another subway shot

[doug anderson]

cropped version

Focus is a little softer in the cropped version, but I still like it.

 

[Cedric MASSOULIER]

Second version is the best for me. We better feel this woman's state of mind.

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Focus is a little softer in the cropped version, but I still like it.

Hi Doug,

I hope you don't mind my mentioning it, but this would be considered an uncommissioned portrait in my jurisdiction (The Netherlands), and is subject to portrait law (specifically chapter 21 of the Intellectual Property law AKA Copyright Act).

Having said that, I don't think this would cause any problems (although IANAL), but the tricky part of the law is that we cannot know if any 'reasonable interest' of the subject is being violated by publishing, which is what the law protects. Just, as a thought exercise, suppose she was in a witness protection program ...

Does that mean we have to be paranoid about shooting in public spaces? No, I'm just cautioning agains potential ramifications resulting from a seemingly innocent capture of (someone's) mood. Personally I would only publish such a pcture if it is very special in some artistic way, not just because she's pretty.

Kind regards,
Bart

 

[Asher Kelman]

Doug,

I find such pictures hardly ever look there best in color, as most colors are not in harmony with the sense of the picture. That's just my feelings on the subject. Also the pictures could be viewed easier just about 20% smaller so as to allow some white space on the page around it. That way one can grasp the entire picture in a glance. On the wall this picture size would be perfect in a frame.

I like the subject, but I'd prefer a sharp rendition. The blur does not help although perhaps it indicates the idea that she is like a rag doll, pulled and buffeted by forces outside her. Since there are many people on trains, there really is no barrier to technically delivering a high quality image.

Bart,

Let's suppose that this picture was taken in Holland by a tourist who returned to the USA or Japan, for example. Also imagine that the subject claims "reasonable interest" is being violated. Then what is the length of the arm of Dutch law to reach after the photographer?

Asher

 

[Kathy Rappaport]

interesting thought

Because I have some photos from a visit to Holland (of some street photographers). Would posting them violate these laws?

 

[doug anderson]

Hi Doug,

I hope you don't mind my mentioning it, but this would be considered an uncommissioned portrait in my jurisdiction (The Netherlands), and is subject to portrait law (specifically chapter 21 of the Intellectual Property law AKA Copyright Act).

Having said that, I don't think this would cause any problems (although IANAL), but the tricky part of the law is that we cannot know if any 'reasonable interest' of the subject is being violated by publishing, which is what the law protects. Just, as a thought exercise, suppose she was in a witness protection program ...

Does that mean we have to be paranoid about shooting in public spaces? No, I'm just cautioning agains potential ramifications resulting from a seemingly innocent capture of (someone's) mood. Personally I would only publish such a pcture if it is very special in some artistic way, not just because she's pretty.

Kind regards,
Bart

Bart: we have no such law here, thank goodness, although we have some people who wish there was.

Addendum: how do you respond to the tone of the picture? Is it exploitive? I think not. This, to me, is the only important criteria. Everything else is moralizing. My intent is to celebrate people. The law is ham-fisted when mis-used.

D

 

[Dierk Haasis]

Voice of dissent.

I like the original crop much better. I'd also play a bit with the colour, probably not a complete b/w but partial.

As for the legality of publication. Well, if she doesn't want to be shown around, Doug is in trouble. Eventually he might get away with it, depending on the crop - in the original version she is not the subject - and intent of publication. If it is Art it might be ruled OK, if it is commercial Doug loses big time, if it is in an unflattering context he will also lose.

 

[doug anderson]

Asher: I've been wanting to bring this subject up for a while and you have given me the opportunity. Cartier-Bresson complained that contemporary photographers were "obsessed" with image sharpness. Many of his photos are out of focus, but somehow the photos work.

My question, concerning street photography, is how important is it, given that it presents itself immediately as street photography?

Cheers,

Doug

 

[Cem_Usakligil]

Because I have some photos from a visit to Holland (of some street photographers). Would posting them violate these laws?

Maybe Bart will tell for sure but I don't expect any of your pictures from here to create any legal problems.

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Let's suppose that this picture was taken in Holland by a tourist who returned to the USA or Japan, for example. Also imagine that the subject claims "reasonable interest" is being violated. Then what is the length of the arm of Dutch law to reach after the photographer?

Hard to say in general, as it depends on the specific reasonable interests being violated. I do know that the USA and the Netherlands have an extradition treaty, and it is occasionally used even to hear unwilling witnesses. It simply depends on the perceived severity of the violation, which is impossible to predict.

Again, I don't think we have to worry too much, afterall the maximum fine for the act of publishing alone is € 11,250.00 (but airline tickets are cheaper than that), but there might be other damages awarded as well. Also, not all damages can be easily expressed in monetary value, so there will certainly be legal representation costs involved as well, and a lot of hassle.

Bart

 

[doug anderson]

uncropped, black and white version

Asher suggested black and white. Here it is.