Olympus OM-D E-M5, E-M1, E-M10 - Mk1, Mk2 & Mk3 Owners Thread

Fuji Dave said:
I am NOT going to argue at all, have a look in the street photography thread MANY women in that.
Click to expand...
Whoo is arguing? someone expressed an opinion; you described that as moaning. I asked you a question, you say I am arguing. Why would you not engage in a debate?
 
Chipper said:
Whoo is arguing? someone expressed an opinion; you described that as moaning. I asked you a question, you say I am arguing. Why would you not engage in a debate?
Click to expand...

How Jeff said the first one made me feel as though I was a perv then when I said gay pride shots go in tomorrow he said no comment. Yes I will agree ONLY on the first shot might well of been better taken but the other lady was well ok.
 
Last edited:
Well, there you go; you are upset by one person's comments and, rather than seek clarification, you became angry. You have agreed that one shot was perhaps inappropriate. The point I would make is that women experience the world very differently [not just for the obvious gender differences]; to be observed and photographed surreptitiously will for the vast majority of women be an uncomfortable position. It may be your right to do this but that doesn't mean you have to. If you have daughters, sisters, nieces, would you like a stranger doing this?
 
Chipper said:
Well, there you go; you are upset by one person's comments and, rather than seek clarification, you became angry. You have agreed that one shot was perhaps inappropriate. The point I would make is that women experience the world very differently [not just for the obvious gender differences]; to be observed and photographed surreptitiously will for the vast majority of women be an uncomfortable position. It may be your right to do this but that doesn't mean you have to. If you have daughters, sisters, nieces, would you like a stranger doing this?
Click to expand...

My daughter died so dont have family anymore as the rest died. I do think before I take the shot, Jeff helped me years ago in another forum and that was great, but I have noticed some of my shots have been questioned, if its NOT against the rules and folk dont like them then I'm fine with that but because I know what a couple of members in this thread will say if gay pride shots go in is so sad. So my quick snaps with the OMD5 III will go in here, but my better shots go in the Sony thread from now on.
 
I am so sorry to hear of your losses. I understand that people will either like or not any posts I put on here; it's not simply a question of whether it is permitted or legal; it's a questions of ethics and whether there is a potential for harm; for balancing up the rights of all concerned. Re gay pride: Are you suggesting that you will receive responses that are homophobic?
 
Chipper said:
I am so sorry to hear of your losses. I understand that people will either like or not any posts I put on here; it's not simply a question of whether it is permitted or legal; it's a questions of ethics and whether there is a potential for harm; for balancing up the rights of all concerned. Re gay pride: Are you suggesting that you will receive responses that are homophobic?
Click to expand...

Thanks, NO names mentioned but YES. My GAY PRIDE shots are going in the Sony thread, YES I know it's not for some folk but at the end of the day we are ALL Human Beings.
 
Chipper said:
Well, if there are homophobic posts, I would certainly report them; no place for that. I think my wife would agree! ;)
Click to expand...

I dont think the two members who Im thinking of would say anything on here as they'd be banned, I had to delete a photo of my flickr years back because of a homophobic comment.
 
Chipper said:
it's a questions of ethics and whether there is a potential for harm
Click to expand...
What ethical problems do you see Linda and what is the potential harm of photographing females ... and should I as a male be concerned about females photographing me in public places?
 
Fuji Dave said:
I dont think the two members who Im thinking of would say anything on here as they'd be banned, I had to delete a photo of my flickr years back because of a homophobic comment.
Click to expand...
Well, that's confusing as you said you wouldn't post on here because of that...
 
gramps said:
What ethical problems do you see Linda and what is the potential harm of photographing females ... and should I as a male be concerned about females photographing me in public places?
Click to expand...
In theory there shouldn’t be an issue with either, however unfortunately this isn’t reality sometimes. The reassuring thing is that the VAST majority of photos are taken with the best of intentions.

