Support NeoGAF

[Volimar]

100% agree! They can go have entertainment con somewhere else.

At this point, it'd be easier to move the comics thing to the rumpus room at the local Chuck E Cheese than to move all the other stuff.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Why should I avert my eyes (and lens) in your magnificent presence? Get over yourself and don't go out like that if you can't handle people looking at you and taking your photo without your permission.

I'm kind of confused here. I take it you are a photographer or are into photography? Is it necessary to your craft to focus on specific people and take candid photos of them? Ignoring the concerns that nobody is really raising to begin with ("oh, so my wide crowd shot requires everyone in the shot's permission now?"), I'm honestly trying to ascertain whether or not people who consider themselves passionate fans of photography think that being able to take pictures of people without permission is necessary and why.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

I'm kind of confused here. I take you you are a photographer or are into photography? Is it necessary to your craft to focus on specific people and take candid photos of them? Ignoring the concerns that nobody is really raising to begin with ("oh, so my wide crowd shot requires everyone in the shot's permission now?"), I'm honestly trying to ascertain whether or not people who consider themselves passionate fans of photography think that being able to take pictures of people without permission is necessary and why.

Like why not "Hi, my name is Bob. Do you mind if I take candid shots of you for a couple of minutes? I think it'd look cool. I'll show you what I get."

I understand getting totally candid shots for photojournalism, but I don't understand the defenses of this need for personal photos.

 

[daman824]

So people itt want to make it against the rules to take a picture of a cosplayer at comic con even when the picture is not taken with any sort of creepy intentions?

If so, that's a bit stupid. The crowds there are crazy. And people pushing me from almost every angle along with security constantly berating me to keep moving means that I'm not always going to stop and ask your permission to take a picture of your cool iron man cosplay.

And enforcing such a rule would be nearly impossible.

 

[Flo_Evans]

I'm kind of confused here. I take it you are a photographer or are into photography? Is it necessary to your craft to focus on specific people and take candid photos of them? Ignoring the concerns that nobody is really raising to begin with ("oh, so my wide crowd shot requires everyone in the shot's permission now?"), I'm honestly trying to ascertain whether or not people who consider themselves passionate fans of photography think that being able to take pictures of people without permission is necessary and why.

It will be way quicker to just link you to the master than explain it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Cartier-Bresson

 

[Vice]

I'm kind of confused here. I take it you are a photographer or are into photography? Is it necessary to your craft to focus on specific people and take candid photos of them? Ignoring the concerns that nobody is really raising to begin with ("oh, so my wide crowd shot requires everyone in the shot's permission now?"), I'm honestly trying to ascertain whether or not people who consider themselves passionate fans of photography think that being able to take pictures of people without permission is necessary and why.

For photojournalism candid shots are needed to capture the true feel of an event I imagine art photogs feel the same.

 

[The Broken Ska Record]

So post more dripping sarcastic posts attacking photographers I guess?

lol

Why should I avert my eyes (and lens) in your magnificent presence? Get over yourself and don't go out like that if you can't handle people looking at you and taking your photo without your permission.

Attacking photographers? What are you talking about? You've weaved this narrative that people saying photographers should ask for permission is somehow against photographers. It is not. It is about respecting other people.

 

[LostCaress]

That's fine if you don't agree, but legally that's not the case.

Like I said,I'd rather a guideline than a rule. Legislating decency has mixed results. Bring awareness instead.

Well where I'm from that's actually the law, you can't take pictures of people without consent, even in public spaces - seems to work just fine. This thread is more about what the law (at that particular event) or the convention should be.

So people itt want to make it against the rules to take a picture of a cosplayer at comic con even when the picture is not taken with any sort of creepy intentions?

If so, that's a bit stupid. The crowds there are crazy. And people pushing you from almost every angle along with security constantly berating you to keep moving means that I'm not always going to stop and ask your permission to take a picture of your cool iron man cosplay.

