When did we stop being “nice” ….(and become “nasty”) Part 2 - What you said. 

Only ever happened to me once. I was taking a photo of Liverpool Town Hall with a film camera (Nikon F3). It is a very busy area filled with people eating, drinking and walking about. A man walked up to me and asked if I was taking a photo of him. I said that I wasn't but at least six CCTV cameras dotted about the area were. He walked away!

I find it very odd that people are less threatened by smart phone cameras compared with a larger DSLR. More than often people who know little of photography assume that their smartphone is "better than a professional camera". If that is the case, we should be more worried as just about everyone has a smartphone and have the capability to use it for nefarious means.

Pyrric Victory. To lose the battle to win the war

Smart cameras with phones on them - love it :)

Photographs taken about one hundred years ago, street photography if you will, is now a valued historical record.

I live in a complex where my backyard overlooks the community pool area. Throughout the year I enjoy sitting on my porch and photographing all of the wildlife, the birds, ground animals, deer, etc etc. But from May until September when the pool is open, I’m reluctant to have my camera with me on my back porch due to the pool being a couple hundred yards down the way from me. I’ve preemptively quit taking photos from my back porch over summer in fear of a Karen making a stink over something that isn’t a thing. I thank you for this video and your previous for bringing this up.

I dont think anyone considers the UK a free country these days.

Thank you, Brian! While I am not interested in street photography this has not been an issue for me. I was once approached by a man who was taking photos of people on a fishing pier. I was there photographing migratory shorebirds, as it is a prime spot. The gentleman asked me if he could please take a photo of me. He also asked if he could please have my email address to send a copy to me. He was very concerned about being taken the wrong way but he thought that I would agree, as I was holding a camera. I agreed. He took the photo and did mail a copy (which has been my profile photo on FB for some time.) He was very polite. No stocking, and all that other nonsense. I was glad to add to his enjoyment of his day. Have yet to read comments but back in the Dark Ages of film, there were rules about obtaining model releases if one was to photograph an individual (not a general shot of a large crowd.) Perhaps someone else commented on that. As for our freedoms, an important take-away of my studies of Political Science taught me that if FEAR can be instilled into people and an "ADVOCATE" appears to "SAVE" them from social ills, then they can easily persuaded to ABDICATE THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS. Hmmm...where have I seen that in my life's history? (Snear.) Yes! Let's all continue to take out our cameras! (Personally, I find them less annoying than smartphones.) Cheers!

About a year ago I shot some footage along a walkway near the beach - t was a wide angle. As I walked along the path I saw a middle aged woman eye balling me as if I had 3 heads so I made the mistake of winking at her as I felt a little under the microscope. - when I returned back along the path, her tattooed covered companion started screaming at me and accusing me of filming girls sunbaking although I was not near the half a dozen sunbaking and was using a wide angle and filming the path etc I tried to explain this but I couldn’t stop him screaming and accusing and as I was getting weird looks from others I just left but I though maybe later there could have been some mental health issues with the individuals and I have learnt to maybe just avoid such individuals as anyone who confronts people with camera are likely to have some issue and best to steer clear and little can be done to explain the laws to such folk and hope I don’t run into such folks in the future

Brian, just found your channel. Watched part 1 and now part 2. Yes I have been accosted in public taking a picture of a church/temple! By a well dressed gentleman who I think thought he was in the picture, not sure how as I was pointing at the golden angel on top of the spire stood on the footpath next to the A6!. (Mormon temple Chorley) I walked away before I got into trouble and he got hurt. I love my photography, it's my go to hobby and take pictures of anything I find interesting. I recently bought a drone (4 years ago) and after speaking to my friend who uses one for videoing he said it would take my photography to another level (no pun intended!) Now flying a drone takes folk moaning to another level once again!! How ever, it is not my experience yet whilst flying. Quite the opposite. I was taking pictures of my friend on his paddle board in the sea on a quiet beech. The wife spots for me whilst I fly. She warned me of a family approaching. Instead of being the normal Karens it was the polar opposite. Wanting to see the photos and congratulate me on my hobby. They thought it was wonderful. I don't like confrontation, and I am not very good at it. It's the one thing that holds back my photography, being scared of getting into a confrontation with a Karen. Reading the comments was helpful knowing I am not alone in this. Sorry for the long post. Subscribed and looking forward to catching up on your content.

