Everytime I see this subject come up, it infuriates me. This ignorant attitude inhibits photographers from making some potentially great pictures. Unles you 'put words or infer endorcements or imply editorial with that person speaking part of the message,' including a person in your photograph does not require the permission of the person in the picture to offer that picture into the public. S. Shapiro ----- Original Message ----- From: rand flory To: List for Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals - Students Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 12:28 PM Subject: Brighton Beach Brooklyn and exploitation Dave, Any time you photograph a person without their permission (even if it is granted later), it is probably a form of "exploitation." When a person is in a situation by circumstance rather than by choice, you, the photographer, could possibly feel this more deeply than normal. But I don't think you exploit someone unless you put them in a bad light. You did not do that with "Brighton Beach Brooklyn." Getting these folks all bundled up and moved onto the street took a lot of effort on somebody's part. It would have been so much easier just to have allowed them to stay inside. So the feeling is that they wanted to be there and someone cared enough to put them there. This is, to me anyway, a celebration. A celebration emphasized by the background even if is meant for a different crowd. Great shot! peace and pixels, rand ----- Original Message ----- <snip> I wanted to get some feedback,because although I like the photograph, I felt that it might be construed as exploitive. <snip>
