DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> photographing children in public
Pages:  
Showing posts 26 - 50 of 106, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 06/09/2005 09:05:25 PM · #26
i always ask permission to take photow even if the kids are my friends...hey i even ask if its ok to take pictures of peoples dogs at the park....


06/09/2005 09:11:37 PM · #27
what a sad sad world...what has it come to when we can't take pictures of out kids in public places ? A recent story here was a father was filming his child in a swim carnival when security officers approached him and took him aside and asked him what he was doing ......it was nothing short of major humiliation and embarrasment in front of many people. Poor guy.
I'll quit now before I say something I shouldn't.
 06/09/2005 09:36:22 PM · #28
Imagine if someone wanted to take a photo of a child at a possible high risk landmark, while smoking in an indoor bar, while his pitbull was roaming outside without a leash :P

Edit: Of course he would be using a Sony . The horror. Awwwwww :P

Message edited by author 2005-06-09 21:37:17.
 06/09/2005 09:57:06 PM · #29
I PROTEST

06/09/2005 11:30:16 PM · #30
Originally posted by Neuferland:
I was taking pictures at the school the other day waiting for Ellie and was approached by the principal asking if I had releases from all the children and their parents that were in my shots. I told her, "Well, no because none of the children are in my shots except my own, but thank you for asking."
Deannda


I've never had a problem taking pictures at my daughters school (she's five). Mainly because for the three years she's been at the school (Head Start, Pre-K, K) I've taken over 800 pictures each year of the kids and given the school copies of every single one.

This year I hit 854 pictures and the staff got together and gave me a $50 gift card to Wal-mart to thank me for all the pictures.

Most of the time I was at activities to take pictures of my daughter and figured I might as well take pictures of everyone else too. I had a father just ask me yesterday if I'd bring him copies of the pictures of his son. I was up until 2-3 am finishing up making his copies for today was the last day of school.

Now, if I had a better camera (like the Canon OES 1Ds Mark II) I'd be even more snap happy.
06/10/2005 01:10:26 AM · #31
Hey guys....move to Asia. Parents here like their kids to be photographed, even by strangers.

Anyway, I never thought about the link between child photography and paedophilia (at least in my work). When I do take pictures of kids, I have a nagging question behind me like "what if some people think I am doing this for a bad purpose" but so far, I had never been accosted for doing so. I keep it friendly and casual. Local Photographic Societies here pay kids to medel for their members. No big deal.

I am going to the Scandinavia on July. No children portraits for me. As a matter of fact, I bought a wide-angle lens yesterday.

In the meantime...I am going out now to take more pictures of children in the neighborhood.

Manny

06/10/2005 03:00:17 AM · #32
I finally had a day where it was hotter outside then the pool my kids are taking swiming lessons at. No fog on the lens, one instructor asked who I was taking pictures of, I said my daughter. The head life guard came up afterwards and said he realised my gear was good enough to take only pictures of what I wanted, but the policy was to get permission from management to take pictures in writing.

This may seem off, but I do not care who takes pictures of my children while they are playing and doing what kids do.

I think only people with imbalances within themselves have issues with pictures being taken. When I have been in parks with my kids almost all have cameras taking pictures. Then again, I am a parent with my children, not a indavidual.

Then again, listen to the parents brag if their child ends up in the news paper.

O well. Just tape down the nipples.
 06/10/2005 03:22:28 AM · #33
Originally posted by mpemberton:
This may seem off, but I do not care who takes pictures of my children while they are playing and doing what kids do.

I agree with this. I have never heard a news report that said a child was taken or killed and it was related to the perpetrator taking pics of that child in the park. The predators are opportunists - I don't think they stalk and serveil their victims. And if I knew that my child's pic was posted on some pervert site and people were getting off on it, I would be disgusted, but no more disgusted than I am that they do it to somone else's child.

Originally posted by mpemberton:
I think only people with imbalances within themselves have issues with pictures being taken.

I don't know about that - I just think people are overly fearful.
The solution is not to hide and live in fear - we need to hunt the perverts and burn their village!


Originally posted by mpemberton:
O well. Just tape down the nipples.

I just don't know what to say about that last comment without further explanation of it.
 06/10/2005 03:43:10 AM · #34
Originally posted by kpriest:
Originally posted by mpemberton:
O well. Just tape down the nipples.

I just don't know what to say about that last comment without further explanation of it.


It was a stab at the new American policy about nipples showing on actresses in shows. Pamela Anderson was told to tape hers down in her new show, while in desperate house wives the studio spent thousands of dollars fuzzing out nipples on the actresses. Good God, if people are watching those shows just to see that or are offended by it what next.

Many young children run around the fountain in the park naked. So, the next step, as a pun, will have park wardens saying you better tape down their nipples.
 06/10/2005 03:50:47 AM · #35
Originally posted by mpemberton:
It was a stab at the new American policy about nipples showing on actresses in shows.

Ok - sorry it got by me. Good points. I will agree that the reactive policies are ridiculous.
 06/10/2005 06:53:22 AM · #36
In reply to the comments directed to me without going back to each individual one (don't have time right now)

First off, I'm probably a little more paranoid than most parents when it comes to be my children being photographed in public by strangers for a couple of reasons. Now mind you that my children have been in the paper and on TV news a few times but these are controlled situations and I had the final say if the pictures were used or not.

