James Danziger
shared some interesting thoughts about the rights of photographic subjects on his blog the other day. He states:
"I am one of the few people in the business who actually believes the subject should have some rights. That just by being out in a public space does not give a photographer the right to exploit your image for “fine art” purposes – which is pretty much where the law stands today."
He goes on to highlight a piece from the Washington Post, which I highly recommend reading, written by David Segal, titled "
Double Exposure." Segal interviewed several of Diane Arbus's subjects, and found out how they felt about their likeness being immortalized. The subjects he interviewed were all children at the time their photo was taken, and they all, including newsman Anderson Cooper, felt differently about the images. Now, if you are not familiar with Arbus's work, know that she had the ability to present a very dark, haunting, almost freakish version of human nature. In fact, Arbus did a lot of her work with what, at the time, was considered "freaks."
She shot dwarfs, transvestites, and mentally ill people. As Segal points out, these final images were not something that Norman Rockwell would create.
Arbus, in many of those cases, had written legal consent from the parents for the photographs. As Danziger pointed out, the law today allows for photographers to use the image of anyone they find on the street for non-commercial purposes. This means that if I saw you in a public place I could take your photograph, in whichever manner that I choose to present you, and sell it as art. I could not take that image and sell it to the fine people at Coca-Cola, and have them post it on billboards all over the globe without your consent. You would need to agree that, and most likely, take payment.
As a photographer I support, and execute, these rights. I take photos of people in public places all the time. I do take Danziger's point to heart, and exploiting someone is never my goal. But what if I was in a public place, and another photographer captured an image of me in a park, bending over, picking something up, and my behind was hanging out? What if they sold that photo as art, it became wildly popular, and I became known as the butt girl? Where are my rights? What if that photographer was the Diane Arbus, or Walker Evans of his generation, and the photo of my rear became become known as a masterpiece? (which by the way it...oh, nevermind)
These issues, for me, are not black and white. I am weaving my way through the gray area, and finding out what works for me as a shooter, and as a human being. Just because I have the right to do something doesn't mean I will always choose to execute it. I think the only thing set in stone is that I won't become a member of the paparazzi anytime soon.
Posts
