candid photos and use?

33L

33L

Messages
3,807
Name
Lee
Edit My Images
Yes
i took a candid picture almost 2 years ago of a young boy reaching in to a fountain. now when the shot was taken, i didnt know about consent etc...


my question is, i have it on my website and i had a discussion over the weekend on whether or not it should be used? Its not for sale and purely just an example of work. If for whateve reason the parents/guardians see it, do they have any right to ask for it to be removed?

I thought that the freedom you have when taking candids in public means that i could use the images, it has got me thinking and want to know what my limitations are?

1. Can i use the image on the site for 'promotional' purposes?
2. Can i use the image for comercial reasons i.e sell it for someone to use?
3. Whats the worse case scenario with these types of shots?

Lee
 
1) Yes
2) Technically, in the UK, yes. But you'd be hard pushed to find someone who'd publish it without a release.
3) That would largely depend on how it was used. The worse the mis-representation of the subject the greater the potential for damages.
 
1. Can I use the image on the site for 'promotional' purposes?

You can but the publisher would run the risk of being sued by the guardian/ parents of the child because you have not got a model release form and permission to use the image of a ‘minor’ for promotional purposes

2. Can I use the image for commercial reasons i.e sell it for someone to use?

See the comment above

3. What’s the worse case scenario with these types of shots?

The guardian/ parents of the child take legal action against the publisher.

The publisher then takes legal action against you.

You are not following ‘good practice’, you leave yourself open to Mr/Ms ‘no win no fee’ sending you a letter, dragging you in to court and asking for damages/ compensation.
 
I am a little confused & interested in the outcome of this,if the paps can run around taking photos of well known faces & publish them whats the difference.:thinking:
 
PS, there is no law prohibiting you taking pictures of children in a public place in the UK.

However you may have to deal with angry patents or poorly advised professionals such as PCSO’s, Police officers and the odd off duty ‘Social worker’ who think that any one holding a camera is a threat to children.
 
jockwav said:
I am a little confused & interested in the outcome of this,if the paps can run around taking photos of well known faces & publish them whats the difference.:thinking:
Click to expand...

Im guessing thats because the 'well known faces' are not young boys/girls :shrug:
 
Yes i take your point.:)
 
I am a little confused & interested in the outcome of this, if the paps can run around taking photos of well known faces & publish them what’s the difference.

The difference is that celebrities no matter how much they ‘pontificate’ about not wanting their picture taken actually do want their picture taken for the publicity.

However some celebrities have gone to court, and won injunctions stopping magazines publishing images of their children,( to be fair sometimes the celebrities publicist , will contact the magazine and ask that the children’s faces are pixelised to make them unrecognisable).

Also the celebrities are appearing in a magazine not endorsing a product, legally quite a difference.

There is some legal protection if the child is a ward of court, or is subject to a court order,

There was a famous incident in the 80’s where Andrew Ridgley a singer in a group called Wham was allegedly very rude to photographers. The next time he turned up in the red carpet all the photographers put down their cameras and refused to shoot a single frame, strangely enough he was very accommodating to photographers after that.

To conclude there is no law of privacy in this country you can take any image you like providing that you are stood on public land ,and are not causing a breach of the peace,
 
from what people of said i am struggeling to see how people use street photography for commercial gain?

how can you ask everyone to give consent? I certainly dont have the balls to ask after i have taken the picture. do you just disregard images of children even if they (from a logical point of view) cant be construded as dodgy.
 
33L said:
from what people of said i am struggeling to see how people use street photography for commercial gain?
Click to expand...

I think that without 'model release' you are liable to pay royalties to any
person in the pic if that pic is used for financial gain.

So if you use that pic for advertising purposes,they would be within their
rights to some form of reimbursement.

Could be talking out of my rear but thats i see it :)
 
the image is an example of my work. How can they possibly prove that image alone has brought me any income of any kind?
 
33L said:
the image is an example of my work. How can they possibly prove that image alone has brought me any income of any kind?
Click to expand...

33L said:
1. Can i use the image on the site for 'promotional' purposes?
2. Can i use the image for comercial reasons i.e sell it for someone to use?
Click to expand...

I think that if the above doesnt apply then you have nothing to worry
about but if you are selling pictures from your site & using them as
examples of your work then you may have a legal problem :shrug:
 
Interesting thread and I think an important one.
Personally I'd never take street photos because I'd feel embarrased doing so.

Here's a really good article from the Sydney Morning Herald:

Photography Is Not A Crime

The responses are equally as interesting.
 
jockwav said:
I am a little confused & interested in the outcome of this,if the paps can run around taking photos of well known faces & publish them whats the difference.:thinking:
Click to expand...

It's the difference between editorial and commercial use. Whilst some may argue that editorial is a commercial use in the eyes of the law it's not. The Data Protect Act, ECHR, etc. all recognise editorial use, freedom of the press, etc.

As was mentioned in another thread recently, taking a photo of a celeb for a newspaper, weekly mag, etc. when they're out and about is very different from using the same shot as a bill board for coca-cola simply because they happened to have a can of it in their hand at the time.
 
so as long as i am not selling it and using it as an example of my work there should be no problem.
 
About point 1, how do you define promotional purposes?

Do you mean put the image on your website that is advertising your photography services as a demonstration of your work? If that is the case then there is not a great lot anyone can do AFAIK. You would not be making any money of that specific image...

If, however, the image was being used to endorse a particular product then the posts above referring to releases/royalies and possibility of being sued come into play.
 
Technically, you could sell it to. As stated, there's no law in the UK to prevent it. The problems really start when the shot is being used to promote a product or the shot (possibly combined with text) is perfoming some task/action/etc.

Selling prints doesn't break any laws in the UK but a stock library, for example, wouldn't touch it without a release as they aren't limited to the UK.

Morally it's a whole other matter and opinions are split. The parents of the child might be flattered and pleased or angry and upset.

Having said that, they couldn't prevent further sales under the DPA if the child is recognisible in the shot as they would have a right to prevent the data being processed, but the sales would have happen in order for there to be a case. AFAIK that's not been tested in court though.
 
I would never comercially use it. its jsut a show case and will not be used by anyone else other than me.
 
Then you should be fine. Of course there's always the possibility that the parents find it and ask you to remove it which is a moral decision for you to make.
 
Sounds fine to me. Not a porn site is it? Not trying to distort the truth in any way?

Providing you're being honest, decent and truthful, whether or not people like the image you've taken of them in public has no bearing on your legal right to publish it.

Everything I have to say on this (quite a lot ;) ) is on this thread:

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=100776

BR,

Richard.
 
This is an interesting post.

Slightly off topic, has anyone got a good example of a consent form / model release form? I'm starting to take more photos and to be future proof, its probably wise to use. To date, I have never seen one!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top