Ive battled this for years about the freedom of taking photos in public especially when mobile phones are used in public all the time and very few bat an eyelid -- but hang a telephoto on the end for a DSLR or mirrorless and its like a magnet to people .. I have kinda moved away from digital cameras and moved back to film .. simple choice and I have the prints - intead off 20,000 photos buried on some hard-drive or cloud based storage -- and may I tip my hat off to Pentax for releasing a brand new analogue film camera -- maybe this is a sign for the way the market is turning -- greetings from Ireland

It’s very rare, I’ve had two incidents in four years. The law is clear in the UK. A women accused me of taking her picture, which I hadn’t and threatened the police. I told her to get them and stood my ground. She never came back 😂

People are much more suspicious of each other as well nowadays, you stand out doing anything remotely unusual and people feel threatened. Then you add in the usual hysteria about peadophiles and terrorists being on every street corner and people act first and think later.

I'm a bit mixed with taking people's photos without permission, but that's purely a personal thing and I accept that others have different thresholds for what is acceptable/ethical to them. What's baffling to me though is the whole thing where it's more acceptable to take photos of people discreetly than openly and obviously with a camera. People record strangers all day on smart phones, surveillance cameras, ray-ban meta glasses, inappropriately positioned doorbell cameras, etc... but then when you give the visual courtesy to be like "I'm clearly holding a camera, I'm probably not after a photo of you in particular but if you're doing a crime, having a bad day, or would just rather make sure you're not in a photo then just letting you know I'm the person you can calmly ask to delete or not take any photos" it's somehow seen as more invasive than somebody on the train taking video with their phone... bizarre world.

It's ALL We Evet Hear Bri!! Not Allowed is the new Not Allowed or it should be! 😮

I think it's the proliferation of images on the internet and privacy of people having been trampled heavily (particularly by the big tech companies, but also the governments), so that people are now more easily triggered by having their photo taking (even in public). And I've also seen some street photographers on RU-vid, who are very brazen in pursuing their art, which doesn't help the situation (a few bad apples definitely spoil the bunch). I'm personally not often taking photos on the street, but I'm keenly aware that some people don't want their photo taken and if I was primarily into that photography, I would probably approach them (either before or after taking their photo and ask them for permission, even if I would risk to be asked to delete the photo from the camera).

Good response, Brian. I have revised my viewpoint a bit though. Those that object to others taking photos don't actually have an issue with you taking a photo. They have a "chip on their shoulder" about everything - they are "Karens".... They essentially have a problem with everyone and everything. I had one of those accost me in one of your previous videos.

I was once taking some pictures at a bus terminal when a restaurant owner popped his head out behind me and demanded me to delete all my pictures because he didn’t want his restaurant to be photographed. This stuff happens every day, getting weird looks from people for the audacity of holding a camera in my hand. Only time I’m perfectly comfortable is if I’m attending a wedding, everyone is expected to be photographed there.

Stopped by a juvenile correction faciality today for some snaps (working on video of the area). Beautiful old world administration building, publicly accessible, not restricted. Everything else is fenced in, no public access. A guard walked out to greet me within two minutes. We had a nice chat and he said, no problem talking photo's, just don't film the kids. Yup, not my intention, just interested in the building itself. I'm learning more and more how to avoid conflict. If someone approaches me being nasty, I just walk away and don't engage them anymore. I've had people track me down, threaten me and call the police, more than once. One time I filed a complaint against a park warden and I haven't been back since!