All this being said I remember when I had full access to shooting the BTCC, I felt a bit self conscious taking photos of the grid ladies and questioned whether to post them or not despite them requesting to have their photos taken. It’s a shame how as men we can feel this way or be made to feel this way.
 
Last edited:
gramps said:
What ethical problems do you see Linda and what is the potential harm of photographing females ... and should I as a male be concerned about females photographing me in public places?
Click to expand...
It was the first photo that to me gave the impression of a peeping Tom type photo , and made me think of old men in raincoats as a anology …, I rarely take peoples photos but if I did in the context that Dave has I would feel obliged to ask there permission before publishing them on a public forum .
Im extremely broad minded with a good sense of humour but there has to be a point that should not be crossed those pics crossed it .
 
the black fox said:
It was the first photo that to me gave the impression of a peeping Tom type photo , and made me think of old men in raincoats as a anology …, I rarely take peoples photos but if I did in the context that Dave has I would feel obliged to ask there permission before publishing them on a public forum .
Im extremely broad minded with a good sense of humour but there has to be a point that should not be crossed those pics crossed it .
Click to expand...

Thank you but I disagree, yes it could of been taken better, but her skirt was covering her knees. I had this with the lady in the bikini a while back. The way two folk in here treat some is enough for them to sell their kit and go back to Sony. You can now go back on IGNORE
 
Fuji Dave said:
Tomorrow I am going to take out the Sony and have a great day.
Click to expand...
What difference does a brand of camera make Dave , my objection is to taking photos without the subjects knowledge or consent . If your at a parade and in the open and the subject knows your taking there pic no problem .
 
gramps said:
What ethical problems do you see Linda and what is the potential harm of photographing females ... and should I as a male be concerned about females photographing me in public places?
Click to expand...
It's the right to feel safe; I can envisage circumstances where that would apply everybody regardless of their gender and choices around that. These stats don't sound much: 10%,5% but bear in mind that this is a % of the 33 million women in the country. Stranger violence committed by women against men is a stat I could not find - which I think probably answers your question. There is a % of Domestic violence which is women being violent towards their partners. This is not however what we are considering when we talk about photographing a woman secretly. I obviously cannot speak for all women but I do know that it becomes a habit to check who is around and make decisions based on for example the safest route to walk home. Or whether to walk home, sit on a bench. walk in the park. Screen Shot 2022-08-05 at 20.59.16.png
 
the black fox said:
What difference does a brand of camera make Dave , my objection is to taking photos without the subjects knowledge or consent . If your at a parade and in the open and the subject knows your taking there pic no problem .
Click to expand...
Surely this is not a blanket statement across the board? We have some candid photos of guests from our wedding, most street photos won’t have consent, likewise media photos, sports photos etc. I have lots of holiday photos with people in them, it’s very hard to take a photo in New York without someone being in the picture for example. It’s the same with video, just this week I stumbled across a video on YouTube from a rave in the 90’s and guess who’s bang in the middle of the screen? Yours truly ;)
 
tijuana taxi said:
Put me down for the 5 iii please if you go exclusively with Sony.
Maybe get a Panasonic, we are a more liberal lot over there.
Click to expand...

NOT a cat in hells chance mate, my 5 III will still be used for street photography. If the shot is not against forum RULES THEN IT GOES IN HERE.
 
Chipper said:
. I obviously cannot speak for all women but I do know that it becomes a habit to check who is around and make decisions based on for example the safest route to walk home. Or whether to walk home, sit on a bench. walk in the park.
Click to expand...
I know this is the case and it makes me very sad, no-one should have to go through this :(
 
As someone who does surf photography I quite often photograph people on the beach as well as in the water who are complete strangers and they include women and children.

What I always do is approach them afterwards to show them the photos and offer to gift them and if it's not practical to reach them I usually manage to find someone who knows them so I can establish contact. I have never ever had any objections and in fact quite the opposite.

@Fuji Dave, why don't you do the same and be upfront with someone after you have just photographed them? Everyone, including you, will feel more comfortable. I have privately questioned your 'street portraits' for some time but not said anything until now the subject is being discussed.

