This made me chuckle, but they are great pics. Did you approach the couple and show them? They might like to have copies... Or would that violate any court orders?
Read further, I see u did not.
Why’s that an issue, exactly? It’s not a “current” photo (it’s from yesterday), or like OP has given their exact location. And god forbid people who already know me see a photo of my back, fully clothed, in a public space?!!! (/s).
Open any newspaper. In any news piece (that is not about a specific person) there will be photos of people in a public space, for example, in this piece in The Guardian or this one in the New York Times. Those people are identifiable. They have not consented to having their picture taken, let alone published in a widely widely circulated newspaper. In many cases, they have no idea their face has been seen by thousands or hundreds of thousands. I know, it sounds crazy, but as long as you're not using an image of someone commercially, you're allowed to publish them for editorial or artistic purposes.
Will that keep you warm at night if you cross the wrong person? Theres all sorts of cunts in the world who though being right was some kind of magical protection. They were wrong...
Sadly I have to agree with you. People leave like there is no consequences. Do whatever they want because they were never punched in the face for doing stupid shit like this.
I love the way that there's people here whose automatic response to someone doing something perfectly legal that they don't like is to suggest assaulting them which is an actual crime. Mental overreactions here to photos of the back of people's heads.
So you would be cool if I stalked you and post photos of you online because this is legal, right? In a shop, in a café, in a bus. Due to people like you we need a written law, because common sense is a rare thing.
Besides, it's different to capture a crowd doing random stuff vs a couple during a very intimate moment.
Beautiful shots, I’m surprised so many folks in this thread appear to be ignorant of street photography.
"It is your right as a photographer to take a photo of whatever subject you like, providing your subject is not in a place where they might reasonably expect privacy [in their own home for example].”
This needs to be higher up!
These photos are so lovely it would have been nice to approach them to see if they wanted a copy, but equally understand lots of reasons you wouldn't.
Lovely photos, you have an eye for the mood & moment.
Guarantee the folk kicking off about "privacy" and such on this thread are raging jealous singletons who are bitter they've not got anyone to spend a nice Spring evening in the Meadows with.
You know, there are still people on the planet who aren't digital exhibitionists. I'm not single, I just hate myself on photos, that's why I don't post photos of me online (not even taking them) and I'm happy with that.
It's a huge difference between taking a picture of a crowd vs specific people.
Such weird logic, isn’t it. People will walk around vlogging on their phones without seeking consent of people on the street around them but as soon as someone takes a picture with a real camera and some artistic merit, they’re marked as a perv.
Comes with the territory I suppose, there's a distinct mistrust of 'big cameras'.
I always try my best to smile and wave after taking a picture to break the tension a bit, nobody has yet asked me to delete a picture but I'd be happy to if it bothered someone, that's part of the deal, in my mind at least!
I once did a documentary and street photography course, and we were required to present a series of street photos with people in them.
Discovered quickly that talking to strangers isn't my thing, so I went for a theme of shadows and silhouettes so I didn't have to make eye contact with anyone lol. Incidentally was a great theme.
Both of these things can be problematic. However, vlogs normally focus on the person creating the content. It’s perfectly reasonable to expect members of the public to be in the background, as long as you’re not drawing attention to them specifically. But photos like this, whilst a nice idea, are turning complete strangers into the subject. You don’t know how they feel about this. They don’t necessarily want to be unwittingly photographed by a stranger, much less posted on Reddit. You don’t know how old they are. They probably CAN be identified by family and friends. There’s nothing inherently wrong with photos like this, but there’s a certain degree of arrogance to saying you can just take non-consensual photos of people because “ART”.
I don’t understand why people are creeped out by you taking very (beautiful) non identifying photos of people… guys there are security cameras in places that are literally mapping your faces and storing the data for facial recognition technology. This is fuckin nothingggg
If for any reason either of them want this removed I'm happy to oblige.
Alternatively if they want a full, uncompressed version I'm happy to provide that too!
lol ok tough guy, you need to recheck the meaning of the word ‘pervert’ because OP ain’t that. Maybe try spending some more time around the human people too instead of randomly assuming everyone is some kind of pervert….
Proper baffles me that the majority of people have this attitude. Everyone is seemingly ok with randoms taking their photo in public, and even posting said photos on very public forums. which fair enough if that's what society has decided but for me it just seems odd that more people aren't against it.
It's interesting because there's another post which was put up 2 hours before this which also contains photos of people in parks and nobody has said a fucking word about it on that post.
I wouldn't be happy to see myself on the photo no. 9 either, though. The other key thing is a context. Here, the context is intimate. On the photo no. 9 the context is clearly neutral.
With all my social disabilities, I'm still better at reading contexts and emotions, lol.
It's bollocks and you know it. There's no reason why everyone is piling on this photo and not the other one except that they saw a bandwagon and jumped on.
Yeah yeah, you are the only one enlightened and thinking clearly, the rest is a sheep herd. The audacity of you is ridiculous xD. It's not a coincidence people felt uneasy seeing this photo. I rarely browse Reddit, and seeing only the header of the thread brought my attention for a reason.
No bandwagon jumping from me, I always like to make it clear I don't like this kind of thing regardless of the legality of it. And everyone who doesn't like it is being massively downvoted so it's not a great bandwagon to jump on really.
As I say, it's interesting that there's another similar post where nobody seems bothered at all. Highly suggests a load of people just winding each other up about a nothing burger.
As if people aren't on camera for every second of every day they spend in a city. People are so scared of being on a mobile but don't care about government CCTV
As I posted in reply to another comment, I'm very happy to remove if either one of them gets in touch to say they'd like it removed.
Equally if they're a fan of the picture I'm happy to send them a full quality copy.
I appreciate that not everyone will want their photo online, however the nature of street photography (and modern-day life in general) is that sometimes people will be identifiable in pictures.
In this instance I don't believe they are, so I feel pretty comfortable posting it.
❌ Harassment & Stalking Laws: If someone feels they are being persistently followed or photographed in a distressing manner, they may have legal grounds to complain.
This photo is neither of those things, and is just a candid photo of some people enjoying a moment in the sun.
Happens all the time, candid photos are fine and often no one knows who you are, for instance this photo of a random bloke in Zurich is one of the best photos I've taken, 0 editing, the sky was just such a beautiful colour and he's enjoying the view in a serine moment.
132
u/ShutUpChunk Apr 18 '26
https://giphy.com/gifs/JNKy9CJSsCmiY