And enforcing such a rule would be nearly impossible.

Is it really that hard to get consent? It isn't even necessary to exchange words most of the time, just read the facial expressions - point a camera at someone, she strikes a pose, there, you have consent.

 

[Arjen]

I'm kinda baffled it's even up for debate that taking pictures without asking for permission is a bit creepy and makes people uncomfortable.
I mean, it's not that hard to ask right?
Wow I love your costume, can I take a picture. Easy.
Hell sounds like a great conversation starter even.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

Hey, sometimes you don't get what you want with restricting other peoples photography rights, funny that. You want to change the photography rules, not me.

I don't have a problem determining what is an appropriate photo, my problem would be other people reviewing and approving/denying a photo as "appropriate" based on their own gut instinct. Fuck that.

I think the person being photographed has more of a say of what's appropriate considering they're the one in the photo.

The point you're missing is that just because it's not against the rules doesn't mean you don't look like an asshole for doing it. Again, if that's your best defense it's essentially "I should be able to do this because it's not illegal." then you need a better one. There are tons of things you can do that aren't illegal but are frowned upon doing.

It's not illegal to cut in line, but you're going to look like an asshole for doing it.

It's not illegal to curse around children, but you're going to look like an asshole for doing it.

It's not illegal to make fun of people for being fat, but you're going to look like an asshole for doing it.

It's not illegal to take a picture someone is uncomfortable with, but you're going to look like an asshole for doing it.

So no, legally nothing can stop you, but don't be surprised when people don't look at you favorably because you think your interpretation of a photo is more important then the interpretation of the people the photo is actually depicting.

People were spouting this same nonsense back in that Google Glass thread where a woman wouldn't turn off her stupid video glasses. A bunch of people came to her defense and said it was legally fine so everyone should stop complaining. Like a week later it came out that she used to secretly record her neighbors and was put under house arrest.

 

[Enco]

"Can I take your picture?"

"Sure"

"Thanks"

Not really complicated. Don't be a creep.

edit: as for checking people out, that's why people go in costumes no? So other people can see? Don't complain when people check you out. Go in jeans and a t-shirt if you don't want eyes on you

 

[Kinyou]

Is it really that hard to get consent? It isn't even necessary to exchange words most of the time, just read the facial expressions - point a camera at someone, she strikes a pose, there, you have consent.

Imagine you see some guy dressed as flash running through a corridor because he's late to some panel. That looks cool. Do you now take a picture or try to stop him, ask him for a picture, and then tell him to keep running?

 

[G-Fex]

I can't believe this permission thing is even up for debate.

It's kind of common sense.

 

[Dead Man]

Yes but the question is how many people feel paranoid and uncomfortable.

Cosplay is only becoming more and more popular with Cosplay Heroes helping it become even more mainstream. SDCC attendence is crazy high with no sign of it stopping or people not coming dressed up.

I get people should not be allowed to take upskirt shots and what not but I wonder how often does this stuff happen. I mean someone taking a shot of Jean Grey from behind is a lot less serious then someone taking an upskirt shot.

Nobody should feel harrassed but in an overly sexualized situation like some Cosplay situations are, is it really a big deal that someone takes a zoomed in pic of Jean Grey's but? All of these photos are going on people facebook anyways and people are walking around in public like that.

Not sure a person walking around in skimpy clothes is an 'overly sexualised situation' unless you think girls in shorts and bikinis should expect hordes of creepy wankers to follow them around everywhere.

 

[daman824]

Well where I'm from that's actually the law, you can't take pictures of people without consent, even in public spaces - seems to work just fine. This thread is more about what the law (at that particular event) or the convention should be.



Is it really that hard to get consent? It isn't even necessary to exchange words most of the time, just read the facial expressions - point a camera at someone, she strikes a pose, there, you have consent.

Have you been to comic con recently? Having to get consent everytime you want to take a picture even if that consent is just "approving eye contact" is a stupid rule when you take into account just how much noise, congestion, ect. Is everywhere.