Note that the people who wrote about their problems don't necessarily represent 100% of photographers. Those that never experienced anything of the sort probably just didn't bother commenting. I get an occasional look from the people on the streets, but mostly it's just curiosity. People sometimes avoid walking in front of the lens when they see me taking a photo, but that's not due to privacy concerns as much as being careful not to spoil my photograph (something I'm thankful for since I shoot film and re-taking shots costs me actual money). No one has ever said anything to me about me taking photos, even when I was clearly photographing random passers-by. I live in Poland BTW.

Tank you Brian for keeping us informed.

Thank you Brian! Very good topic -- and as you say, the laws are different in different countries, as are the cultural views -- which, like the laws, change over time. I've seen many videos of photographers testing out cameras during new releases in Japan, and the crowds on the street seem oblivious to the video being shot and the photos being shot. Of course the crowds realize what is going on, but obviously there it is not of any major concern. But yes -- in some places people don't really know or understand the laws, and some just want to exert control in such situations -- right or wrong. Here in the US (I am pretty sure!) it is similar to the UK, that there is no expectation of privacy in public locations, and non-aggressive 'street photography' is legal. But that does not stop people from thinking that it is not legal and making a fuss -- and unfortunately a number of law-enforcement officers are ignorant of the laws as well, and will side with the 'loudest' person in such a dispute. There are some photographers in the US who have spent the night in jail awaiting their time before a judge who then chastises the police and releases the person (with nothing other than an apology). I don't do street photography for my own reasons -- shy and want to avoid any possible conflict -- though personally I love the photos as snapshots of life. But the potential of a conflict with a person, or the law, definitely is something that I will avoid. Oh well. But as you said -- lose the battle to win the war. Sometimes it stinks to have to 'give in' even when we're in the right, but in many cases the 'battle' is not worth it. Good to discuss this and see how different people experience this and deal with it -- so for discussing such an important topic I think that you deserve a big, hot, mug of tea!!!! Watch your PayPal!

Everyone wants to be special so if they confront you they feel special and important. I think covid has made some big changes for everyone and not necessarily for the better.

i was out once and had someone challenge me, i didn't even have my camera to my eye, lens cap was on, they got aggressive demanding to see the images on my camera. I politely declined then i pointed out all the CCTV cameras in the area and asked said person are you going to the control room to demand to look at the images they have of you? they walked away all they wanted was a confrontation which i am finding is common now.

I believe it is a case of being aware of where and what you are shooting. I live in Manchester and in the Northern Quarter there is some incredible street art and architecture. It’s also a place with shelters and support for homeless, addicts and vulnerable people many of whom do not appreciate being photographed for a myriad of reasons. I have the right to take photographs there as it is the public realm but a little sensitivity and self awareness goes a long way. On the flip side many companies and venues are on high alert for what they can perceive to be reconnaisance for security measures and weaknesses given events over the last decade. Whilst they can be clumsy interactions these business care not on jot for the photographer exercising creativity. Sadly the net effect of allsorts of unpleasantness has led to a level of paranoia in some cases. I’ve been photographing Manchester for over 10 years and have never had an issue by reading the environment, going early, being obvious about what I am taking images of and being confident but with humility and respect. I have had just one person ask me very politely not to take a photo of them which I wasn’t trying to do in any case so it was a simple acknowledgement and a friendly hello.

Do you think that in the film camera days you only had a limited number of shots available and therefore not as noticed as today when you can do as many shots as you want. This makes us more noticeable.

In the film days are used to take pictures in towns villages as a record in case they change but never went out to take pictures of people as I always thought is invading their privacy. Having said that my favourite picture of all time which published in the picture post 1948 of two lads about 10 going shopping with the message bag. They had bugger all but Boy did they look happy. Thanks Brian great topic.

Thank you for your thoughts Brian, and I agree this is something to be careful of. As you say its not worth getting into a punch up over, however annoying it is!

Karens are the worst kind of people I had one that spent 2 years trying to me fired from my job even though the bosses were on my side because I was just doing my job within the company rules she was bring a major pain to them on a daily basis back in the old days managers would tell people like that where to go even if they did so in an offensive way society has become to politically correct where we listen to every complaint justified or not then act on it it just empowers these types of people

Liked and Subscribed.

