Is this acceptable photography?

[Rense]

YouTube - WNYC Street Shots: Bruce Gilden

YouTube - WNYC Street Shots: Bruce Gilden

[Wolfdagon]

I think when he says "I have no ethics" that pretty much sums it up. Looked like he scared that frst old lady pretty good. If he jumped in front of me like that I would probably knock the flash or camera to the ground; "Sorry, thought you were attacking me." No better that the paparazzi if you ask me.

[R. House]

Absolutely. Street photography is much of the time an "in your face" style of shooting. Now, would I ever do it in the fashion Bruce does? Absolutely not, too many hangups to overcome about politeness and intruding on others comfort zones. I just wouldn't take his freedom of photography away. Thanks for the post, I found it very interesting.

[korman]

Originally Posted by Wolfdagon

No better that the paparazzi if you ask me.

And since paparazzi are an accepted part of the photography business, indispensable for newspapers and magazines, your conclusion is that this is acceptable also.

Korman

[korman]

Originally Posted by PHILL

I think he says it all when he admits to no Ethics. I'd fake a heart attack if he flashed me in the face, that might make him realise what could happen.

... or he'd just take a few more of you laying on the ground to start a new album named "Dead people I met".

The whole matter here's the gap between well-behaved and barely acceptable.

Korman

[mikman]

If we, as photographers, can't come to a conclusion whether it's acceptable or not, how is the general non-photographer public supposed to understand a strange man flashing them in the face without any warning?

I think it's not acceptable. He himself may have no ethics but I'd argue that he has no right to induce the same belief upon others. It's his breach of personal space that I find irritating. Street photography is a common practice but going within a meter of somebody and flashing them in the face is inconsiderate.

I'm not one to be a care-bear but what if he were to flash an epileptic in the face from under half a meter with a strong flash.

[fintastic]

I find it a little Intrusive for my taste, and might smack the camera down.
I wounder if that has happened to him .( someone thinking they are being attacked)

John

[korman]

Originally Posted by fintastic

I find it a little Intrusive for my taste, and might smack the camera down.
I wounder if that has happened to him .( someone thinking they are being attacked)

I bet, he selects his victims by the probability of this not going to happen. I wonder how many pictures like that he has of cops eating their donut or bruisers with baseball bats.

Korman

[peterst6906]

Gilden's style is not something I would be comfortable trying to copy. I find the approach to be too intrusive.

However, whether that also means that it's unacceptable photography, I'm not so sure.

Just because it's not my style or the style of most people, doesn't mean it's not legitimate? With almost 30 years shooting like this, it seems that within the context of Brooklyn and Coney Island, it's not really a problem.

If there's something additional captured in his images that a more considerate approach couldn't capture, then perhaps there is value in what he does.

One thing Gilden does seem to capture in his photographs is a reaction from the subject (I felt sorry for the old lady at the start). If a reaction is linked, not only to an persons individual emotions, but also to the general feelings of society at a particular time, then perhaps his photos reflect the general feeling and attitiude of society as a whole, not only the individual being photographed.

Maybe that's something worth photographing over the longer term, but I doubt he would be too successful for long doing it outside New York City.

Peter

[HighMark Adventures]

Well I will probably not make any friends on this topic but I disagree with the general census here. Could I be as in your face as he is, not likely. But I do like his style for capturing people naturally in the streets and not the fake oh hey he is taking my picture lets smile/pose bs.

Comment made about personal space, cmon did you watch the video, did you see how crowded it was when he was walking. Walking the streets of any large city is a mute point once you leave your door. He was not infringing on anybody`s quite time. He never chased anybody down an alley to get their pic, he never crept up on anybody who was buy themselves.He is a lot less intrusive on personnal space then hmm bums wanting change, aggressive street vendors, or that relious guy trying to enforce his beleifs upon you. If when walking the streets and I only had to deal with him for that split second in my"perssonal space" for the day I will take it. Another comment made about his flash and possible epileptic attack, seriously man cmon. Also I really don`t see the comparison to what he is doing as compared to the papparazzi.