I'm not going to take a picture of your ass as that is creepy. But I dont see why I shouldn't be allowed to take a full body picture of a cosplay I like without asking them for permission beforehand.

If I have time to ask permission I will as I agree it is polite. But taking a picture of a well designed costume as I pass by while in a large crowd isn't impolite in the slightest. And people arguing that it is must never have attended comic con.

Abd arguing that people who do the above should be kicked out of the con is just stupid.

 

[Regiruler]

There are like, hundreds of other Comicons like you describe already, though. If anything, they should just change the name of SDCC and let it continue to evolve into what it has become: E3 for everything.

E2: Entertainment Expo

 

[FStop7]

I feel compelled to preface this by noting that I'm sighing as I type this, but do you think that someone objecting to you taking a candid picture of them in a costume at a convention is directly comparable to angry people committing illegal acts of violence against law enforcement?

Maybe the rock thrower was dressed up as Sailor Moon.

 

[WrenchNinja]

Imagine you see some guy dressed as flash running through a corridor because he's late to some panel. That looks cool. Do you now take a picture or try to stop him, ask him for a picture, and then tell him to keep running?

I'd say he's a pretty shitty Flash if he can't make it on time!

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Solution seems obvious. Everyone should wear a sign saying if they do or don't give permission to having their unsolicited picture taken.

Job done.

 

[G-Fex]

Solution seems obvious. Everyone should wear a sign saying if they do or don't give permission to having their unsolicited picture taken.

Job done.

Or even easier you can act like a human being and restrain yourself from doing stupid things without others permission.

 

[John Kowalski]

I'm kind of confused here. I take it you are a photographer or are into photography? Is it necessary to your craft to focus on specific people and take candid photos of them? Ignoring the concerns that nobody is really raising to begin with ("oh, so my wide crowd shot requires everyone in the shot's permission now?"), I'm honestly trying to ascertain whether or not people who consider themselves passionate fans of photography think that being able to take pictures of people without permission is necessary and why.

There are many advantages to taking pictures of people who do not act as though there is a camera in front of them. Photojournalism benefits highly from that, not only in it's current state but also in it's classical meaning, where photographers would spend days, weeks, and even months in places examining and portraying in their photos a reality that could not be transmitted through, say, portraiture. Flo mentions Bresson but Bresson's work was first and foremost influenced by his classical painting background and education, though perhaps that'll help as a comparison point. You certainly know of paintings showing social scenes in which the scene is presented in a candid way, right? Bresson's work drew immensely from that (and from painting's classical formal adherence to geometry), and in doing so he became an excellent example of how candid photography works beautifully in portraying someone's natural state of being, often in ways that would simply be impossible to portray if you were to let everyone know in advance that you would be photographing them.

Of course there are many layers to that ability to capture people naturally, and not all of them need to be done without them knowing you're taking a picture of them. Nowadays it's a bit harder because photography is nearly ubiquitously available, and some cultures either have a very strong perspective of photography that doesn't understand really understand photography (and thus do not understand how to portray anything other than their face and their food and pretty things), or a strong distrust for photographs because of their privacy concerns. You can very much hang around with a camera and take candids while obviously standing with a camera stuck to your face for ten seconds, yet still have people behaving naturally. You can also just make your subject so comfortable with the camera that they will act naturally regardless.

There is a huuuuuuuuge artistic legacy underneath candid photography in art, and i doubt i could ever make it justice. If you want, you can research street photography and photojournalism mixed with candid photography, there are probably lots of resources on that, or maybe just pm me for more.

 

[Switch Back 9]

Have you been to comic con recently? Having to get consent everytime you want to take a picture even if that consent is just "approving eye contact" is a stupid rule when you take into account just how much noise, congestion, ect. Is everywhere.

I'm not going to take a picture of your ass as that is creepy. But I dont see why I shouldn't be allowed to take a full body picture of a cosplay I like without asking them for permission beforehand.

