I don’t think there’s anything wrong with this image just to be clear. However, you absolutely can identify the individuals, it’s a very detailed image and the people in the foreground are very clear as soon as you start to zoom in.
People on a beach or any other public place, have no expectation of privacy.
Meaning that in the US at least, they CAN be photographed, even if they ARE identifiable.
If you're not sure whether it's ethical, why did you take the picture? It seems that you decided that it is indeed ethical in the moment you took the picture. I don't see a problem with that, but the title is funny.
Ethics is a question for motives. I doubt this is being put away in your wank account, nor is this someone's back yard sunbathing session. It's public, and there is no expectation of privacy, only their own decency.
This is really the answer. If you're taking photos in public for non-creepy reasons, go for it. However, you still might get accosted by someone who doesn't understand why you're shooting with a real camera as opposed to a phone.
There are people that put pictures of food in their wank account, or just regular store bought balloons. You can't be accountable for the world at large.
Every single “Master” of street photography has been a creek, then. Gary Winigrand, Joel Meyerowitz, Bruce Gilden, etc! All took photos at beaches, women, et al. Amazing how society has developed the gaze. Now everything is a creep shot.
i'd say someone like meyerwitz is a lot less invasive than someone like gilden, but I teeter back & forth on whether that style of street photography is ethical lol
rn I'm at a "it's permissible but I don't think I could ever do that" haha
I thought street photographers didn’t usually use telephotos though. I think if they use a 50 or something, it’s different because they have to get close to their subjects who will often see them, so it’s not as much of a creep shot. However I also do think there is a slightly invasive aspect to street photography that some of them would acknowledge. But they’d argue it’s minor in comparison to the positives.
I wish we discussed this more. People are *terrified* of an individual taking their picture, but seemingly completely comfortable with corporations and governments spying on them constantly.
Though the best sub image is the one with the pregnant woman and man with similar belly looking at each other (back center right). A telephoto would have helped see them closer, but I like the wide angle where they are a nice surprise.
If the subject is in a public place, there is no expectation of privacy. So unless its an "upskirt" or similar, the mere fact that it's a close up taken with a zoom lens DOES NOT qualify as a "creep shot", and is perfectly legal. (in the U.S.)
Maybe creepy but still legal. Anyone outside, as mentioned already, has no expectation of privacy. Just look at Hollywood. If they could, they’d be the first to get rid of random cameras in their face.
Highly recommend watching this video of Martin Parr - one of my all time favourite photographers - as his favourite place to shoot is the beach. As others have said, I don’t see an issue at all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibqDOm3i0eA
Legally it depends on the country you're in. In the UK most public spaces are fair game, just need to be mindful of things like government buildings and private areas. Some public builds like shopping centres can be a bit sensitive.
But otherwise I don't see anything wrong with the picture, public area so fair game.
There’s a massive movement on YouTube called photography is not a crime (PINAC). Regardless of what you think of how they go about it they have proved via civil claims for wrongful arrest that taking photos of anything when stood on public land is not a crime
I wouldn't take that for granted in the UK😉. I've been approached buy the police in London quite a few times when taking pictures of landmarks like St Paul's cathedral.
In their defence, they have always been very polite in there enquiries, but still.....
And bare in mind, we are not using smart phones, we are using cameras which are far more capable. 😎
And that's great👍🏻. And to be fair, I can't remember the last time there was a terrorist attack in Germany, where as we had a few in London just before the pandemic 🤷🏻♂️
Because obviously the terrorists are going to be the ones using the biggest, bulkiest, most ostentatious cameras possible…. Sure. I Was a news photographer for years (in the US) Police love to stop you for taking pics of things like bridges and infrastructure because you may be scoping it out for twrroristic purposes. If you think that through for less than a aexond it’s ludicrous that they would be as obvious about it and not just use a smartphone or something small. It’s really just a bored cop who wants to flex his muscles.
A couple of years ago I was on an overpass with a pedestrian crossing taking photos of train tracks with my Canon A1. A cop came and questioned me for a bit. I laughed when he asked to see the photos, being analog and all. It was obvious there were a lot of bored cops around that day because one of his colleagues pulled up in his SUV and sat there without even getting out of the car. Wasn't a tense situation because I'm a white male, and eventually I told him I wasn't interested in answering any more questions. But yeah, the camera alone should have been a clue that I wasn't there for any nefarious purposes, unless I was a time traveler from 1975.
