Home » Bikini, Swimsuit, Lingerie, Fashion, Model Portfolio And Portrait Photography » Peaceful Photographers

Peaceful Photographers

May 29, 2007

Is people photography a violent art form? Is it true that (a part of) someone’s soul is stolen when a photograph is taken?

Is a “candid shot” just a nice photographic term for invasion of privacy?

That frozen moment when the shutter clicks will forever belong to the photographer and not the subject.
The answer is clear to me: if the person believes his or her soul is being stolen it is true (for that person). It is their soul therefore they have the right for that belief.

When a photo is taken without consent the subject has the right to object. Photos taken of people in public are not considered invasion of privacy by US law. But certain cultures, religions and customs are very different from laws of the United States.

The definition of the word “candid” lets photographers off too easily: “photography of subjects acting naturally or spontaneously without being posed”. I would also add “without permission” to the above.

On the other hand all photos which were “willingly given” to the photographer by the subject should be considered gifts of the highest value. No matter who or what the subject is: a person, a cloud, a bear, a flower, etc.

Having a camera pointed at someone’s face is a relatively new experience for human beings (less than 200 years old) and as many of us know it can be an uncomfortable experience.

So how violent is photography from the subject’s point of view?
This explanation might be overly dramatic but it will get my point across best.

A closer look reveals that some words in context with photography are quite aggressive, invasive even violent:

A photo shoot can easily be made to sound like a covert military operation: The subject first was framed, exposed, captured. After taking a head shot she was carried to a dark room where dodging and burning was applied. At last she was blown up.

Terms like scouting locations, manipulating light and subjects, posing, touching up and concealing evidence of imperfections also give the impression of photography being a forceful art form.

No wonder having photos “taken” can be an intimidating experience for the subject. And no wonder “shooting” subjects can be exciting, drug-like addicting experience for the photographer.
With that said there are very different approaches to photography from a celebrity paparazzi photographer to a still life photographer and everything in between.

I personally have been getting less and less satisfaction out of modeling photography which shows in the lack of modeling photo shoot posts in the last few months. They seem too forced, too fake and invasive resulting in uncomfortable scenarios and therefore useless images.
If I only wish to photograph models who’s looks I get inspired by, who I think have talent and out of those who do not want to charge me (God forbid will pay me) well, then my options are quite narrow.

Venturing into travel, people and documentary photography raises several ethical and privacy issues.
In the future I wish to employ “less violence” in my photos I plan to approach the change in my photographic style with patience and understanding.