If I have time to ask permission I will as I agree it is polite. But taking a picture of a well designed costume as I pass by while in a large crowd isn't impolite in the slightest. And people arguing that it is must never have attended comic con.

Abd arguing that people who do the above should be kicked out of the con is just stupid.

I agree, I think it's fucking ridiculous that people dressed up in costumes at an event like this are bothered that other people are taking pictures of them. This whole freakout is people looking for an excuse to make a big deal about something. Don't want your picture taken? Don't wear a brightly coloured and/or sexy costume when your entire point for doing so is to get attention and then complain when it happens. People need to fucking relax.

 

[DarkFlow]

At this point, it'd be easier to move the comics thing to the rumpus room at the local Chuck E Cheese than to move all the other stuff.

lol sadly this is true, they've pretty much gutted the comic stuff.

 

[LostCaress]

Imagine you see some guy dressed as flash running through a corridor because he's late to some panel. That looks cool. Do you now take a picture or try to stop him, ask him for a picture, and then tell him to keep running?

There's a huge range of things, from illegal, to legal, with several degrees of creepiness in between. I'd say most people would say upskirts should be illegal (or are), but a picture of Obama in a public address, without his formal consent, is legal.

The law in my country actually has most situations properly described, so there are clear exemptions (people in background, famous people, events with journalistic interest, etc..) but there are obviously more complicated situations, ones that would be settled in a court (is that person part of the background or not? Is this newsworthy? etc..)

But let's face it, for most common situations, even if they could/should be illegal, they'll never see a day in court, so why wouldn't we just use common decency? Is it that hard to ask someone to take a picture of them? If it bothers you so much to say "can I" then probably the picture doesn't mean that much to you and the rights of the subject should be preserved.

Your specific situation is one that could be argued either way, you could make a case for it being noteworthy in some way, and there's always the factor of consent being hard to get in this case - maybe a cool thing to do would be to take a picture and then ask for permission?

 

[antigoon]

Imagine a world in which convention attendees would be discouraged from taking photos of cosplayers at will, without permission. What if I couldn't take this photo I decided I wanted to take? The horror.


Edit: One of the most annoying ways people argue against stuff like this is to stretch out the hypothetical policy to its extreme and say "oh, look it doesn't work in this very specific fringe case, this is a very bad idea."

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Or even easier you can act like a human being and restrain yourself from doing stupid things without others permission.

With what I've seen of Comic Con, I imagine it might be hard to get permission from every single person whose picture you want to take and I imagine people would get frustrated very quickly as people keep disrupting them to get their permission.

A sign seems the best way to approach this.

 

[Transhuman]

I think one of the main reasons laymen think it's o.k to take pictures is because they see other people taking pictures of the person in question and assume that they're attending in a professional capacity instead of a leisurely one.

A good rule of thumb is this: if you're setting up a shot and you're thinking "I can't wait to masturbate to this later", don't take the picture.

 

[Switch Back 9]

Or even easier you can act like a human being and restrain yourself from doing stupid things without others permission.

What do you do for a living? If my job is to go for my magazine or website as a journalist and go cover comic con, taking pictures isn't "stupid" or "inhuman" it's my living and you can bet your sweet ass I'm not going to ask every single person I shoot for permission. Ninety per cent of my shots would look staged as hell and I'd maybe get a tenth of the required amount.
Get off your high horse, you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Not every person with a camera deserves to be verbally lynched and labeled as a creep because of people like you. For a lot of us it's a paycheque.

Edit: after reading your comments in the display gallery thread I've come to to the conclusion that you have a HUGE personal issue with this entire concept. Please ignore my reply, you've taken a pretty hard stance on this and it's very clear you're not going to budge.

 

[Gentleman Jack]

Why is your cosplay hobby somehow more important than my photography hobby?