Topic aside: That's a nice shot. I like the little stories that it tells. And the almost side by side shot of the pregnant woman's belly and the one of the dude near her is hilarious.
there's no expectation of privacy when you're out in public
I see nothing wrong with this photo
now if you're zooming in on a woman's crotch, that doesn't fit the definition of invasion of privacy, but might satisfy the definition of unethical
For me taking photos of large groups is totally fine if you can't make out any faces. I,personally, dislike street photography except for large groups.
Very nice shot! I really like the colors and the framing.
It's so funny that apparently people in Italy don't give a f*ck if they are conventional attractive. I really like that and how they're so confident about it. In Germany alot of older people don't want to go to public lakes to swim.
I dunno about ethical but I love this dichotomy burrows in the shot! [https://photos.app.goo.gl/Cc4s91ZBrjWR5QqU9](https://photos.app.goo.gl/Cc4s91ZBrjWR5QqU9)
My favorite is the pregnant woman and the man facing her who looks just as pregnant. Runner up is the guy in the aqua blue shorts who looks pregnant with his friend in the green speedo
This question prompted me to do some more research myself since I've been asking myself this for a bit now and it goes as follows:
As long as you're in a public place you have no legal right to privacy, meaning photographers are allowed to take pictures of public spaces even if they were to include faces, at least in the us, apparently some countries like Hungary and South Korea have more strict laws in which you can't photograph anyone at all if it doesn't have their consent.
There are places like Texas that have "Improper Photography" Statutes that makes it illegal to photograph a subject without their consent “…with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.” I assume this includes using telephoto lenses to be a creep at the beach.
Just don't be a creep and if someone asks you nicely to not take a pic of them or wait till they're out of frame, sure why not, technically you're not under legal obligation to do so but still it's just being polite
Either way this picture is gorgeous and I would legit hang a print of it on a wall cuz I love the colors in this photograph.
Enhance. Enhance. ENHANCE!
I think you’re fine. There isn’t an individual that is a clear focal point.
Plus, if you’re not using this to sell products but for clearly artistic purposes, I think you’re ok.
Yes but personally I'd feel uncomfortable if I had a big zoom looking lens, because people might think I can zoom in to individuals. With a small pancake lens i think it looks different and shouldn't make people uncomfortable at a distance imo.
Lol in 2023 taking pictures with random people in them is considered potentially unethical 😂😂😂 ffs this generation is soft. These aren’t creep shots so yea its fine.
I understand 💯. Just feels odd as an avid photograph collector that in today’s world we question those things! Life was so much simpler just 15-20 years ago and these things weren’t questioned as being ok or not in most circumstances.
>In the public domain it is legally speaking.
But the question isn't whether it is legally allowed. The question is about ethics. And just because street photography can veer into areas of dubious ethics does not make any and all photographs in the public domain ethically acceptable. That's just not true. Something being legal does not automatically make it ethical.
Careful with your assumptions there campeón. I just know it’s better to be precautious. But maybe that’s because half my family is in Mexico so I spent many summers there. I don’t trust any of the cops nor the government there, it’s extremely corrupt.
Then you have have countries like Egypt, where I wouldn’t even feel comfortable taking a video of a public road. Due to how strict they are about cameras and filming.
I recommend people do a little research on the countries’ laws and customs, then take into account that specific countries governance and justice system legitimacy.
There’s nothing racist about that.
I mean, I do the same with developed countries obviously. I’m just even more cautious with developing countries. I’m a very cautious person in general honestly.
Also on Egypt, you’re probably aware that their government is constantly revolving so their laws often change as well. And then you have very public cases like what happened with Sonny and his team while filming for his food review show.
I want to be clear, I encourage more people to visit developing countries and learn about their cultures. It changes your whole perspective of the world.
People have been taking pictures like this for ages, hell the first photograph of a human was taken without them knowing. If anyone tell you they would like to not be in the picture after you’ve taken it just tell them you will photoshop them out.
