pics.
You seem a tad bit paranoid. Personally, I don't care to micromanage what some young teen or 20 something has plastered all over there fb page. Live and let lives my attitude.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-26-2015, 08:14 AM
 
3,279 posts, read 5,302,931 times
Reputation: 6149
I read the street photography article, and that is one man's perspective. Even he admits that people have become more wary in recent years of photographers. That is my point. People are more wary, and why? Paranoia, I say--and I don't care how many people say otherwise, I see enough to come to the conclusion that it is indeed due to paranoia. There have always been people who are camera-shy, but now you have people who are just plain paranoid, and moreover, think they have the RIGHT to DICTATE that no photo of themselves should exist anywhere without their explicit permission, when such has never been the case.

That is where this writer and I part company--he believes that you have to acknowledge this change and if street photography suffers because of it, then so be it. I, and I'm hardly alone, say otherwise, that photography has a rich and long tradition and it should be respected regardless of people becoming hysterical over nothing. That is, an art genre should not suffer just because people are becoming paranoid, because that means fear, and irrational fear at that, risks undermining decades of beautiful tradition, and it shouldn't be that way.

Regardless, I think some of you are apparently not reading, reading where I say I DON'T DO paparazzi shots of other people at close range, it's much more a thing that I see SOMETHING or a VIEW of WHATEVER, and there may happen to be people IN IT, and typically you can't even make out their face they're so small. Yes--I'm taking that photo.

"You're stealing their identity." Oh please. Maybe that's how they see things in funny old France, but I'm not in France. I'm in the USA. In the USA, it is understood--in the public, photographically-speaking, everything is fair game, and a person's photo is THEIR CREATION. One day, that law may change, but for now, thank goodness, it is what it is--in the public, it's fair game.

I have my own article I found, about a famous street photographer. (10 Things Garry Winogrand Can Teach You About Street Photography) One quote:

"However I think one thing that we can learn from Winogrand is to follow our instincts and our guts, and go for our shots. If a person is too far away, we should either run (or walk) to them and go for the shot. If we think that they may get upset for us taking the shot, we should put away those assumptions and go for the shot anyways. If we are concerned of offending people, take the shot anyways. If you feel guilty afterwards, you can always delete the photograph afterwards (or never show it to anyone else)."

Heck, I don't do ANY of that. Again, I'm just speaking of taking "overview" shots and people may happen to be in them, barely even recognizable. You're telling me I shouldn't take a photo of the Washington Monument or whatever because someone MIGHT be in there somewhere? That's what I'm saying--I'm not obligated to never photograph outdoors because people may be in there.

And spare me "upskirts," I know about those and I don't do those.

Am I saying that people have to stay indoors? That's THEIR choice. They can CHOOSE to make a big deal about nothing, or they can just accept that in the USA you're going to potentially end up in a photo and it's not a big deal, and move on with your life. I'm not stalking anyone anyway. Please. If you want to be paranoid and hole yourself up while urinating in jars the rest of your life like Howard Hughes did, YOU'RE the one acting silly.

As for a mother "protecting her child"--from WHAT? PROTECT a child from a PHOTO? Are you serious? That's silly. That photo isn't going to hurt her child. I could have stooped to her level and made a fuss about how maybe she should teach a 12 year old to not assume someone wants to be PICKED UP and to ASK next time. No. Instead, I saw it as a beautiful moment, a precious interaction, not a "violation of my child's boundaries" bunch of bologna. Stupid people can ruin the most wonderful things sometimes.

Last edited by shyguylh; 06-26-2015 at 08:30 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2015, 10:08 AM
 
12,535 posts, read 15,173,486 times
Reputation: 29088
Quote:
Originally Posted by txfriend View Post
Ha, your picture is taken 100 times everyday by complete strangers by walking down the street, at a stop sign, walking into and in any store, any neighbors surveillance camera and hundreds of other places.
Precisely why people don't like individuals snapping pictures of them at random. People are getting sick of it, and feeling like they're always being watched.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shyguylh View Post
As for a mother "protecting her child"--from WHAT? PROTECT a child from a PHOTO? Are you serious? That's silly. That photo isn't going to hurt her child. I could have stooped to her level and made a fuss about how maybe she should teach a 12 year old to not assume someone wants to be PICKED UP and to ASK next time. No. Instead, I saw it as a beautiful moment, a precious interaction, not a "violation of my child's boundaries" bunch of bologna. Stupid people can ruin the most wonderful things sometimes.
Normally, a lot of people might agree with you that your neighbor was overreacting. But with the way you've carried on in this thread, I'm inclined to think your neighbor reacted that way to you for a reason. Your posts on here present a--wait for it--unflattering picture of you.

Bottom line is that photographers with ethics ask, even if it's after the fact. Back in college, I was approached several times while sitting out in a park if someone could take my picture. Sometimes I said yes. Sometimes I said no because my gut fired that the purpose wasn't genuine.

One time a photographer snapped a photo of my high school sweetheart and me post-relationship. We were both in college at that point and had met up as friends over Christmas break, and were having a great time in Manhattan. After he took the picture he came over and introduced himself and asked if we minded that he took it. Not sure what difference it would have made because this was 1985 and he was using film, but the fact that he asked was enough to get us to say we didn't mind and to hope we ended up in an exhibit somewhere.

