Toronto Photography Meetup Group

Kensington Market

Venice

I'm sorry but I think those shots come across as voyeuristic. first of all you're using a zoom lens, secondly you only focused on the girl and finally you didn't put the main subject in a "place". they're in a subway station but then again, except them kissing, what else is going on?

IMO the best candid shots are when people are in a public place and they do have a sense of your presence, so you're not simply sniping at them from afar, because that would be voyeurism.

here is one by me taken at dundas square last year.

<a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/nahiam/Toronto/photo#4972545204401930258"><img src="http://lh6.google.com/nahiam/RQIHhInzABI/AAAAAAAAAHg/6-dg8Si1KOg/s144/Picture%20015.jpg"></a>

I understand how those shots can come across as being voyeuristic, since they are showing an intimate moment with the subjects unaware of my presence. However, just because someone uses a telephoto doesn't make them a voyeur either. With the lens that I used, I was approx. 15 ft. away from the subject, which is hardly hiding in the bushes! As for a public place, it is on a subway platform afterall, and you can see other people standing behind them.

I don't really want to get into an argument about candid vs. voyeurism vs. photojournalism, etc etc. But if the definition is what you're using to judge the merits of my photographs, then that's your loss.

Shooting with a 17-55 from the hip:
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/maelswarm/422523827/" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://farm1.static.flickr.com/171/422523827_5dc8359201.jpg" width="334" height="500" alt="'Formula 1' Baby"></a>

Voyeurism is a criminal act, please do not throw words like that around if you're not sure of the meaning.

What Taylor did is _not_ voyeurism.

From the Canadian Criminal Code http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/ShowDoc/cs ... ting=false

[quote]Voyeurism

162. (1) Every one commits an offence who, surreptitiously, observes

Definitely not "voyeuristic" as they are on a subway platform, with the people in the background not too far from them!

Right, so folks who shoot birds with tele zooms have bird fetish!
they should make the birds aware of their presence first ....
Way to go politically correctness

Thanks for the support guys, but I think this is getting a bit out of hand!

Instead of picking apart words, let's see your decisive moments!

here are a few from when i lived in Vienna... almost all were shot with a 50mm lens...

Great candids Ken! Were those from your Leica days?

taylor - still shooting rangefinders (bth leica and voigtlander).. but yes.. that was from 2004 when i only had one camera with me in vienna... an M4-P with a 50/2...

The reason I raised that point with you is because I usually shoot on the street of Toronto but i strictly avoid places where people are tense and i also avoid shooting people in a situation which they might not like. for me that's the rule.

for example, do you think the young lady in your photos would be happy if she sees that photo, or she'd be a little "creeped out"?

I'm a little concerned about the good will of public in regards to us photographers. I would hate if people start becoming suspicious and outright hostile because we photograph them in compromising situations where they wish they were not photographed.

Since, you used the term "decisive moment", i gather that you're familiar with works of Cartier-Bresson. But remember that one of his major maxim was to respect one's subject while photographing them and be sensitive and intuitive to the situation.

Please don't think i'm lecturing, its just that i feel responsible being a street photographer in Toronto to share and inform so we all enjoy the goodwill of people In Toronto.

Here is an excellent article by Michael Richmann of luminous landscapes, he lives in Toronto: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutor ... reet.shtml

cheers,

zoraak - while i can understand your concerns, i'm not sure how you can deduce the circumstances under which taylor produce that image... nor, would i suggest, can you read the mind of the woman in the image... i respect the approach you take to street photography and i believe that how other's approach it is their business and that there isn't a 'right or wrong' way to do it... dont worry too much about what the 'public' thinks about photographers... not something you can control... all you can do is be respectful to your subject, however that may manifest itself ...

personally i don't enjoy using lenses longer than 50mm (other than composed portraits)... but if it works for Taylor, then that's all that matters to him...

whether or you like or dislike is image is a personal matter...

i wish you good light..

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/88821321@N00/1966850138/" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2027/1966850138_4e40f64918_o.jpg" width="800" height="533" alt="couple-on-beach"></a>
Oly SP, 40/1.7 uncropped.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/88821321@N00/1966850116/" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2324/1966850116_35c99f7c1f_o.jpg" width="800" height="533" alt="art_gallery"></a>
Canonet G3 QL17 uncropped

My 2 cents - I would love that photo if I was that woman!