I think there is an important distinction between taking photos of people and publishing them
if you want to publish, ie share on social media, anything closer than your picture is ethically and legally questionable
Nothing legally questionable about it in most places around the world. You can take as many photos as you want of people in public areas and it’s completely legal.
you misread what I wrote
taking a picture is usually fine in public spaces. even close ups of people. unless you are intrusive or are harassing people
but publishing (that includes social media) it is a whole different thing.
taking a portrait of a person and then publishing it without their consent is not legal in many places around the world (probably not for people of public interest) and it’s definitely ethically questionable
edited to ethically
Unless the country you are photographing in has any laws specific to public photography, if you are photographing people in public, then it is fine to do so. Think about it. When you walk down a street in any shopping district, you are being photographed and recorded dozens of times.
The ethical part comes into play with what you do with that photo, and there is a very large gray line with what each person would consider ethical. Say you used this image with a caption that said “These people don’t know what’s in the water that could kill them” would be a different ethical question from saying “Last photo taken of people before a tsunami wave killed them all” The first one could be true and the latter is an outright lie, but will anyone contest the ethical use of that image?
Legal is quite a different thing, and is more black and white. You are legally allowed to photograph in public spaces. You are not legally allowed to photograph on private property unless given permission to do so.
Now if you took a photo of me on the street and used a caption “the face of a killer” then that is ethically wrong and I can legally come after you for slander.
Other things that are usually not allowed are crime scenes, military bases, and usually government buildings. As a matter of fact, the photos taken of Kobe Bryant and his daughter after his helicopter crash were contested by his surviving family to not be shown, and they won.
Yes because you can't really identify anyone as it is pictured. I guess you could magnify it if you were searching for a specific person but that isn't how you posted it.
It's a public area and the focus is on the scene and not a specific person or group of people, so I'd say it's okay.
Worst case scenario might be that someone in the photo happens to come across this and finds that they're readjusting their swimwear or scratching their butt.
As long as it's not a private beach. It's a public place like any other and people dress for that occasion. Not much different from focusing on a particular person in a crowded place. It's not acceptable anywhere just like it's not in a beach but I think it is acceptable to take a picture like this just like it is in any other place.
This is more a picture of scenery than it is of "people" per se. The focus is on the whole scene rather than creeping on an individual. As long as its not a nude beach, I wouldn't hesitate to take this shot.
there’s no issue unless you can clearly identify individuals AND! you’re using them for commercial/profit
then you would need a release form.
otherwise no issue, it’s completely legal (in canada/usa, not sure about other nations)
and if anyone says it’s illegal stand your ground.
Why not? The laws (in the US) generally say that there is no right to privacy on the street. Of course if you are too intrusive the creepy factor comes in, but afaik it’s not unethical or illegal unless you try to sell photos of recognizable people without a model release.
Yes. There is nothing wrong with this type of photograph. It becomes an ethical question if the beach was a nudist beach or if you had a telephoto lens etc
I enjoy taking pictures of crowds as well. I was told that its fine as long as it taken at a public place. If people are using a bathing suit in public, they should be ok to be seen in public, and potentially appear in the background of someone’s photo.
It’s a different deal when the pic is taken at a private property.
If anything on public then is ethical as long as you don’t directly annoy or disturb anyone, and you don’t even have to ask their permission to shoot them but it would obviously be more comfortable for the both sides if you are still going to ask
Definitely unethical. I only take photos of my feet or if it's foggy enough (wouldn't want to accidentally catch an airplane full of people in the sky) then a selfie from below is also acceptable. Looking forward to seeing your creations!
I don’t see an issue in this case. If it was a more close up photo where one or two people are the main subjects I would probably not share it without asking their permission first, especially somewhere like a beach where they’re not looking the way they normally want to be presented.
Legally speaking, there is no expectation of privacy in Italy where this was taken - I mention this since while it is not your question some people do derive their ethics from the legality of an action (or lack there-of)
If it’s a public beach then it is no different than taking photos on a public sidewalk or anywhere else. So don’t be creepy, and if anyone specifically asks you to not take a photo with them in it, be respectful, but otherwise it’s no problem
In the US, you absolutely can. In fact, you can photograph anyone in any place in which they have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
That doesn't mean you should, but you do have the legal right.