But my reasons are simple, one, my oldest has been approached by a strange man in public, less than a block from our home therefore my children are NEVER alone outside, do not walk to school alone and do not walk home alone. Two, I myself am a victim of sexual child abuse and while having worked through the issues, it makes me more aware of what can happen, that the saying, "Oh, that only happens to other people." is far from true and you need to be more alert to your children and their habits and emotions. Don't get me wrong, I do not coddle my children, I do not "shelter" them from the world but I do my best to insure their safety and well being while teaching them it's a real world out there, not everyone is sweet and wonderful and they have to be aware of their surroundings and use their best judgement.

This is not the same world we all grew up in (the older people here), we can no longer allow our children to run around like we used to. The same problems existed back then that do now, child molesters, kidnappings, abuse, the difference now is that we are no longer silent about it, the victims no longer have to live in shame and fear and the people who committed these crimes no longer have the power they used to. At least they shouldn't if we all stand up to them.

Deannda
Gotta go play with the horses now
 06/10/2005 09:40:14 AM · #37
Originally posted by kpriest:
I agree with this. I have never heard a news report that said a child was taken or killed and it was related to the perpetrator taking pics of that child in the park. The predators are opportunists - I don't think they stalk and serveil their victims. And if I knew that my child's pic was posted on some pervert site and people were getting off on it, I would be disgusted, but no more disgusted than I am that they do it to somone else's child.


I absolutely agree. While "child pornography" is an issue, you can't define which pictures are and which aren't because it's subjective; further, to make it a crime it should have some negative impact on society, right? The christian right would have us believe that negative impact is pedophilia, I need to see the inconclusive research that shows if you look at picture A you will do action B. Otherwise we can quote statistics all day long.
We could also might make a case that demographically those aged 65 or older contribute greatly to the number of accidents on the road...therefore take away ALL their driving licenses. It completely disgusts me that we actually have a group of people in the US pushing our government more towards theocracy. They would not; could not see Nick Ut's famous picture as anything other than a "neckid kid" or see the horror captured by such a fantastic photograph.



That shot and this conversation stirs so much emotion. I could go on and on but I need to remember that BIG BROTHER is coming, he WILL be watching. While we won't have "freedoms to," we will have "freedoms from" whatever he and his media choose to scare us with.

more info on the Nick Ut's photo: //slate.msn.com/id/1896/
 06/10/2005 10:05:58 AM · #38
Originally posted by ericsuth:
..... I need to see the inconclusive research that shows if you look at picture A you will do action B. Otherwise we can quote statistics all day long.


Ironically you chose to illustrate your point with a photograph that DID motivate many, many people who were previously on the fence about the Vietnam War, to join the anti-war movement. Photographs DO motivate action and that is one example of "in(sic)conclusive research" you wanted. Ted Bundy in an interview given days before he was executed stated that the progression through soft pornographic material to increasing more violence oriented photographs was his (and many cellmates') first steps into the dark corridor that led to acting out that visual stimulus. I would suggest you Google for that interview before you say A does not equal B.

Just trying to respond to that one statement by ericsuth. Not saying that anyone should be denied the ability to shoot pictures in a responsible way. Heck, I love to shoot street scenes. Here's one of my best with no permission from anybody. There are all ages in this shot. I would hate to think someone would think this should not have been recorded.
 06/10/2005 10:27:33 AM · #39
When I went to Coffman park to try and find the watch house, I was unfamiliar with the area and walked around the park looking for it. One of the areas I walked around was a playground. I made sure my lenscap was on and pointed my camera straight up to avoid any bad ideas (my sun hood was on so the cap might not have been visible) and I stll got dirty looks from the parents. And I'm only 17. It's gotten to the point where I almost don't want to take my camera to a public place because of the issue.
 06/10/2005 10:28:17 AM · #40
Originally posted by RonBeam:

Ironically you chose to illustrate your point with a photograph that DID motivate many, many people who were previously on the fence about the Vietnam War, to join the anti-war movement. Photographs DO motivate action and that is one example of "in(sic)conclusive research" you wanted.


You said it yourself but like so many others, you seem to want to push it to a black and white issue. Yes, photographs may motivate,influence, or have certain impacts but the degree to which they do it is rather important don't you think? Some...individuals, in seeking to influence laws and our government would have 99% of our populace restricted if something only influences 1%, and yet it's only influence, something within the individual sicko is already broken. In the end, they must be responsible for their own actions and their perceptions not the artist who may or may not influence others.

Like the argument above with older drivers...you might have us restricting those older than 65 or whatever from driving...Sound crazy? Look at how our government restricts our soldiers who can die for country but not drink alcohol in it...for the same reasons.
 06/10/2005 10:31:52 AM · #41
Originally posted by ericsuth:
...Sound crazy? Look at how our government restricts our soldiers who can die for country but not drink alcohol in it...for the same reasons.