Kinda feels like you're completely ignoring the intent of the proposed changes to SDCC policy because the rights of jerks taking creepshots are inviolable or something.

 

[The Broken Ska Record]

What do you do for a living? If my job is to go for my magazine or website as a journalist and go cover comic con, taking pictures isn't "stupid" or "inhuman" it's my living and you can bet your sweet ass I'm not going to ask every single person I shoot for permission. Ninety per cent of my shots would look staged as hell and I'd maybe get a tenth of the required amount.
Get off your high horse, you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Not every person with a camera deserves to be verbally lynched and labeled as a creep because of people like you. For a lot of us it's a paycheque.

As a photojournalist you would have a release form and probably a badge indicating you were press. Last I checked, photographers don't get paid by the photograph. And no, no one is calling all photographers creeps. It really isn't hard to ask if you can take a photo.

 

[Flo_Evans]

Kinda feels like you're completely ignoring the intent of the proposed changes to SDCC policy because the rights of jerks taking creepshots are inviolable or something.

I find this silly because creepy people are going to be creepy and jerk off (or whatever you think is happening) to photos of girls regardless if they have permission to snap it or not.

I'm not really sure what you think having to ask every person for permission is going to accomplish? Maybe some really creepy socially inept people will be prevented from even approaching girls in the 1st place?

 

[Switch Back 9]

As a photojournalist you would have a release form and probably a badge indicating you were press. Last I checked, photographers don't get paid by the photograph. And no, no one is calling all photographers creeps. It really isn't hard to ask if you can take a photo.

Not paid by number of photos no, but you'll have a much smaller pool to draw from if you don't have time to just snap away. The press badge thing is a good point though I thought about that as soon as I posted.

 

[Arjen]

I agree, I think it's fucking ridiculous that people dressed up in costumes at an event like this are bothered that other people are taking pictures of them. This whole freakout is people looking for an excuse to make a big deal about something. Don't want your picture taken? Don't wear a brightly coloured and/or sexy costume when your entire point for doing so is to get attention and then complain when it happens. People need to fucking relax.

What, because people like to dress up they automatically do it for attention?

 

[The Broken Ska Record]

Not paid by number of photos no, but you'll have a much smaller pool to draw from if you don't have time to just snap away. The press badge thing is a good point though I thought about that as soon as I posted.

Yup. And besides most professional photographers will take several pictures of the same subject to make sure they get the best one.

 

[daman824]

Imagine a world in which convention attendees would be discouraged from taking photos of cosplayers at will, without permission. What if I couldn't take this photo I decided I wanted to take? The horror.


Edit: One of the most annoying ways people argue against stuff like this is to stretch out the hypothetical policy to its extreme and say "oh, look it doesn't work in this very specific fringe case, this is a very bad idea."

Fringe cases? Have you been to comic con?

 

[Vice]

As a photojournalist you would have a release form and probably a badge indicating you were press. Last I checked, photographers don't get paid by the photograph. And no, no one is calling all photographers creeps. It really isn't hard to ask if you can take a photo.

Many websites do pay by the photo. I did a bit of freelance for Comic-Con a few years ago and we received a certain amount per unique photograph. I believe release forms are relatively rare for press photographers in the United States as well.

 

[Switch Back 9]

What, because people like to dress up they automatically do it for attention?

Give me a break. I bartended at a theatre for a summer, and if there's one thing I learned, it's that people who design and creat costumes and then wear them out in public LOVE getting the attention. Whether it be compliments on the costume itself, or the techniques, the accuracy etc... They put a lot of work into it and they like hearing about it. Thinking otherwise is silly.
Edit: ESPECIALLY if they are doing it and going to comic con. If you don't want attention but like designing and dressing up in costumes, you're a fucking idiot or a hypocrite for doing it at the world's biggest convention.

 

[Cow Mengde]

Shockingly "doing a double take" isn't at all what is being complained about.

You misunderstand me.