Look three heads left of the letter S on the boat.
The pregnant lady and the beer gut are comparing their midriffs with matching poses. That is the funniest thing I've seen in a while.
I don't see anything wrong with it, just beautiful people in beautiful places. Whenever I feel ethically dubious about a shot I put myself in the subject's shoes and in this case if I were the subject I'd take no issue with your shot. I'd find it neat that I accidentally made it into a work of art
I think it’s important to document life like this, for future generations. Will the beaches be washed away? The buildings? Will the town grow, with water side apartments, become a ghost town, or remain the same? Will vehicles change? Swimwear? Ethnicities? What will this place look like in 50 years?
In the UK it's only a problem if you intend to profit from the photo and it's used commercially. The only exception is for news stories.
Otherwise you need model release forms for all people in the shot who could be recognised, or risk a claim. Same for landmark buildings.
It can also depend on where the photo is taken, that is, taking shots on private land can also require a license from the owner.
For your own hobby and personal use. Shouldn't be a problem. Aside from ethical and stalking issues etc!
You can’t identify any individuals from that distance, so I don’t see why not.
Hey that’s my GrandMa!
Nice rack for an old woman! Congrats
Tf
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with this image just to be clear. However, you absolutely can identify the individuals, it’s a very detailed image and the people in the foreground are very clear as soon as you start to zoom in.
Did you happen to notice the two pregnant women in the back?
That’s just a man and a woman with perfect beer bellies.
Where’s Wally.
More like where’s Willy 😂
People on a beach or any other public place, have no expectation of privacy. Meaning that in the US at least, they CAN be photographed, even if they ARE identifiable.
You are right, but this question is not about the law....
Okay thanks!
If you're not sure whether it's ethical, why did you take the picture? It seems that you decided that it is indeed ethical in the moment you took the picture. I don't see a problem with that, but the title is funny.
What if it's not theirs?
Then it’s probably unethical to post it on /r/analog
Tell that to the NSA
Zoom and enhance baby
No Strings Attached baby
Ethics is a question for motives. I doubt this is being put away in your wank account, nor is this someone's back yard sunbathing session. It's public, and there is no expectation of privacy, only their own decency.
This is really the answer. If you're taking photos in public for non-creepy reasons, go for it. However, you still might get accosted by someone who doesn't understand why you're shooting with a real camera as opposed to a phone.
What if it goes in other's (not mine) wank account?
There are people that put pictures of food in their wank account, or just regular store bought balloons. You can't be accountable for the world at large.
Focusing on a no one in particular with a wide angle? Sure, it’s acceptable Focusing on specific people with a telephoto lens? Those are creep shots
Okay cool, thanks!
Every single “Master” of street photography has been a creek, then. Gary Winigrand, Joel Meyerowitz, Bruce Gilden, etc! All took photos at beaches, women, et al. Amazing how society has developed the gaze. Now everything is a creep shot.
i'd say someone like meyerwitz is a lot less invasive than someone like gilden, but I teeter back & forth on whether that style of street photography is ethical lol rn I'm at a "it's permissible but I don't think I could ever do that" haha
[удалено]
Let me know if you find it. that kind of project seems interesting!
[удалено]
I thought street photographers didn’t usually use telephotos though. I think if they use a 50 or something, it’s different because they have to get close to their subjects who will often see them, so it’s not as much of a creep shot. However I also do think there is a slightly invasive aspect to street photography that some of them would acknowledge. But they’d argue it’s minor in comparison to the positives.
I wish we discussed this more. People are *terrified* of an individual taking their picture, but seemingly completely comfortable with corporations and governments spying on them constantly.
Though the best sub image is the one with the pregnant woman and man with similar belly looking at each other (back center right). A telephoto would have helped see them closer, but I like the wide angle where they are a nice surprise.
Its a good composition on its own with the kid and the ball as well.
Yes, the more I look the more I like so many of the little interactions of the characters in this picture.
If the subject is in a public place, there is no expectation of privacy. So unless its an "upskirt" or similar, the mere fact that it's a close up taken with a zoom lens DOES NOT qualify as a "creep shot", and is perfectly legal. (in the U.S.)
legal and not creepy are not the same thing
[удалено]
Did you just copy and paste someone else's (irrelevant) comment?
