Toronto Photography Meetup Group

There's legally and then there is ethically right and wrong. Legally, post it on flickr all day long, regardless of what opposition they might put forth. Public activity done in public = in the clear. However, just because one can, doesn't mean one should. While there is a right to post it online (as best I can determine), there is no obligation to post online. As such, if someone is concerned enough to request that an image be removed, to not honour the request (presuming the image is not a truly artistic achievement in photography - I haven't seen the image), would be undignified (regardless of the approach of the subject). For me, though, this is exclusive to photos where a face is identifiable. If it is someone's dog or their house or their whatever.. to bad so sad.

I've taken tons of candid shots around the city, most of it posted on my FaceBook... soon will make its way to my site... So far never had any problems as such... I would not have an issue with removing any of the images as long as the person asks nicely... If they were rude about it I'd offer them the chance to buy the exclusive rights to the image in which case I'd stop using it myself for lets say $500


On a side note I was about to take a candid shot of this very interesting looking probably homeless girl... She had nice tattoos and what not... Anyhow as I was about to take the shot she noticed me jumped up turned around and started to flip out at me... Yelling that I have no rights to do so - that I am breaking the law, that she wants the film out of the camera (what film???) and telling me that she'll call the cops... I asked her what law I was breaking... Told her also to call the cops as I would be having dinner next door so they can find me there... I hate dealing with stupid people... Too bad cause I know it would have been a great shot...

Tone is very hard to discern on the internet, while her comment certainly wasn't polite I thought it was more desperate than aggressive, and full of obvious urgency. Removing the image was absolutely the right thing to do (though I accidentally clicked the wrong answer in the poll).

Whatever her reasons and approach I think any decent-minded photographer would remove any image clearly identifying a person if requested by that person. It's got nothing to do with the law or expectation of privacy, and it's disappointing to hear so many people clamouring to criticise her. The law shouldn't be an issue in a situation like this, where someone is so obviously distraught at being on the internet like this.

I've been asked twice to remove images and have done without argument. I've had many more people, who recognised themselves or family members in my images, be perfectly happy about it. I always offer them free copies if they contact me and have given over 100 prints away in the last three years.

In the end you did the right thing, you did the right thing taking the picture and posting it, and you did the right thing taking it down.

Was she sitting on Yonge St. next to Pickle Barrel? With her dog?

Like the paparazzi. They sure love taking photos to score that one photo for big $$$ but they also hate their photo being taken... one of the newschannel ran a segment on the paparazzi and one went out taking photos of the paparazzi and ended up getting pushed around and mouthed off at.

Paparazzo are a special breed of scum who give all of us who own a camera a bad name. Taking a shot in a public place is one thing. Hanging out of a tree with a 500mm lens and 2X TC four blocks away, so that you can shoot over someone's 3 metre tall privacy fence and then claim that the subject was "visible to the public", is something else entirely. They don't want their pictures taken because then they would be readily recognizable, and blocked from their nefarious deeds.

As to the original question I have, on occasion, deleted pictures when asked. If someone came to me in a confrontational manner though, I would likely get my back up and tell him/her to go pound sand. I'm under no obligation to remove a picture, either legally or morally, if it is taken in a public location and with no expectation of privacy.

welcome to the reality of street photography in Toronto, it's nothing like Asia. You have handled yourself perfectly, and quite frankly I don't think it would be worth for you to argue with this woman, most likely there is something not right with her marbles.

I have not seen the photo, and the only time I have problem with photos of strangers if it presents them in a bad light, I gather this wasn't a case here.

maybe she felt wronged so reacted in the way she did. Ppl want privacy, but it's getting more sparse in this day and age with all the online photo etc. sites. You may not have been "wrong" to post the pic legally, but ethically if the person doesn't want their pic online, I'd remove it.

I agree with Dave; she should have PM'd you. You did handle it well though.
I also agree that she was on the right asking for the photo to be removed; it doesn't matter why (personal safety, whatever...) I feel it is her choice.

I would not want my photo up by people I do not know without consent either.

On one hand you have a great shot (i didn't see it but will assume such)... on the other you could be letting her crazy sociopath ex husband know where here new home is. We will never know what the panic was really for.

Err on the side of caution. I put people before pictures and would have taken it down too.