My father was an excellent photographer. He was chiefly an artist, and also worked in advertising, but he loved to take photos of people as references for his paintings. He had his own dark room and would develop them himself. I briefly dated a very successful photographer, one so successful he owned his own shop in an expensive part of D.C. My college sweetheart was a model, so I spent 3 years around professional photographers, as well as young photographers who needed photos to build their portfolios. My ex-SO's brother is a phenomenal amateur photographer. My degree is in journalism and as such, I had to learn the ethics of various types of photography. A friend of mine teaches photography at the university level.

I have never encountered such an ugly, entitled, defensive attitude toward photography as I have in your posts. Pretty much all of the photographers I've known would be appalled at your attitude on here.

Last edited by Lilac110; 06-26-2015 at 10:19 AM.. Reason: Grammar, girl!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2015, 10:23 AM
 
Location: The Jar
20,058 posts, read 18,261,749 times
Reputation: 37120
Some people are not photogenic, and they know it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2015, 10:31 AM
 
12,535 posts, read 15,173,486 times
Reputation: 29088
Quote:
Originally Posted by virgode View Post
Kind of a sweeping statement 300mil. FB can be filtered; isn't that correct. Not everyone posts pics of family and friends at awkard moments. If someone posts a pic of me I don't like, I ask them to remove it, in return, I offer the same respect. I would never want anyone to feel uncomfortable. I've become a photo buff and love sharing pics.
You seem a tad bit paranoid. Personally, I don't care to micromanage what some young teen or 20 something has plastered all over there fb page. Live and let lives my attitude.
I don't post photos of friends on social media, but if I did, I would send them the photo first and get their okay.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2015, 10:37 AM
 
Location: 39 20' 59"N / 75 30' 53"W
16,077 posts, read 28,497,719 times
Reputation: 18189
Quote:
Originally Posted by shyguylh View Post

As for a mother "protecting her child"--from WHAT? PROTECT a child from a PHOTO? Are you serious? That's silly. That photo isn't going to hurt her child. I could have stooped to her level and made a fuss about how maybe she should teach a 12 year old to not assume someone wants to be PICKED UP and to ASK next time. No. Instead, I saw it as a beautiful moment, a precious interaction, not a "violation of my child's boundaries" bunch of bologna. Stupid people can ruin the most wonderful things sometimes.
Indeed, the problem with taking childrens photos, people have become paranoid their kids faces will end up on some kiddie porn site, it is an issue.
In todays society everyone can be suspected and labeled a pervert. The posts you're responding to, perfect example.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2015, 10:50 AM
 
3,279 posts, read 5,302,931 times
Reputation: 6149
Quote:
Originally Posted by virgode View Post
Indeed, the problem with taking childrens photos, people have become paranoid their kids faces will end up on some kiddie porn site, it is an issue.
In todays society everyone can be suspected and labeled a pervert. The posts you're responding to, perfect example.
Indeed.

And dare I say it, when someone flips out about how their child's photo may end up in such a place, my response--so? Really, so? Is it sick that someone finds a 4 year old "hot?" Of course it is, it's very sick. However, that doesn't mean all of photography needs to stop because something like that MIGHT happen. Statistically speaking, the risk is way overblown, and even if it does happen, so what? It's not actually harming your child, not a bit. We're not talking about children locked up in the basement being made to engage in sick activities and pose for NUDE photos of them doing sick things with other children. To equate a child in a bathing suit enjoying a fountain as being analogous to that, or me taking a photo of a child holding my child as being in that realm of things, please.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2015, 02:27 PM
 
Location: SC
2,966 posts, read 5,201,335 times
Reputation: 6925
It's none of your business if they don't want a strange man taking pictures of their child.

They are the parent, and it is their right to protect their child from anything they may feel uncomfortable with.

You can keep posting 2 page dissertations about it, but it doesn't matter. You are not that child's parent.

There is nothing more to say about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2015, 05:38 PM
 
3,279 posts, read 5,302,931 times
Reputation: 6149
Quote:
Originally Posted by L0ve View Post
It's none of your business if they don't want a strange man taking pictures of their child.

They are the parent, and it is their right to protect their child from anything they may feel uncomfortable with.

You can keep posting 2 page dissertations about it, but it doesn't matter. You are not that child's parent.

There is nothing more to say about it.
Ah, but there is.

In public, anyone can take a photo of anybody, upskirts notwithstanding, and that goes for anyone.

Period.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-27-2015, 10:27 AM
 
1,242 posts, read 1,684,988 times
Reputation: 3658
I dislike being in photos and I'm not photogenic at all. However, I don't really care if a friend wants to take a photo but when it comes to public photos from strangers they can $*ck off.

Either I'll move out of the way or if I feel trapped in a photo I will turn my face away. In rare instances if I'm annoyed I will turn my face away and also flip the offender the bird. Very juvenile but it makes me happy. Frame that one.

PS the comments that ridicule people who don't like photos taken and say things like "you're no Taylor Swift, calm down" are amusing. You do realize you are not some famous photographer either right? You are just an old creepy guy who, like many crappy photographers, probably think thier photos are something special when they are mediocre at best.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Non-Romantic Relationships
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:51 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top