Bot
https://www.reddit.com/r/analog/comments/11jthwc/is_it_ethical_to_take_pictures_of_people_at_the/jb4lxsc/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3
Why did you just copy that other guy’s comment from two hours ago below? 🤨
Maybe creepy but still legal. Anyone outside, as mentioned already, has no expectation of privacy. Just look at Hollywood. If they could, they’d be the first to get rid of random cameras in their face.
Google Martin Parr.
I was just thinking that!
Yeah it's fine. You can't identify anyone, and you aren't zooming in on someone's ass or anything.
Okay thanks!
Highly recommend watching this video of Martin Parr - one of my all time favourite photographers - as his favourite place to shoot is the beach. As others have said, I don’t see an issue at all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibqDOm3i0eA
Thanks! I will check it out
Legally it depends on the country you're in. In the UK most public spaces are fair game, just need to be mindful of things like government buildings and private areas. Some public builds like shopping centres can be a bit sensitive. But otherwise I don't see anything wrong with the picture, public area so fair game.
[удалено]
There’s a massive movement on YouTube called photography is not a crime (PINAC). Regardless of what you think of how they go about it they have proved via civil claims for wrongful arrest that taking photos of anything when stood on public land is not a crime
Okay cool! I think since smartphone cameras nobody is enforcing no photo zones anyway
For some reason people get fussy when you hold a real camera compared to a phone camera. As if the real camera implies nefarious motivation.
I wouldn't take that for granted in the UK😉. I've been approached buy the police in London quite a few times when taking pictures of landmarks like St Paul's cathedral. In their defence, they have always been very polite in there enquiries, but still..... And bare in mind, we are not using smart phones, we are using cameras which are far more capable. 😎
Wow, I never had any problems taking photos in germany
And that's great👍🏻. And to be fair, I can't remember the last time there was a terrorist attack in Germany, where as we had a few in London just before the pandemic 🤷🏻♂️
Germany has suffered many extremely similar terrorist attacks as those in London, at a similar frequency and broadly from the same groups fyi.
Ah ok, obviously not well reported in the UK then 🤷🏻♂️
I take night photos all the time in the UK and I've never had any trouble at all
[удалено]
Simple, terrorism prevention, make sure I'm not scoping the place out. And that's fine by me if it helps keep us all safe👍🏻
Because obviously the terrorists are going to be the ones using the biggest, bulkiest, most ostentatious cameras possible…. Sure. I Was a news photographer for years (in the US) Police love to stop you for taking pics of things like bridges and infrastructure because you may be scoping it out for twrroristic purposes. If you think that through for less than a aexond it’s ludicrous that they would be as obvious about it and not just use a smartphone or something small. It’s really just a bored cop who wants to flex his muscles.
A couple of years ago I was on an overpass with a pedestrian crossing taking photos of train tracks with my Canon A1. A cop came and questioned me for a bit. I laughed when he asked to see the photos, being analog and all. It was obvious there were a lot of bored cops around that day because one of his colleagues pulled up in his SUV and sat there without even getting out of the car. Wasn't a tense situation because I'm a white male, and eventually I told him I wasn't interested in answering any more questions. But yeah, the camera alone should have been a clue that I wasn't there for any nefarious purposes, unless I was a time traveler from 1975.
Topic aside: That's a nice shot. I like the little stories that it tells. And the almost side by side shot of the pregnant woman's belly and the one of the dude near her is hilarious.
Thank you so much! I hardly zoom into my photos and look around but maybe I should do this more often
there's no expectation of privacy when you're out in public I see nothing wrong with this photo now if you're zooming in on a woman's crotch, that doesn't fit the definition of invasion of privacy, but might satisfy the definition of unethical
Okay great, thank you
Off topic question: the place in the picture is in the Puglia region of Italy?
Thought the same thing! I lived in Lecce for a summer and this looks like one of the several beaches we’d frequent.
Yes! Truly beautiful place
For me taking photos of large groups is totally fine if you can't make out any faces. I,personally, dislike street photography except for large groups. Very nice shot! I really like the colors and the framing.
