Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Clix Pix

macrumors Core
Original poster
Did these people (presumably strangers to you) who were casually going about their business of shopping in that store give you permission (i.e., sign a "model release") to take one or more photographs of them and were they made aware that the photo(s) would wind up on at least one very public internet site? And for that matter, does the store itself have a policy regarding people taking photos in it?
 
  • Sad
Reactions: bondr006

r.harris1

macrumors 68020
Feb 20, 2012
2,210
12,757
Denver, Colorado, USA
Did these people (presumably strangers to you) who were casually going about their business of shopping in that store give you permission (i.e., sign a "model release") to take one or more photographs of them and were they made aware that the photo(s) would wind up on at least one very public internet site? And for that matter, does the store itself have a policy regarding people taking photos in it?
Is there a specific law you’re thinking of here you can point me to? Most US states are pretty permissive, especially with non-commercial use. I occasionally photograph people on the street, in bars, and other public places, as do a fair number of people on this and many, many other forums. It’s a whole genre of photography :) . If I were to do a full-on portrait where it’s obvious, I’d be polite and ask. I also wouldn’t think a big box store is going to care too much, since people photograph stuff in them all the time (product images to send to their spouse or partner to make sure they’re getting the right thing, for example).
 

sparksd

macrumors G3
Jun 7, 2015
9,989
34,241
Seattle WA
Is there a specific law you’re thinking of here you can point me to? Most US states are pretty permissive, especially with non-commercial use. I occasionally photograph people on the street, in bars, and other public places, as do a fair number of people on this and many, many other forums. It’s a whole genre of photography :) . If I were to do a full-on portrait where it’s obvious, I’d be polite and ask. I also wouldn’t think a big box store is going to care too much, since people photograph stuff in them all the time (product images to send to their spouse or partner to make sure they’re getting the right thing, for example).
I believe that it is legal in any state to take pictures in any public area, including property that is open to the public (like a store) unless there is a posted restriction on photography on the premises.

https://www.institute-of-photography.com/your-rights-as-a-photographer/

https://lifehacker.com/know-your-rights-photography-in-public-5912250
 

bondr006

macrumors 68030
Jun 8, 2010
2,902
16,819
Cary, NC - My Name is Rob Bond
Did these people (presumably strangers to you) who were casually going about their business of shopping in that store give you permission (i.e., sign a "model release") to take one or more photographs of them and were they made aware that the photo(s) would wind up on at least one very public internet site? And for that matter, does the store itself have a policy regarding people taking photos in it?
Unless the store has posted signs or rules against it, you can take pictures in a retail store. If an employee of the store asks you not to take photos, then you have to stop. Just like in a public setting, there are no laws against taking photos, even if there are people in it. If you are taking a picture with a person being the express subject of the photo, you may want to ask them if they mind, but in a public area, there are no laws requiring you do so.

Take it easy Clix. @mollyc is an adult whom I am very sure is familiar with photography etiquette.
 
Last edited:

mollyc

macrumors G3
Aug 18, 2016
8,064
50,727
Did these people (presumably strangers to you) who were casually going about their business of shopping in that store give you permission (i.e., sign a "model release") to take one or more photographs of them and were they made aware that the photo(s) would wind up on at least one very public internet site? And for that matter, does the store itself have a policy regarding people taking photos in it?

Is there a specific law you’re thinking of here you can point me to? Most US states are pretty permissive, especially with non-commercial use. I occasionally photograph people on the street, in bars, and other public places, as do a fair number of people on this and many, many other forums. It’s a whole genre of photography :) . If I were to do a full-on portrait where it’s obvious, I’d be polite and ask. I also wouldn’t think a big box store is going to care too much, since people photograph stuff in them all the time (product images to send to their spouse or partner to make sure they’re getting the right thing, for example).

I believe that it is legal in any state to take pictures in any public area, including property that is open to the public (like a store) unless there is a posted restriction on photography on the premises.

https://www.institute-of-photography.com/your-rights-as-a-photographer/

https://lifehacker.com/know-your-rights-photography-in-public-5912250

Beautiful shot Molly! Is this Costco's or Sam's? My wife and I just spent a few hundred $$(easy to do) at a very crowded Costco's yesterday afternoon.