[glockman99]

Actually, I like his "in your face" style of street photography. I wish I could shoot as quickly as he does and get a high percentage of in-focus, well composed, useable photos. I'm guessing that he has about a 24mm lens on that Leica.

[Ed Shapiro]

Well Folks- Let’s face it; street photography is not for the faint of heart from a viewpoint of doing it of viewing it. Being a native New Yorker, I can tell you that New York City is another planet and some guy walking around with a camera is not an outrageous sight to see. Come on people. In that place people walk by a murder in progress and don’t even stop to see what is going on- well until the police get there and then the rubberneck. Don’t worry about that old lady- the photographer was probably in more danger that she. He is fortunate that she didn’t take the business end of an umbrella up side his head and kill him- well it wasn’t raining that day. Who knows, she may have kicked him in the shins or some other place that would yield more pain.

Look at it this way- if an “artist. Set up on easel in a traffic island in Times Square, probably no one would pay him any mind unless the cops decided to chase him away for distracting drivers. Did the really make that place into a pedestrian mall?

In “The City” if people were really annoyed with him, they would advise him in a very unique to New York City manner. It goes like something this “Hey! Who are you Alan Funt or somebody- get out of my face before I…” etc- use you imagination. Most folks there are actually good sports and would probably have fun with a street photographer. Oh- Alan Funt was the originator of the first “Candid Camera” TV series.

For those who are interested in some classic NYC street photography and related items just Google; Friedlander (Street Photography), Weegee (Arthur Felig) and Gary Winigrand.

Just consider street photographers and folks doing their job; photographing people on the street. The are not voyeurs, creeps, or violent intruders. Mind you- if one suffers from agoraphobia or are wanted by the police, I guess street photographers can be pretty scary people.

Ed

[aam1234]

Originally Posted by korman

I bet, he selects his victims by the probability of this not going to happen. I wonder how many pictures like that he has of cops eating their donut or bruisers with baseball bats.

I was thinking the same. Most (all?) the people he shot were in the older side of age, and was wondering what will happen if he shoots young & athletic people.

I feel bad for the old lady he scared. At her health/age it could be fatal, not to mention impolite.

[Gna]

Originally Posted by Rense

YouTube - WNYC Street Shots: Bruce Gilden

As long as he doesn't publish or sell those images it's perfectly legal. Even if he is obnoxious.

[gsk]

Originally Posted by Gna

As long as he doesn't publish or sell those images it's perfectly legal. Even if he is obnoxious.

Is it really legal? Since his style is to go up into your face and take a photo, I bet you could cause him some trouble and say he took your photo without a model release contract signed.

Is it acceptable? I don't think it is because of his unethical style. I don't think it's true street photography because his into your face style makes the person react and therefore doesn't capture the true character of the person being photographed.

[felix.reichardt]

Have to admit he has some really fantastic images in his portfolio. Not sure I would accept to be photographed like that and he surely would get some warm words of appreciation

[Athena]

In general my feelings for him and his style after watching the video can be summed up with the words "obnoxious" or "annoying".

What I find unacceptable about what he is doing is the flash. Would it be ok for him to go around flashing a high powered light in people's faces were it not connected to a camera? I doubt many people would find that acceptable. So what makes it acceptable behavior just because the flash is helping him make a photo? I can't see from the video that anything productive other than his own pleasure is coming from this activity. It's selfish and inconsiderate.

Which is not to say that there aren't millions of other selfish and inconsiderate people in the world doing other annoying or obnoxious things. It's only to say that that is my opinion of his behavior.

[Rense]

Originally Posted by Ed Shapiro

...

Look at it this way- if an “artist. Set up on easel in a traffic island in Times Square, probably no one would pay him any mind unless the cops decided to chase him away for distracting drivers. Did the really make that place into a pedestrian mall?
...

I'm so gratefull I live in a city where an artist can set up his easel:

[~Emily~]

Crowded or not I don't think it is acceptable. Could he get the same effects with a longer lens and no flash? Or maybe just temporarily mount the camera on the side of a building and release the shutter remotely? Wouldn't he get the preoccupied look he's going for?

[fintastic]

"Wouldn't he get the preoccupied look he's going for?"

I don't think so this is fear in some of these people thats what makes it fun for him.