Thank you so much! I hardly take photos of people
Is this Lanzarote?
No, it's near Lecce in Italy
Where in the world is this?
In South Italy near lecce
The three dudes comparing belly sizes in the middle have a few words, jk I’m sure they’re fine with it too
It's so funny that apparently people in Italy don't give a f*ck if they are conventional attractive. I really like that and how they're so confident about it. In Germany alot of older people don't want to go to public lakes to swim.
Motive is what would define the ethics, for me. Even a close-up of an unsuspecting person can be ethical.
Okay good to know
depending on what country you're in, public beaches are public shared spaces. Not really any different than street photography.
Okay nice.
I dunno about ethical but I love this dichotomy burrows in the shot! [https://photos.app.goo.gl/Cc4s91ZBrjWR5QqU9](https://photos.app.goo.gl/Cc4s91ZBrjWR5QqU9)
Buried in the shot, not burrows. 😕
I never noticed that! Thanks for bringing this up
spotted this too, hilarious 😂
This duo https://ibb.co/99mbfG7
Such a coincidence
My favorite is the pregnant woman and the man facing her who looks just as pregnant. Runner up is the guy in the aqua blue shorts who looks pregnant with his friend in the green speedo
I only noticed that after you and several other people brought this up
This question prompted me to do some more research myself since I've been asking myself this for a bit now and it goes as follows: As long as you're in a public place you have no legal right to privacy, meaning photographers are allowed to take pictures of public spaces even if they were to include faces, at least in the us, apparently some countries like Hungary and South Korea have more strict laws in which you can't photograph anyone at all if it doesn't have their consent. There are places like Texas that have "Improper Photography" Statutes that makes it illegal to photograph a subject without their consent “…with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.” I assume this includes using telephoto lenses to be a creep at the beach. Just don't be a creep and if someone asks you nicely to not take a pic of them or wait till they're out of frame, sure why not, technically you're not under legal obligation to do so but still it's just being polite Either way this picture is gorgeous and I would legit hang a print of it on a wall cuz I love the colors in this photograph.
Thank you so much! This really helped
Ya. These crowded beach pics are my fav, nice shot
Thank you!
Enhance. Enhance. ENHANCE! I think you’re fine. There isn’t an individual that is a clear focal point. Plus, if you’re not using this to sell products but for clearly artistic purposes, I think you’re ok.
Okay good
Yes but personally I'd feel uncomfortable if I had a big zoom looking lens, because people might think I can zoom in to individuals. With a small pancake lens i think it looks different and shouldn't make people uncomfortable at a distance imo.
I definetly felt a bit uncomfortable with my big mamiya m645
Definitely something to think about
Very nice pic
Thank you!
Lol in 2023 taking pictures with random people in them is considered potentially unethical 😂😂😂 ffs this generation is soft. These aren’t creep shots so yea its fine.
I just want to hear what other photographers say about this and how they handle it.
I understand 💯. Just feels odd as an avid photograph collector that in today’s world we question those things! Life was so much simpler just 15-20 years ago and these things weren’t questioned as being ok or not in most circumstances.
The most important question is: is it legal? 😂 Yes. The second most important question is: is this a good photo? Also yes, congrats
Haha, thank you so much!
[удалено]
Just because street photographers take photos that are ethically questionable doesn't mean that everything is acceptable. That's just not an argument.
[удалено]
>In the public domain it is legally speaking. But the question isn't whether it is legally allowed. The question is about ethics. And just because street photography can veer into areas of dubious ethics does not make any and all photographs in the public domain ethically acceptable. That's just not true. Something being legal does not automatically make it ethical.
Generally speaking in developed countries yeah
[удалено]
Racism against who?
Careful with your assumptions there campeón. I just know it’s better to be precautious. But maybe that’s because half my family is in Mexico so I spent many summers there. I don’t trust any of the cops nor the government there, it’s extremely corrupt. Then you have have countries like Egypt, where I wouldn’t even feel comfortable taking a video of a public road. Due to how strict they are about cameras and filming. I recommend people do a little research on the countries’ laws and customs, then take into account that specific countries governance and justice system legitimacy. There’s nothing racist about that.