Unless the store has posted signs or rules against it, you can take pictures in a retail store. If an employee of the store asks you not to take photos, then you have to stop. Just like in a public setting, there are no laws against taking photos, even if there are people in it. If you are taking a picture with a person being the express subject of the photo, you may want to ask them is they mind, but in a public area, there are no laws requiring you do so.

Take it easy Clix. @mollyc is an adult whom I am very sure is familiar with photography etiquette.


Well it seems like this question has already been answered, but in the US there is no expectation of privacy in public, and since I am not submitting this image for commercial use anywhere, it is considered art by the Supreme Court, and legally no model release is required. You can even take photos of children without permission in public, but I don't personally (or try not to...somewhere like a beach that would be difficult to avoid). Costco has signs at the entrance stating video surveillance is in effect, so no one should expect privacy there, either.

@Clix Pix Did you ask permission before photographing and posting these men?


 

Clix Pix

macrumors Core
Original poster
Is there a specific law you’re thinking of here you can point me to? Most US states are pretty permissive, especially with non-commercial use. I occasionally photograph people on the street, in bars, and other public places, as do a fair number of people on this and many, many other forums. It’s a whole genre of photography :) . If I were to do a full-on portrait where it’s obvious, I’d be polite and ask. I also wouldn’t think a big box store is going to care too much, since people photograph stuff in them all the time (product images to send to their spouse or partner to make sure they’re getting the right thing, for example).
There is a difference between shooting a photo of someone walking or doing something on a public street/sidewalk and shooting a picture of a stranger in a privately-owned facility (and, yes, although it is open to the public, per se, a store is still private property owned and/or rented by someone). So are shopping malls, theaters. bars, etc.

As we've seen in discussions here before regarding street photography, a good approach to this is to make a connection with the person, ask permission, etc, rather than just shooting them with or without their knowledge.

There is also a difference between shooting a photo of the display of fresh fruit, produce, canned goods or other products to text home quickly to be sure that the selected item meets with a family member's approval. People also use their phones to scan QR codes, too. I've used my own iPhone to take an occasional snapshot of something interesting, but I always make sure that I simply focus closely on the object or food item. The canned goods, the fresh fruit, the produce and QR codes are objects, not people. The objects and pieces of fruit or vegetables don't care if someone takes a photo; some people do.
 

sparksd

macrumors G3
Jun 7, 2015
9,989
34,241
Seattle WA
Yes, property which is open to the public is still private property and the owners/tenants do have the prerogative to restrict or forbid photography. They may or may not actually post signage to that effect, though. In some situations not only inside the building is photography prohibited but it is also on the exterior grounds.

I once had a business owner try to chase me off as I was taking photos from the public sidewalk in front of the business - nope, I explained to him that you can't do that.
 

Clix Pix

macrumors Core
Original poster
Unless the store has posted signs or rules against it, you can take pictures in a retail store. If an employee of the store asks you not to take photos, then you have to stop. Just like in a public setting, there are no laws against taking photos, even if there are people in it. If you are taking a picture with a person being the express subject of the photo, you may want to ask them if they mind, but in a public area, there are no laws requiring you do so.

Take it easy Clix. @mollyc is an adult whom I am very sure is familiar with photography etiquette.
I would hope that anyone would have the common courtesy to ask a stranger if it is OK to take their photograph, giving them the option to respond either yes or no and/or to simply move out of camera range. If someone is dressed up in a clown suit or modeling new fashion, then there would be greater likelihood that they wouldn't object to their photo being taken and might even expect it to be. If a customer is simply minding their own business and busy doing their shopping that is a different situation and the person probably would not appreciate a stranger standing there taking their photo, regardless of what the actual subject matter is intended to be.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: bondr006

Clix Pix

macrumors Core
Original poster
I once had a business owner try to chase me off as I was taking photos from the public sidewalk in front of the business - nope, I explained to him that you can't do that.
Yep, depends upon who owns the property upon which the building is situated. I think it is usually large corporate campuses, schools, universities and federal property where the exterior grounds may also be privately owned, not just the building(s).
 