 

[The Broken Ska Record]

Many websites do pay by the photo. I did a bit of freelance for Comic-Con a few years ago and we received a certain amount per unique photograph. I believe release forms are relatively rare for press photographers in the United States as well.

Huh. I guess I was taught differently in school. Or maybe that was just the school being careful.

 

[Flatline]

Jesus Christ, the way things are going these "groups" will ask us to sign a contract to talk to a woman. Banning people from even taking photos at such an event is such a ridiculous suggestion, they do realize that people take photos of other things other than the cosplayers, right? Really makes you wonder what's next.

 

[devilhawk]

Or even easier you can act like a human being and restrain yourself from doing stupid things without others permission.

And there we go, taking a photo is now inhumane.

 

[G-Fex]

What do you do for a living? If my job is to go for my magazine or website as a journalist and go cover comic con, taking pictures isn't "stupid" or "inhuman" it's my living and you can bet your sweet ass I'm not going to ask every single person I shoot for permission. Ninety per cent of my shots would look staged as hell and I'd maybe get a tenth of the required amount.
Get off your high horse, you're making a mountain out of a molehill. Not every person with a camera deserves to be verbally lynched and labeled as a creep because of people like you. For a lot of us it's a paycheque.

Edit: after reading your comments in the display gallery thread I've come to to the conclusion that you have a HUGE personal issue with this entire concept. Please ignore my reply, you've taken a pretty hard stance on this and it's very clear you're not going to budge.

hahaha this response. Okay.

No I'm not making a mountain out of a molehill, cause for every "photojournalist" there's probably 3 creepers looking for some upskirt shot to keep for themselves. I don't remember attacking journalists or photographers, you should know better. Sounds like you're the one making a mountain out of a molehill out of my reply. I'm talking about the regular people who go to the con.

And yeah it's real cute you bring up the comments from the other thread, yes I do take issue with this concept. Not huge or personal as you dream it to be. But I think stuff like that deadpool crap is pretty stupid.

I agree, I think it's fucking ridiculous that people dressed up in costumes at an event like this are bothered that other people are taking pictures of them. This whole freakout is people looking for an excuse to make a big deal about something. Don't want your picture taken? Don't wear a brightly coloured and/or sexy costume when your entire point for doing so is to get attention and then complain when it happens. People need to fucking relax.

You're hilarious.

And there we go, taking a photo is now inhumane.

Yeah that's what I was getting at it.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Jesus Christ, the way things are going these "groups" will ask us to sign a contract to talk to a woman. Banning people from even taking photos at such an event is such a ridiculous suggestion, they do realize that people take photos of other things other than the cosplayers, right? Really makes you wonder what's next.

Did you read any of the actual article before getting angry?

 

[Flatline]

Did you read any of the actual article before getting angry?

Yes I did, did you?

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Yes I did, did you?

Where did they suggest "banning people from even taking photos at such an event"?

 

[Winterfang]

Groping is uncalled for sexual harassment.

 

[Switch Back 9]

Groping is uncalled for sexual harassment.

I don't think anybody in the thread is supporting groping.

 

[Flatline]

Where did they suggest "banning people from even taking photos at such an event"?

They pretty much suggest that or they're fucking naive. There are 40MP cameras even in smartphones nowadays, how will they know if I'm taking a "surreptitious" photo of a cosplayer or the thing in front of her? Will they have a special panel judging the morality of each photo?

 

[devilhawk]

Groping is uncalled for sexual harassment.

And that should not be tolerated in any fashion.

Thread is more about wanting to dictate people's eyeball movements and directions.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

They pretty much suggest that or they're fucking naive. There are 40MP cameras even in smartphones nowadays, how will they know if I'm taking a surreptitious "photo" of a cosplayer or the thing in front of her? Will they have a special panel judging the morality of each photo?

It's pretty easy. If the person says they don't want you taking a photo of them, you don't take a photo. If they see you taking a photo of them and ask you to delete it, delete it.