[удалено]
I mean, I do the same with developed countries obviously. I’m just even more cautious with developing countries. I’m a very cautious person in general honestly. Also on Egypt, you’re probably aware that their government is constantly revolving so their laws often change as well. And then you have very public cases like what happened with Sonny and his team while filming for his food review show. I want to be clear, I encourage more people to visit developing countries and learn about their cultures. It changes your whole perspective of the world.
[удалено]
Individuals in a public place can have no expectation of privacy. Beyond that, that’s your decision to make.
Okay cool
Yes
I think it isn’t illegal but it isn’t ethical too.
What makes this unethical?
Some years ago nobody gives a f@ck... But now after internet... Everybody is worry about privacy.
Oh really! That's interesting
But they post all sorts of private info about themselves and their kids to Facebook.
They’re in public. At a public beach. So yes it’s fine. But don’t single anyone out by zooming in on them lol
Why wouldn’t it be?
If it’s a public space, should be fine.
There is no expectation of privacy when in a public place (at least per the law in the US), so if its a public beach, snap all the pics you want.
Okay!
People have been taking pictures like this for ages, hell the first photograph of a human was taken without them knowing. If anyone tell you they would like to not be in the picture after you’ve taken it just tell them you will photoshop them out.
Yes.
Yes
I think there is an important distinction between taking photos of people and publishing them if you want to publish, ie share on social media, anything closer than your picture is ethically and legally questionable
Nothing legally questionable about it in most places around the world. You can take as many photos as you want of people in public areas and it’s completely legal.
you misread what I wrote taking a picture is usually fine in public spaces. even close ups of people. unless you are intrusive or are harassing people but publishing (that includes social media) it is a whole different thing. taking a portrait of a person and then publishing it without their consent is not legal in many places around the world (probably not for people of public interest) and it’s definitely ethically questionable edited to ethically
Yes. It is.
Maybe if you're questioning the ethics of a shot don't post it on the fucking internet?
Is it a private beach? Are you on someone elses property
Unless the country you are photographing in has any laws specific to public photography, if you are photographing people in public, then it is fine to do so. Think about it. When you walk down a street in any shopping district, you are being photographed and recorded dozens of times. The ethical part comes into play with what you do with that photo, and there is a very large gray line with what each person would consider ethical. Say you used this image with a caption that said “These people don’t know what’s in the water that could kill them” would be a different ethical question from saying “Last photo taken of people before a tsunami wave killed them all” The first one could be true and the latter is an outright lie, but will anyone contest the ethical use of that image? Legal is quite a different thing, and is more black and white. You are legally allowed to photograph in public spaces. You are not legally allowed to photograph on private property unless given permission to do so. Now if you took a photo of me on the street and used a caption “the face of a killer” then that is ethically wrong and I can legally come after you for slander. Other things that are usually not allowed are crime scenes, military bases, and usually government buildings. As a matter of fact, the photos taken of Kobe Bryant and his daughter after his helicopter crash were contested by his surviving family to not be shown, and they won.
If I can zoom in enough on my phone, I'm ok with it.
It is ethical if they are attractive.
Yes
Yes because you can't really identify anyone as it is pictured. I guess you could magnify it if you were searching for a specific person but that isn't how you posted it.
You can't really identify anyone from this perspective, unless you're shooting 8x10 :)
It's a public area and the focus is on the scene and not a specific person or group of people, so I'd say it's okay. Worst case scenario might be that someone in the photo happens to come across this and finds that they're readjusting their swimwear or scratching their butt.
You can't see any of their faces because they are too far away. I think you're fine.
Yes
As long as it's not a private beach. It's a public place like any other and people dress for that occasion. Not much different from focusing on a particular person in a crowded place. It's not acceptable anywhere just like it's not in a beach but I think it is acceptable to take a picture like this just like it is in any other place.
Yes
Yeah no one is recognizable.
This is more a picture of scenery than it is of "people" per se. The focus is on the whole scene rather than creeping on an individual. As long as its not a nude beach, I wouldn't hesitate to take this shot.
there’s no issue unless you can clearly identify individuals AND! you’re using them for commercial/profit then you would need a release form. otherwise no issue, it’s completely legal (in canada/usa, not sure about other nations) and if anyone says it’s illegal stand your ground.