Clix Pix

macrumors Core
Original poster
Well it seems like this question has already been answered, but in the US there is no expectation of privacy in public, and since I am not submitting this image for commercial use anywhere, it is considered art by the Supreme Court, and legally no model release is required. You can even take photos of children without permission in public, but I don't personally (or try not to...somewhere like a beach that would be difficult to avoid). Costco has signs at the entrance stating video surveillance is in effect, so no one should expect privacy there, either.

@Clix Pix Did you ask permission before photographing and posting these men?


No need to ask permission of those men because they were actually working on the grounds of our condominium complex. I am one of the many owners of these buildings and common grounds areas. That was (partly) my tree they were cutting down! :)

Aside from that, it was fairly early in the day [for me] and I had not yet showered and dressed. I certainly would not go running out there in my nightclothes! I was able to shoot the photos from the comfort of my own home, right out the window.

As it happens there is construction going on at the public school building in my neighborhood, too, and tempting as it would be to shoot photos of that and men at work doing interesting things with fascinating machinery, I am not doing so because that would be inappropriate: it is not my property (although of course my county taxes do help pay for the public schools and construction projects on schools, libraries and other county properties).
 
  • Sad
Reactions: bondr006

mollyc

macrumors G3
Aug 18, 2016
8,064
50,727
No need to ask permission of those men because they were actually working on the grounds of our condominium complex. I am one of the many owners of these buildings and common grounds areas. That was (partly) my tree they were cutting down! :)

Aside from that, it was fairly early in the day [for me] and I had not yet showered and dressed. I certainly would not go running out there in my nightclothes! I was able to shoot the photos from the comfort of my own home, right out the window.

As it happens there is construction going on at the public school building in my neighborhood, too, and tempting as it would be to shoot photos of that and men at work doing interesting things with fascinating machinery, I am not doing so because that would be inappropriate: it is not my property (although of course my county taxes do help pay for the public schools and construction projects on schools, libraries and other county properties).
It seems you wish to make this an ethics discussion, not a legal discussion (as an aside, I'll note that despite you wanting everyone to follow the "rules" of the POTD thread, which aren't actually rules but merely guidelines, you've gone off tangent within the thread once again - this is really a discussion that should be moved to its own street photography thread).

Legally, I have done nothing wrong in shooting within a public store, nor have you done anything wrong, shooting on your communal condo property. However, ethically, I was in view, carrying around a largish black box around my neck. People could see I was using a camera; had anyone approached me, I would have put it away and not publicly posted photos (or would have deleted them in camera if asked). You however, essentially hid in your dwelling with no one knowing they were photographed, similar to paparazzi. That you are part owner of the building makes no difference on an ethical basis, and you too, were on a private property. Just because I have someone enter my own home to service my HVAC does not mean I just automatically get to photograph them.

People in my photos could have objected because they could see me and approach me; the people in your images were no different than stalker victims being photographed with a zoom lens. No, I am not saying that you were stalking them, but on an ethical basis, you did not let your subjects know, either by discussion or by having them see you out with a camera, that you were taking their photographs.

Also, legally you are allowed to stand on an actual public street and take photos of children, workers, bystanders. You are also allowed to publish those photos without consent or model release.
 

deep diver

macrumors 68030
Jan 17, 2008
2,711
4,520
Philadelphia.
I think this is both a legal and ethical matter given how connected the two are and how much they inform one another. I don't think we should pretend otherwise.

I also think the sniping detracts from the value of the conversation.
 

Clix Pix

macrumors Core
Original poster
This is good to have a separate thread for this type of discussion. Things which turn into a discussion quite definitely need to be pulled out from what is primarily meant to be a photo thread, not a discussion thread. Unfortunately this all kind of escalated.... I had actually deleted a couple of my posts, deciding that they were unnecessary responses when there was later reiteration of some of the points anyway. Appreciate the new thread!
 

Altis

macrumors 68040
Sep 10, 2013
3,167
4,898
No need to ask permission of those men because they were actually working on the grounds of our condominium complex. I am one of the many owners of these buildings and common grounds areas. That was (partly) my tree they were cutting down! :)
Wait, so you think people should ask every subject in a public setting before taking their photo -- but that it wouldn't apply if you have some kind of partial ownership of the property? Why wouldn't those workers have any less right to privacy than the store shopper?