Random candids of classmates. Taken with the 70-200VR (thanks Taylor!) and usually garnered a "WTF!" response. Now they want me to take more in classes.

<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2122/1966662421_d85cac06b0.jpg" width="500" height="334" alt="DSC_2576.jpg">

<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2416/1967490646_b74c6e0d6a.jpg" width="335" height="500" alt="DSC_2584.jpg">

<img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2174/1966661841_ed31a1c578.jpg" width="334" height="500" alt="DSC_2601.jpg">

This was shot with either a 35 or 50mm lens.

edit: It was the 35. Didn't have the adapter for the 50 when I shot this.

Taylor, the rights link you listed is great and valuable (and thank you for posting), but as it is specific to the States, I wonder if anyone is familiar with any Canadian photographer rights links?

Also, for me, the bigger question is not whether I can photograph some random person, but what I am legally allowed to do with that photograph. Is it legal for us to post it on the internet? Obviously, I couldn't use it in any sort of advertising without their full consent.

So, back to the matter at hand

[quote="jasfitz"]So, back to the matter at hand

For the Canadian Version, http://ambientlight.ca/laws.shtml

I'm pretty sure it's been discussed before too.

[quote="jasfitz"]
So, back to the matter at hand

Thanks for the link.

Good point, I should have chosen my words more carefully. What I meant to say was this: When you're snapping away at someone legally, and they approach you and want to know why you're taking photos of them, or what you intend to use them for, how do you respond? Are you truthful? Do you tell them only what they need to know?

I think of it as a game. Ad part of the game is to take your pics without being seen or "caught". That's not to imply that we're doing something devious or wrong, but as far as I'm concerned the intent of the game is to capture a scene or moment without being seen. Once you're visible/apparent to the subject then you lose what was candid and the resulting photo immediately changes. It just depends on what you're attempting to do with your pics. Ideally I like to get unposed and real candids, not stilted/sometimes awkward poses.

It's not easy doing candids. Most of us _do_ have that attitude of "I don't want to get caught" and it often shows.

The answer then, is "it depends". If they are non-confrontational and look open to reason, then I'll explain - this hasn't yet even happen to me once yet.

Most people don't bother to come up to me to ask. OTOH, I'm frequently stopped by strangers looking for directions and such... or to help them take a picture

I've been noticed quite a few times when I'm taking someone's photo. Most of the time, I smile back at them and they just keep doing their own daily thing. The worst thing you can do is TRY to be sneaky about it, but rather do it in a way that shows you don't mind being seen.

For the times that I've been approached (e.g. in an arcade by the manager) I show them the photos that I've taken of them, tell them that this is a hobby and I'm not doing it for commercial means, and if they want a copy of the photo. I've never run into problems where they've asked their photo to be deleted, or escalating confrontation.

I think for me, I don't play the game of "I don't want to be caught", I don't mind if I am.

Talk about intimate moment in public area


Distillery coffee shop, Toronto




As I said, I had tons of candids

But I have to say that I went for the interesting architectural feature rather than the groping hand

Daniel

Here is my little angel slipping in the stroller

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/sirtie/1912380064/" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2377/1912380064_7b0f28f334.jpg" width="363" height="500" alt="Dreaming of ponies"></a>

Here are a few from my recent trip to Montreal.

Haha! "Aww honey, you're so sweet!"

I think the 105mm is my favourite for candids:
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/maelswarm/1559909669/" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2200/1559909669_3952d8de3f.jpg" width="332" height="500" alt="Shafted"></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/maelswarm/1560937208/" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2156/1560937208_0b6682bb0e.jpg" width="332" height="500" alt="Heavenly lovers"></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/maelswarm/1561002256/" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2212/1561002256_9d85c806f8.jpg" width="500" height="332" alt="Corridors of light"></a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/maelswarm/1560845416/" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2311/1560845416_6417c72e33.jpg" width="500" height="281" alt="How's the book?"></a>

You never disappoint k-beer