1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Photographer travels to South Africa to track down woman who used his pics

Discussion in 'photography, graphics & art' started by editor, Feb 13, 2017.

  1. Stanley Edwards

    Stanley Edwards 1967 Maserati Mistral.

    Having the consideration to offer people in a much worse place than yourself something for the right to profit from their image is not 'banning' street photography, nor safari photography. When do people stop becoming people?
     
    SheilaNaGig likes this.
  2. Athos

    Athos Well-Known Member

    They're both dicks, especially him. As if the old bill would give a flying fuck. He just wasted a fortune.
     
    bimble and editor like this.
  3. editor

    editor Taffus Maximus

    Because you've paid everyone who may not be too well off who appears in your photos, yes?

    I'm totally against ramming a camera in someone's face - I always show respect - and often people are more than happy to pose. If you make payment the normal thing, only the rich will be able to take photos and those without money may get into trouble from people demanding payment.

    It's all about treating people with respect and giving when you can, but this cash for photos notion as a rule is a flawed argument.
     
  4. Stanley Edwards

    Stanley Edwards 1967 Maserati Mistral.

    We are probably making argument simply for the sake of discussion here. Straying from the point of the thread and running over well trodden old ground on U75.

    Street photography without permission is fine with me. However, if you see an opportunity and think the resulting images may make you profit, or further your own goal, it is only polite to thank the subject and ask if they mind what you plan to do. It doesn't even have to be a financial thanks (however small). Simply the recognition that they created the opportunity as much as you captured the moment.

    With relevance to this thread; I can only assume the guy is a totally inconsiderate arsehole who hasn't done anyone any favours, least of all himself.

    If we are sticking to discussion, I doubt anyone here will argue against your points, or mine. It is their argument - their problem, and my own personal view is very much in favour of the woman who I see as being victimised for little, or no good reason.

    If we can make any comparison; is it really any different to people lifting photographs off the web and sticking them on their own blog unaccredited? If so, I am as guilty as anyone else. This is of course assuming the memory card was not intentionally stolen, but 'found'.
     
  5. chilango

    chilango *shrugs*

    I once went to an exhibition that consisted entirely of a "found roll" of holiday snaps.

    The artist was upfront about the provenance of the photos and that's what made the show poignant.
     
  6. tim

    tim Well-Known Member

    Most of whom are less weird as those those they wish to bereconnected with.
     
  7. Celyn

    Celyn Well-Known Member

    But didn't this woman add her watermark or whatever to the photos, claiming they were actually hers rather than "I am posting someone's else's pics I found because I like them so much"?
     
  8. Stanley Edwards

    Stanley Edwards 1967 Maserati Mistral.

    Yes. Apparently.

    Still, does that warrant the reaction. I suspect if she was a 6ft he, the twat would have stayed in Brighton.
     
    salem likes this.

Share This Page