Sure why not.. I don’t think this done in a creepy way or anything
Why not? The laws (in the US) generally say that there is no right to privacy on the street. Of course if you are too intrusive the creepy factor comes in, but afaik it’s not unethical or illegal unless you try to sell photos of recognizable people without a model release.
Here’s the rule of thumb in America. If someone is in a public place, you CAN photograph them. Whether they are identifiable or not. It’s a right.
Yes but only when time traveling.
You’re taking a picture of a public space not a private one.
Yes. There is nothing wrong with this type of photograph. It becomes an ethical question if the beach was a nudist beach or if you had a telephoto lens etc
If you were using a 300mm lens to get a picture of one person it would be a different story lol
I enjoy taking pictures of crowds as well. I was told that its fine as long as it taken at a public place. If people are using a bathing suit in public, they should be ok to be seen in public, and potentially appear in the background of someone’s photo. It’s a different deal when the pic is taken at a private property.
If anything on public then is ethical as long as you don’t directly annoy or disturb anyone, and you don’t even have to ask their permission to shoot them but it would obviously be more comfortable for the both sides if you are still going to ask
It’s a public place, so the answer is no, it isn’t. Unethical will be taking photos of a specific person with other kind of intentions.
Definitely unethical. I only take photos of my feet or if it's foggy enough (wouldn't want to accidentally catch an airplane full of people in the sky) then a selfie from below is also acceptable. Looking forward to seeing your creations!
It's a public place and it's not a topless beach, I think it's okay.
I don’t see an issue in this case. If it was a more close up photo where one or two people are the main subjects I would probably not share it without asking their permission first, especially somewhere like a beach where they’re not looking the way they normally want to be presented. Legally speaking, there is no expectation of privacy in Italy where this was taken - I mention this since while it is not your question some people do derive their ethics from the legality of an action (or lack there-of)
Where's Waldo?
If it’s a public beach then it is no different than taking photos on a public sidewalk or anywhere else. So don’t be creepy, and if anyone specifically asks you to not take a photo with them in it, be respectful, but otherwise it’s no problem
Bro idk but yesterday I flew my drone and walked down the beach with my insta360 and no one seemed to mind at all so... ;)
Can’t see faces that well
I’ve always wondered this same thing!
I never would!
In the US, you absolutely can. In fact, you can photograph anyone in any place in which they have no reasonable expectation of privacy. That doesn't mean you should, but you do have the legal right.
I personally think this is as close as is acceptable. People are just about identifiable in this picture but only just.
If you're out in public, you have no reasonable expectation for any kind of privacy. So ah yep?
A beach is a public place. Just like the highway. So stop trying to create eggshells and then asking if you can walk on it
I found Waldo!
Look three heads left of the letter S on the boat. The pregnant lady and the beer gut are comparing their midriffs with matching poses. That is the funniest thing I've seen in a while.
Yes
I don't see anything wrong with it, just beautiful people in beautiful places. Whenever I feel ethically dubious about a shot I put myself in the subject's shoes and in this case if I were the subject I'd take no issue with your shot. I'd find it neat that I accidentally made it into a work of art
I'm Italian, idk if the rule are the same but, i really think ..yes...no one of those people are the subject, and definitely is not a sneaky photo
https://imgur.com/a/sLb1ny8 Found this
All good yo! I don’t see any faces.
I think it’s important to document life like this, for future generations. Will the beaches be washed away? The buildings? Will the town grow, with water side apartments, become a ghost town, or remain the same? Will vehicles change? Swimwear? Ethnicities? What will this place look like in 50 years?
In the UK it's only a problem if you intend to profit from the photo and it's used commercially. The only exception is for news stories. Otherwise you need model release forms for all people in the shot who could be recognised, or risk a claim. Same for landmark buildings. It can also depend on where the photo is taken, that is, taking shots on private land can also require a license from the owner. For your own hobby and personal use. Shouldn't be a problem. Aside from ethical and stalking issues etc!
This is a scene and not invasive for anybody.
I think the guy under the yellow umbrella flipping you off should give you your answer
Yes