You can't assume that they haven't spotted you just because they don't say anything and it's the furtive or secretive aspect which is most likely to upset someone. Whereas if you are honest about it you may even make some more friends (as indeed I have done).
 
Last edited:
Fuji Dave said:
NOT a cat in hells chance mate, my 5 III will still be used for street photography. If the shot is not against forum RULES THEN IT GOES IN HERE.
Click to expand...
I was only joking, street isn't my thing, but a lot of people seem to like it.
Guess its like bird photography, most are reapectful, but others will do anything for a photo.
 
Chipper said:
It's the right to feel safe; I can envisage circumstances where that would apply everybody regardless of their gender and choices around that. These stats don't sound much: 10%,5% but bear in mind that this is a % of the 33 million women in the country. Stranger violence committed by women against men is a stat I could not find - which I think probably answers your question. There is a % of Domestic violence which is women being violent towards their partners. This is not however what we are considering when we talk about photographing a woman secretly. I obviously cannot speak for all women but I do know that it becomes a habit to check who is around and make decisions based on for example the safest route to walk home. Or whether to walk home, sit on a bench. walk in the park. View attachment 362798
Click to expand...

The statistics tell a horrible story and we have many recent high-profile cases that demonstrate that women are vulnerable, sadly to a small number of men, who as a consequence inflict a presumption of guilt on all men! However taking 'unsolicited' photos of women in a public place is far removed from those statistics, especially as in most cases the individual concerned would (by the nature of the photo) be unaware of the event having taken place.

I regularly take photos in the street, of men and women, without asking permission ... there have been a couple of occasions when I have been asked to delete the photos and I have done so unquestioningly, there have also been a couple of occasions when having raised the camera I detected discomfort or evasion and I did not take the photo.
In my '100 Strangers' projects, although I asked permission of all beforehand, I had a very, very small number of refusals.
 
gramps said:
The statistics tell a horrible story and we have many recent high-profile cases that demonstrate that women are vulnerable, sadly to a small number of men, who as a consequence inflict a presumption of guilt on all men! However taking 'unsolicited' photos of women in a public place is far removed from those statistics, especially as in most cases the individual concerned would (by the nature of the photo) be unaware of the event having taken place.

I regularly take photos in the street, of men and women, without asking permission ... there have been a couple of occasions when I have been asked to delete the photos and I have done so unquestioningly, there have also been a couple of occasions when having raised the camera I detected discomfort or evasion and I did not take the photo.
In my '100 Strangers' projects, although I asked permission of all beforehand, I had a very, very small number of refusals.
Click to expand...
The point of the stats was to explain the constant vigilance required; I don't agree that it is 'far removed' - as I have explained, pointing a camera surreptitiously a lone woman sitting at a table illustrates what I mean. You ask people - nothing surreptitious about that.
 
RedRobin said:
As someone who does surf photography I quite often photograph people on the beach as well as in the water who are complete strangers and they include women and children.

What I always do is approach them afterwards to show them the photos and offer to gift them and if it's not practical to reach them I usually manage to find someone who knows them so I can establish contact. I have never ever had any objections and in fact quite the opposite.

@Fuji Dave, why don't you do the same and be upfront with someone after you have just photographed them? Everyone, including you, will feel more comfortable. I have privately questioned your 'street portraits' for some time but not said anything until now the subject is being discussed.

You can't assume that they haven't spotted you just because they don't say anything and it's the furtive or secretive aspect which is most likely to upset someone. Whereas if you are honest about it you may even make some more friends (as indeed I have done).
Click to expand...

For my street photography it is about catching that moment in time, if I ask and they say no then I'm ok with that but it gives me a buzz taking photos of strangers that's why it is called street photography. If you ask and they say yes then it's a posed shot, but catch the shot without them knowing if they are doing something is great.
 
Chipper said:
The point of the stats was to explain the constant vigilance required; I don't agree that it is 'far removed' - as I have explained, pointing a camera surreptitiously a lone woman sitting at a table illustrates what I mean. You ask people - nothing surreptitious about that.
Click to expand...

