I always attempt to remain unseen by my subjects because I want to capture people naturally.An assault is any act (and not mere omission to act) by which a person intentionally or recklessly causes another to suffer or apprehend immediate unlawful violence.
Common Assault – s.39 Criminal Justice Act 1988
It seems to me that the example of the photographer shoving a camera in a person's face without permission is clearly assault.
I always attempt to remain unseen by my subjects because I want to capture people naturally.
It seems to me that the example of the photographer shoving a camera in a person's face without permission is clearly assault.
I doubt the court would either....I agree, if a photographer did that to me he'd certainly get to appreciate what assault meant. I'd call it self-defence, but I doubt he'd see it like that.
Camera suppository anyone?
How can it be assault?It seems to me that the example of the photographer shoving a camera in a person's face without permission is clearly assault.
'Assault' only requires the threat of force, so that the recipient of the threat fears that he will be hit.How can it be assault?
He didn't physically touch them....
Fair enough, but how can jumping in front of someone and taking their picture imply a threat of force?'Assault' only requires the threat of force, so that the recipient of the threat fears that he will be hit.
'Battery' is the actual application of force.
If you split your comment, "jumping in front of someone" could be taken of as a threat, depending upon circumstances however "taking their picture" is unlikely to be threatening.Fair enough, but how can jumping in front of someone and taking their picture imply a threat of force?
As shown in the second video: someone jumping in front of you could well make you aprehend an immediate threat of violence.Fair enough, but how can jumping in front of someone and taking their picture imply a threat of force?
Yeah, if someone jumps in front of you in a quiet street or a dark alley, but he was taking photos in a busy street.As shown in the second video: someone jumping in front of you could well make you aprehend an immediate threat of violence.
I did watch the rest of the video in hopes of seeing that...He's more likely to be assaulted.....
I did watch the rest of the video in hopes of seeing that...
I did watch the rest of the video in hopes of seeing that...
'I ask Meyerowitz about the combative, confrontational style of street photography espoused by the likes of fellow New Yorker Bruce Gilden, and he grows visibly angry for the only time in our conversation. "He's a f*****g bully. I despise the work, I despise the attitude, he's an aggressive bully and all the pictures look alike because he only has one idea – 'I'm gonna embarrass you, I'm going to humiliate you.' I'm sorry, but no."'Joel Meyerowitz: 'brilliant mistakes ... amazing accidents'
The photographer talks to Sean O'Hagan about his new book, which celebrates his 50 years of finding the 'wow' factor in everyday placeswww.theguardian.com
Yep, he pretty much echoes my opinion of Gilden. I'd say I'm amazed that he hasn't been seriously assaulted but, from what I've seen, he selects his "targets" carefully.
If you split your comment, "jumping in front of someone" could be taken of as a threat, depending upon circumstances however "taking their picture" is unlikely to be threatening.
But whereas the hairy bricklayer is unlikely to feel 'threatened' by a photographer jumping out in front of him, the whole scenario could be 'threatening' to a young girl.
When my daughter and son in law were both on general duties they played a little game called "spot the biggest ISG". They gave up on it when they realised that most "security guards" had already failed the exam for "prat" and therefor would never be promoted to "idiot".
It's a good job I sneaked a peek at what you posted here or I wouldn't have realised that you're not just another "street bully".Coming late to the conversation, but as with most things that skirt the edges of what is and what isn't an actual offense, the deciding factors will inevitably come down to intent and perception....
...Bottom line: If the subject of the photograph feels their privacy is being invaded, then it is. It's also far better to have the consent and cooperation of your subjects than risk antagonising them.