Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Hi all,

Recently, this was what happened to me.

After arriving in Toronto for the first time (going to be here for a couple of years), I went along shooting downtown along College Street. I managed to capture a shot that a really like (panned) of a cyclist. Those who had me on flickr were able to see this image before the situation happened.

Today, a couple of days after I posted the image, the subject of the image (which I did not know) approached me in a somewhat rude manner, demanding the photo to be removed. I tried looking up and did read up some sites about laws, but never got a definite answer about this. Do I have a right to keep the photo posted on flickr (I have no commercial purposes for this photograph. It's really for my own artistic pursues).

The flickr image that this is happening in is: http://www.flickr.com/photos/pqpqpq/2680092622/ . I removed the photo as requested by the lady, but because she was so rude, I felt that I shouldn't have. And I don't believe that legally, I needed to.

Can anyone tell me about what the law says in this manner? Have you guys ever encountered something like this (i mean seriously...how can someone randomly find your flickr and find that the image up there is of themselves?...what are the chances!?)

Hope I can hear more regarding this issue from the other photographers here in TO.

Cheers,
Yi-Wei

read this:

http://ambientlight.ca/laws.php

and then tell HER to read it, and then put it back up.

hahaha i totally agree with Borbor.

I guess it all boils down to how you think about this issue. Each photographer has their level of ethics to measure up to.

If it was me; I'd keep the photo up, the letter you wrote linked to it, and the links of Canadian law regarding this issue as well. It'll be a good reminder for the plaintiff, as well as other photographers, about how this issue is dealt with here in Canada.

I agree with this. Its not so much an issue of whether it is legal or not, but more of respect for others and a reflection of your own morals and ethics.

While I understand that her approach was rude and harsh, it is not really an unexpected response from someone who does now want their photo online. I know this will sound cliche, but put yourself in her shoes and think of the type of reaction that would be generated. I certainly don't think I would be in a very calm manner whilst knowing that thousands of people will be able to view my picture publicly. I think this justifies her rash response. You can't expect everyone to be as calm as most with regards to their own pictures being posted.

I'm not trying to pick a side, because I do think her reaction was rash and a bit immature in the way she responded to others' comments.

I think the way you handled this is the right thing to do. Don't repost the photo or argue any legality issues with her. You've shown some class with removing the image and posting a statement, but that is really all you need to do - nothing more and nothing less.

I think that the letter that you posted was fine. You handled the wording nicely. I would have been taken aback too that someone would confront you and demand that the photo be removed. Not everyone will be like this so let it go. You've taken the high road by removing the photo and explaining why it was removed. Reposting the image after all of this only subverts your intentions to do the right thing.

Since she did mention that she was concerned about her personal safety and did not want to be profiled in such a manner, I think that it's fair to comply with her request. Nobody knows what her situation is and while photographers want the ability to freely express their art and their thoughts, there needs to be some understanding too that some people won't be happy with being featured online.

I think there is no justification for the tone of her response. It reflects her character and personality more than anything else. She could have approached you in a more dignified manner.

I think your resonse was very dignified, even though you were under no obligation to remove the photo. The only reason why I would have done the same thing (regarding an adult that is- if it were a child I would take it down no questions asked, but then again that is a whole different topic) is that some things are simply not worth the hassle. Take heart that you will get better shots another day.

Yi-Wei, to my mind you handled it correctly, what ever the law taking photographs in public is a privilege that one day we might not have. It's easy to be stubborn because the lady was rude but it doesn't change the validity of the request. Many people think taking photos of strangers on the street is rude in it's self and as such should not be allowed.

Just last week I got a comment on a shot I took from the streetcar window in 2006.



I wrote to her asking if she wanted me to remove it.

Her reply:



This is by no means the first time and I always offer to remove it. It might be different if it was a news story.

I think you did the right thing too. Sure, it's easy to get offended when we're told to do something, but we have to remember that as photographers we have a responsibility to ourselves and the community to keep our good name. You didnt HAVE to do anything, but I think it's only common decency to remove the picture once you know the person in question is uncomfortable with it.

Sure, you can quote the law back and say you dont have to remove anything. At the moment, it's not illegal to be a prick. But piss enough people off and those laws that you are using to protect yourself will easily be changed. I really dont like this whole mentality from the vocal rude "street photographers" that say "I can do whatever I want so shove it". It really gives us all a bad reputation.

Bottom line, I think what you did was right. You politely quoted the law AND you removed the picture. Hopefully, the next time she has this problem, she'll be a little more polite.

Exactly what I would've done. I'd offer to remove it as well, but if they bitch me out about it then I'm afraid my reply to them would be only the url to that website.

Tell that putting up the photo was free, taking it down would cost her!!!
Then quote her your rates!

Obviously this woman doesn't like the whole idea of sharing photos via Flickr -- because her entire album is private, and nothing shows. So I think in terms of pleasing her - you've done the right thing, but she should really have asked via a private message. I am not a fan of people making a public example of others.

THAT made my day

How about posting the image here?

I'd love to see what all the hubbub was about.

I'm torn about whether I'd have left it up or taken it down. Probably if I'd received a nice personal email requesting that I take it down, I'd comply. But given the tone and demanding nature of her public posts, I'd probably get my dander up and tell her to get lost.

I am very unimpressed with Sadie's conduct.

Tell her to get a lawyer, to see what the lawyer says, and then be there to take a photograph of her on the street when the lawyer laughs her out of her office.