If the photo in the OP was taken by someone who owns some stock in that company, would they no longer need to be asked permission?

Like others have said, legally there is no right to privacy in public spaces (not publicly-owned, but spaces accessible to the public).

It goes without saying that those who express (verbally or otherwise) that they do not want to be photographed, as well as any kind of harassment or following of the subject, would be wrong by the standards of any sensible person. The exception to that could be argued is the case of people who are behaving poorly/illegally towards others and demand not to be filmed/photographed.
 

Clix Pix

macrumors Core
Original poster
I think this is both a legal and ethical matter given how connected the two are and how much they inform one another. I don't think we should pretend otherwise.

I also think the sniping detracts from the value of the conversation.
Yes, Deep Diver, I agree that this IS indeed a legal as well as an ethical matter. Also let's throw in a little common sense and courtesy as well, regarding people who are merely in the situation of shopping in a store, riding the escalator in a mall, eating in a restaurant, relaxing in a bar, simply doing their own thing.... It really is quite intrusive of someone who either openly or stealthily shoots photos of other people without their consent and often without their knowledge. To add insult to injury, then the image(s) might be posted on a very public website. Maybe ask first, then shoot? Give the person the opportunity to say "yes" or "no" and/or if they're right smack in the middle of the area that is really the subject, the chance to say, "oh, excuse me, let me move out of the way!" What makes anyone so special that he or she feels they have the "right" to pull out a camera and take a stranger's photograph?
 
  • Sad
Reactions: bondr006

Clix Pix

macrumors Core
Original poster
Wait, so you think people should ask every subject in a public setting before taking their photo -- but that it wouldn't apply if you have some kind of partial ownership of the property? Why wouldn't those workers have any less right to privacy than the store shopper?

If the photo in the OP was taken by someone who owns some stock in that company, would they no longer need to be asked permission?

Like others have said, legally there is no right to privacy in public spaces (not publicly-owned, but spaces accessible to the public).

It goes without saying that those who express (verbally or otherwise) that they do not want to be photographed, as well as any kind of harassment or following of the subject, would be wrong by the standards of any sensible person. The exception to that could be argued is the case of people who are behaving poorly/illegally towards others and demand not to be filmed/photographed.
That last sentence is indeed one aspect of this whole situation which has been something on my mind, too.....right now things seem to be pretty volatile in many areas of the US, and frankly, it seems rather foolhardy in many environments, even those which seem innocuous, to pull out a camera and start shooting photos of strangers.... One or more of those strangers may indeed have a violent objection and respond by pulling something of his or her own out which, unlike a camera, could be a deadly weapon.....
 
  • Sad
Reactions: bondr006

beach bum

macrumors demi-goddess
Oct 6, 2011
8,797
30,959
Philly
This thread caught my attention with the question of “ethics.” One of my classes covered this topic as protected under the First Amendment and labeled as a form of expression.

I’ve viewed many YT videos on this very topic, a lot of the content is under “First Amendment Auditors (FAA)” where photography and video conducted in public areas by members of the public are defended under the Constitution—summary.

In an ideal world, it would be nice to get permission from individuals who are a part of a photo or video composition, but it is not a requirement. Many of the YT FAA state that anything that they can see in the pubic arena/facility is fair game and is a protected activity.
 

Altis

macrumors 68040
Sep 10, 2013
3,167
4,898
Yes, Deep Diver, I agree that this IS indeed a legal as well as an ethical matter. Also let's throw in a little common sense and courtesy as well, regarding people who are merely in the situation of shopping in a store, riding the escalator in a mall, eating in a restaurant, relaxing in a bar, simply doing their own thing.... It really is quite intrusive of someone who either openly or stealthily shoots photos of other people without their consent and often without their knowledge. To add insult to injury, then the image(s) might be posted on a very public website. Maybe ask first, then shoot? Give the person the opportunity to say "yes" or "no" and/or if they're right smack in the middle of the area that is really the subject, the chance to say, "oh, excuse me, let me move out of the way!" What makes anyone so special that he or she feels they have the "right" to pull out a camera and take a stranger's photograph?
It's a "right" (legally) granted equally to everyone, so nothing about making "anyone so special".