The photo you are on about, the lady was with a lady friend having a drink but her back was to me so I cropped her out.
 
Chipper said:
pointing a camera surreptitiously a lone woman sitting at a table illustrates what I mean.
Click to expand...
I think it just illustrates your personal feeling, (which you are entitled to have).
 
Fuji Dave said:
For my street photography it is about catching that moment in time, if I ask and they say no then I'm ok with that but it gives me a buzz taking photos of strangers that's why it is called street photography. If you ask and they say yes then it's a posed shot, but catch the shot without them knowing if they are doing something is great.
Click to expand...
.... I wrote AFTER not before you took someone's photo. I totally understand that a portrait of someone, including close friends, is nearly always better when they don't know at the time < Unless they are a professional model.

So, I ask again, why not catch the candid moment in time when they don't know (as far as you can tell) and then tell them about it afterwards and offer them your photo.

If they tell you they don't want you to keep the photo then you must respect their privacy and not be selfish about it and consequently personally intrusive.
 
Last edited:
RedRobin said:
.... I wrote AFTER not before you took someone's photo. I totally understand that a portrait of someone, including close friends, is nearly always better when they don't know at the time < Unless they are a professional model.

So, I ask again, why not catch the candid moment in time when they don't know (as far as you can tell) and then tell them about it afterwards and offer them your photo.

If they tell you they don't want you to keep the photo then you must respect their privacy and not be selfish about it and consequently personally intrusive.
Click to expand...


I would not tell them because they might say delete it, but if they did see me I smile and say thank you.
I don't think some of the worlds best street photographers ask.
 
RedRobin said:
.... I wrote AFTER not before you took someone's photo. I totally understand that a portrait of someone, including close friends, is nearly always better when they don't know at the time < Unless they are a professional model.

So, I ask again, why not catch the candid moment in time when they don't know (as far as you can tell) and then tell them about it afterwards and offer them your photo.

If they tell you they don't want you to keep the photo then you must respect their privacy and not be selfish about it and consequently personally intrusive.
Click to expand...
This is one of the reasons I don’t do street photography, I’m too shy to go up to strangers and ask permission about taking their photo either before or after the event :exit:Not that I think a lot of street photography needs consent though.

I’m off to the Moto GP tomorrow, much more comfortable there as it’s a given that people will be taking photos (y)
 
Last edited:
mazdaman said:
If any one is wanting a big white one 150-400

Log in to Facebook

Log in to Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family and people you know.
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com
Click to expand...
.... Obviously I don't need a second big white lens but am curious to see about the one on Facebook but you have to join the group to see anything.

The group admin's wise disclaimer doesn't inspire confidence.
 
snerkler said:
Surely this is not a blanket statement across the board? We have some candid photos of guests from our wedding, most street photos won’t have consent, likewise media photos, sports photos etc. I have lots of holiday photos with people in them, it’s very hard to take a photo in New York without someone being in the picture for example. It’s the same with video, just this week I stumbled across a video on YouTube from a rave in the 90’s and guess who’s bang in the middle of the screen? Yours truly ;)
Click to expand...
.... Yes but Fuji Dave's street photos of people I have seen here so far are all very up close and personal of individuals - They're not crowd scenes, they're not even street scenes.
 
RedRobin said:
.... Yes but Fuji Dave's street photos of people I have seen here so far are all very up close and personal of individuals - They're not crowd scenes, they're not even street scenes.
Click to expand...

We all have our own way of shooting, mine is up and close. If I get spotted then I'd gladly delete if asked, plus it is not against forum rules as far as I know.
 
Catching someone in a photo unintentionally is fine ,but deliberately stalking someone from a hidden position can only be defined as creepy , I’m with Robin on this if you do take someone’s photo at least ask them if it’s o.k to publish it . You never know your subject might be somewhere they don’t want there partner to know about and could cause all sorts of problems if it gets known about . Bit of a far fetched scenario BUT it’s possible
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top