Actually scratch that last part about taking another photograph of her... I wouldn't want to be caught in the ensuing explosion of rage if I were you.

Hi all,

Thanks for your input regarding this issue. After a night of thinking and after having a slightly more calm emotion, I guess I felt glad that I took down the picture of her.

Yes, legally, I probably didn't have to do it. But as pebbz stated, it's also important to give us, photographers, a good name. I'm glad that I took the photo down.

To those who want to see the photo, I think it'll be inappropriate for me to post the photo yet again, but here's the description of the photo. The lady was the main subject of the photo, she dominated half the frame on the left. The rest of the shot is motion blurred, and really, it is evident that she is the main subject.

I thank you all for giving me more insights regarding this issue. I'll keep doing my street photography. But I'll be more aware that this is unlike China (where i've been living for the past 4 years), subjects might be more sensitive in terms of being photographed.

P.S: I found it sad that when I checked my "Popular" page on flickr.... this became the shot with the most views ..hahah I wish that that would have been my real photographs.

Thanks all once again. Love to hear more about what you guys would do

Cheers,
Yi-Wei

nice response and handling of the situation, Yi-Wei.

cheers!

Yi-Wei, I commend you for your maturity, I probably would have left it up longer just out of spite because of her bad attitude. Impressive that she was able to find her self, not impressive is her paranoia. She's in danger because he pic is online? Maybe Interpol is after her or maybe the Terminator?

Maybe she is on the run. Heh Heh.

Anyway, Yiweiang, your response is cool. I encountered the same thing in Jamaica that you did in China. People are pretty cool about having their picture taken. It was pretty refreshing, actually.

I can understand when people are against having their photo taken due to long standing cultural norms (e.g., Aboriginals in Australia don't like having their photo taken because they feel it steals their souls or something like that) but I find that many people in the 'west' have misguided ideas about their 'privacy.' As if we have any anymore.

I tend to ask people if I can take their photo out of basic courtesy. If they say no, so be it. But when they get all bent out shape like what's her name did, it is really off putting.

No, he would take her money first. Then laugh her out of his office.

BTW, Y, your street photos are brilliant. Keep it up.

I think you did the right thing taking the picture down. but I find funny the story about her personal security, if I would be so concerned about being recognized I wouldn't bike down on College St., busy road, and quite often there are TV cameras, and I can't imagine she would have any success asking CityNews to remove her from the footage...

I bet she doesn't have an album and only registered with Flickr to lambaste someone over a legitimate photograph that happened to have her in it.

She doesn't strike me as the type to have pictures of herself around and posted online from the comments made.


As i said in my comment on the flickr, Yi-Wei acted right and rose above someone who was being very rude in making their request. That is something they should be proud of, being able to respond appropriately and reasonably to someone who was not being reasonable.

Hey

You have handled that in a classy manner like any TPMGers would do. You get our votes

Daniel

Off topic....
How do you replace a picture on flickr without removing it and re-post? I see that you replaced the picture with the letter. There are pictures that I posted but would like to replace it with a different post processed version but have not figured how to do it.

There should be a link in the bottom right of the page, where all the stats and upload/camera info is that reads "Replace this photo"

That lets you re-upload a new image to the same page.

Looking at her profile, it lists her as having no contacts. Please correct me now if there is in fact an option to hide one's contact list in flickr, because it appears to me that such an option does not exist.

I have to assume (let me repeat I am making an assumption) that since Sadie lists no contacts nor posts any publicly available photos that she in fact has no photos on flickr (if she has no contacts with which to privately share photos then ipso facto there must be no photos on her profile whatsover, save possibly for having an online personal backup) and thus Sadie is not a photographer in the first place.

Sadie will not, and can not appreciate our point of view with respect to the legality of the taking and posting of the photograph.

What disturbs me further is that this individual, with seemingly no flickr presence whatsoever has managed to locate this photo of themselves only days after it was taken, and appears to have created a flickr account solely to demand removal of a photograph that does not meet her approval based on an inaccurate understanding of what her rights actually are in this case.

Maybe she is afraid of a stalker, or is in the witness protection program, but she has drawn unnecessary attention to herself thereby defeating her seemed purpose of remaining anonymous in the first place.

How much time is she devoting to finding photos of herself that must be eliminated from existence due to an unenforceable personal paranoia?

Sadie needs to get a life.

what i'm wondering is, how the hell did she find you? i have a feeling she is some sorta secret agent who has hook-ups. watch out for the red dots when you walk by a window :p or maybe she faked her own death and is trying to live a new life
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 72291.html

she seems to know how to use flickr quite well too considering she was able to harass someone into removing it as his favorite bahahah.

Maybe she did us a favor by asking you to take down her picture, because if we look at it too much we may turn into stone!!

Makes me want to take a picture of her and post it not only on flickr, but photobucket and other sites as well. Where did you say this picture was taken? LOL!

I guess if you don't want to be captured in public by cameras (video/photo) you can:
1. Don't go out!
2. Wear a hat and sunglasses.
3. Wear a paper bag over your head.
4. See #1!

May I ask one thing?

Did she prove that she is the one in the picture? Or she just say it is?

If people just come to me and ask me to put down my picture because they say they are in there. I will be super busy. ha ha

For a troll to go through such great lengths to generate this much attention doesn't seem likely. Whether or not she was the one in the photo, what's done has already been done, so there doesn't seem to be any point in further beating a dead horse.

Found it. Thanks!