Do you think the news media gets permission of all the people in photos or film clips? They roll footage in public spaces like malls all the time with people all over. They also have vehicles, with license plates, which is even more identifiable.

Same with people taking photos of friends or family but with other people in the background. If you want to photograph your kid trying on a funny hat in the store, do you ask others around?

People walk around vlogging as well, capturing anything that gets caught by the camera.

I get photographed or filmed all the time just riding around on my motorcycle, which is identifiable by the license plate. Nobody has ever asked me, that I can recall, because frankly they don't need to :p
 

mollyc

macrumors G3
Aug 18, 2016
8,064
50,727
Yes, Deep Diver, I agree that this IS indeed a legal as well as an ethical matter. Also let's throw in a little common sense and courtesy as well, regarding people who are merely in the situation of shopping in a store, riding the escalator in a mall, eating in a restaurant, relaxing in a bar, simply doing their own thing.... It really is quite intrusive of someone who either openly or stealthily shoots photos of other people without their consent and often without their knowledge. To add insult to injury, then the image(s) might be posted on a very public website. Maybe ask first, then shoot? Give the person the opportunity to say "yes" or "no" and/or if they're right smack in the middle of the area that is really the subject, the chance to say, "oh, excuse me, let me move out of the way!" What makes anyone so special that he or she feels they have the "right" to pull out a camera and take a stranger's photograph?

But you did not follow your own train of thought. You did not ask the tree people for their permission, you posted it on a public website, AND you (essentially) hid in your house while doing so. How is that any different, or "more ethical" than photographing someone where they can see you using a camera?
 

cthompson94

macrumors 6502a
Jan 10, 2022
812
1,164
SoCal
The question on ethics is a deeply personal one, because as others have stated and proved the rules in the U.S. is pretty relaxed for photographers in public spaces, so if person A ethics draws the line at the law then quite a bit is fair game. Like Molly has pointed out she refrains from having others children in her photos unless unavoidable like the beach or I am sure other places like maybe a park where you may get another child in the photo and while not the goal this unintended child in the photo of your child does add to the photo instead of having just a bunch of photos of your child like you lived on a planet by yourself. I know the homeless get brought up the most (from what I have seen) when it comes to ethics and like others stated I think it depends what the intention of the photo was and what is done after. If I were documenting the homeless in my city to bring awareness and say I got big and a lot of offers and new jobs and whatnot from it without reciprocating the positivity to those I photographed then that is wrong to me, because my intention was awareness not profit or gaining anything besides awareness.

I don't think there will be a "winner" in this thread, but to question one member's ethics while defending yourself with what some would consider questionable ethics is just backwards. There is no standard besides the confines of the law, and both photos I have seen meet that requirement.
 

Altis

macrumors 68040
Sep 10, 2013
3,167
4,898
That last sentence is indeed one aspect of this whole situation which has been something on my mind, too.....right now things seem to be pretty volatile in many areas of the US, and frankly, it seems rather foolhardy in many environments, even those which seem innocuous, to pull out a camera and start shooting photos of strangers.... One or more of those strangers may indeed have a violent objection and respond by pulling something of his or her own out which, unlike a camera, could be a deadly weapon.....
Again, people use judgement about what would be reasonable. If someone seems willing to attack you while on video, probably best to film it for your own safety (most people won't openly commit crimes directly on camera). In any case, they have no right to attack anyone but you do have the right to photograph and record video.

I would appreciate if you addressed the main point of my post regarding the difference between a store and workers at a condo.
 

Clix Pix

macrumors Core
Original poster
I think something needs to be considered, too, in exactly what the situation is where the photographer is shooting..... Is it a public event? Is it a massive fire in the neighborhood? Is it something happening in what is indeed truly "public space" and where no expectations of privacy would exist? Or is the photographer shooting images of strangers shopping in a store, browsing through a mall, eating in a restaurant or relaxing in a bar where most people are just doing their own thing and aren't expecting some stranger to be taking their picture at all?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.