Paleo Retiree writes:
A pic I fired off last summer in NYC’s Washington Square Park:
The case, as far as I can tell, for this snap being deemed a Creepshot: 1) Skin. 2) I didn’t ask my subjects for permission, either to take the shot or to post the shot online. 3) I definitely sneaked the shot off. 4) OK, I admit it, part — a big part — of what moved me to take the snap was, “Hey, girls, er, young women in bikinis!” And creating-from-lust is no longer permissable … Except in pop music … fashion … advertising … and porn. But whatever. It’s not like these things have to make sense, let alone be consistent.
The case, as far as I can tell, for this snap NOT being considered a Creepshot: 1) You can’t really tell who the girls, er, young women are, so who cares? 2) The galz have chosen, of their own free will, to display themselves in a very public spot. (This being a busy park in a huge city, there’s no question that thousands of people passed by during their sunbathing session.) And let’s be real: If/when you’re in public, you’re gonna get looked at — and possibly be photographed — by strangers. Deal with it.
But I’m an oldguy. What do I know about today’s mores, assumptions and sensitivities?
Your thoughts, hunches and verdicts?
- My original posting about Creepshots lays out my general thoughts about the topic. Don’t skip the comments, where many visitors offer up sharp observations and reflections.
- I’m no lawyer, but this strikes me as a good guide to the legalities of taking photographs in public. “Legal” doesn’t automatically mean “admirable” and/or “desirable,” of course.
- Fenster turned up a provocative interview with a news photographer who’s also a lawyer. “If you’re in public, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy,” he says. “That’s the difference between what is public and what is private. It’s the reason that all those security cameras that are on every city street are allowed to photograph us, because when we’re out in public we have no reasonable expectation of privacy.”