It was only the idiocy of drafting men to "die for their country" in Viet Nam -- men who had no say in the election of their leaders -- which led to the lowering of the voting age to 18.
 06/10/2005 11:04:20 AM · #42
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by ericsuth:
...Sound crazy? Look at how our government restricts our soldiers who can die for country but not drink alcohol in it...for the same reasons.

It was only the idiocy of drafting men to "die for their country" in Viet Nam -- men who had no say in the election of their leaders -- which led to the lowering of the voting age to 18.


Regardless of who done it, 494 or 1,664 (30%) of our soldiers have died in Iraq alone without being allowed in their own country to legally have a drink of alcohol when the rest of the country can freely drink. Allowing 18 year olds to drink is consistently shot down by those that cite the number of lives they save each year, that otherwise they say might have died in alcohol-related driving incidents.
 06/10/2005 11:06:20 AM · #43
Man, I thought this thread was about taking pics of kids in public, not the draft, the war, or the drinking age.
06/10/2005 12:22:55 PM · #44
As an amaature photographer, I feel the same frustrations and indignation that many have expressed here. Banning the photoghraphing of children in public places is a huge step down a slippery slope that might lead to the banning of anything except studio photos. This half of me is horrified.

As a parent, I have a somewhat different perspective. If someone I don't know points a camera at my children, they can expect more than dirty looks from me. I confront anyone that starts snapping images of my children without permission. And I will not grant permission unless they are willing to show me a valid ID. When I've asked for ID, I've gotten 3 different kinds of response. 1 ~ They show ID and tell me they understand my caution. 2 ~ They grunt something about Nazis and wander off. 3 ~ One 'gentleman' turned white as a sheet, started shaking, and ran away.

My daughter asked me if "monsters" were real or make believe. Well, not wanting to lie to my child, I had to tell her they're all too real. And many of them carry cameras. If my caution protects my children from some pervert, I will live with the mutters and indignation of the people that think I'm being a facist. Mess with my rights as a photographer and I'll mutter about you being a Nazi... Mess with my children and I'll go ballistic all over your ...
06/10/2005 01:28:20 PM · #45
I knew there was a reason I prefer landscapes. Trees rarely complain.
 06/10/2005 02:02:29 PM · #46
After doing a Google search on the causes of pedophilia I see there are only theories, and no substantiated (with scientific research) causes. With that being the case, I would say that politicians who are attempting to enact laws prohibiting child photography in public are either trying to capitalize on the hysteria surrounding high profile cases to appear as though they are "tough" on this kind of crime, or are giving into political pressure from fearful and irate parents.

Maybe we should ban all forms of war movies for fear they may give our politicians the idea to go to war?
 06/11/2005 12:03:53 AM · #47
I would allow my kids to be photographed in public and I'm a very paranoid individual. Anything we do in public is not a problem.
06/11/2005 12:09:00 AM · #48
Originally posted by ericsuth:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by ericsuth:
...Sound crazy? Look at how our government restricts our soldiers who can die for country but not drink alcohol in it...for the same reasons.

It was only the idiocy of drafting men to "die for their country" in Viet Nam -- men who had no say in the election of their leaders -- which led to the lowering of the voting age to 18.


Regardless of who done it, 494 or 1,664 (30%) of our soldiers have died in Iraq alone without being allowed in their own country to legally have a drink of alcohol when the rest of the country can freely drink. Allowing 18 year olds to drink is consistently shot down by those that cite the number of lives they save each year, that otherwise they say might have died in alcohol-related driving incidents.

I prefer to prevent them from dying be either method.

At a rough guess, I'd say that the 30% of casualties you mention is very close to the number who've died in driving (non-combat) accidents in Iraq.
 06/11/2005 12:10:37 AM · #49
Originally posted by laurielblack:
Man, I thought this thread was about taking pics of kids in public, not the draft, the war, or the drinking age.

Sorry, I'm easily distracted by related subjects.
 06/11/2005 03:52:41 AM · #50
You know, right now there are millions of photos of children in the media including celebrity children. Anyone can photoshop them into inappropriate situations. The world is full of evil and there is no way to stop it, no matter how many bans and laws are made. Evil will always find a way. All we can do is try to reduce it,but not in a way that stops the rest of us from enjoying our freedom. Parents have to stay one step ahead by educating there children on these evils. I am a parent, I explained to my children on more than one occasion not to speak to strangers. My son was sitting on our front porch step with the door open,when a van with a man and woman stopped and tried to get him to come over to them. They may have only wanted directions,we'll never know. My son ran in and told me.They drove off, cussing. I can't get a ban on vans driving down our street. All I can do is educate my child. It could have possibly saved his life, we'll never know. I do know that it would be sad not to see photos of children anymore. Do we let the minority sick people dictate how we live in our world? The way I see it, a photographer taking a picture of a child in public is not committing a crime, it is what becomes of that photo that might make it a crime. Therefore, instead of hassling a photographer taking a photo(innocent until proven guilty), they should be hassling the people who have been caught, tried and convicted, and not coddling them in a jail that is more like a hotel. Put the fear of God in these folks, and educate the children, that's the only way to reduce the crime rate.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 05/19/2025 02:46:42 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 05/19/2025 02:46:42 AM EDT.