Good follow up video Brian (hope I spelled this correctly). Social media has created this monster. During the heyday of film photography, you didn’t have social media and smart phones where pics could be taken, reviewed, and posted on the internet in just mere seconds. Yes, I did hear that the UK is very picky about what can be done in public (almost as bad as Canada). Been slightly addicted to UK police dramas (I have Britbox on Amazon) and if some of the public limitation laws on these police dramas are true, then it is very restricting. Plus the fact you good folks have public monitoring cameras everywhere. Not to this level in the USA. In Japan (where I live now), more public video cameras monitoring people, but the Japanese are very good at posting “No Camera” signs where you are not allowed to take pictures. Unfortunately, I believe it will only get worse. Another law in Japan is every smart phone sold in Japan (whether Android or iPhone) must make a shutter noise when taking pics (no silent picture mode allowed). The reason for this is the amount of perverts taking pics on public trains.

The day you stop fighting for our rights is the day you give them up! I think going the extra step to not get people all riled up may be appropriate but most these people will shut the heck up when you let them know you have just as much right as they do! If not, it’s time they learned!

Watching this video while I take out my a6000 from 2017 and just got serviced and repaired spent a fortune but that’s besides the point in India where everyone is an influencer and vlogs everything with mostly cell phones and good cameras I’m curious to know where I fit in in 2024 walking around with a 55-210 lens. I plan to take it for wildlife photography tomorrow. Let’s see how it goes.

I do street photography in the US a sure way to get me to take your picture is to tell me I can’t. People focus on the camera but never on the 360 camera filming them it is hilarious. What I do make sure to do is wait a while to post those images.

Had a funny thing happen last week. Was at the Pride parade. Took ~1k images of marchers in the parade and viewers on the sidewalk. At one point I was at the closest to the paraders on the street. One of the paraders came up to me and asked if he could photograph me. Thee marcher turned the table on me. What a surprise. Mask On Nurse Marty (Ret)

I tend to do night street these days more often as there are far less humans and almost zero kids about. If I were up to no good would I walk around with a huge obvious camera hanging from my neck, or just use my tiny iPhone mini with its excellent camera. No one bats an eyelid at my phone, whilst some froth at the mouth if I'm holding my GH6

Hi Brian , I think this is becoming a real problem , I am now not comfortable in doing street photography at all , in any town due to any potential confrontation, I would still consider doing street photography within a group (but not my own town), as I think this lessens the chance of confrontation and reduces the chances of being called a 'weirdo'. Also I think its best to use a larger camera as you are less likely to be judged as a voyeur. Country parks still seems to be OK (not at weekends) , busy places but people seem to accept there might be photographers around - also I have considered taking a tripod even if i dont need it , just to look more of a professional. With all this in mind i am seriously considering selling my lovely every day camera as I just dont want to get involved in any hassle (the stress is not worth it), United Kingdom.

This mindset is very familiar, and not just western. I used to live in Japan, where 'no photography' signs are commonplace in shops and phones are required by law to have a shutter sound that cannot be switched off, but at the same time photography is a popular hobby and come cherry blossom season there are old men with tripod-mounted SLRs, lenses as long as their arm and jerkins with dozens of pockets bulging with gear taking pictures of flowers and nobody bats an eye. Once when I was on a day trip to Tokyo, I was photographing architecture and street scenes when a man accosted me and demanded I stop. "Why?" I asked. His answer was just "Privacy", to which I responded "Whose privacy? The buildings' privacy?". His answer was "everyone's". I told him I'm not taking pictures of people, I'm photographing the buildings. He threatened to tell the police, and wen I started to argue he turned around and walked off without a word. The really funny thing was, it was sunset in early autumn and still about 35 centigrade, but he had his tracksuit hood up and a facemask on, no way could he have been identified from any photo.

I feel you need to stand up for your (legal) rights, or it may become accepted that if you challenge someone doing street photography (or any type of photography), you can get it stopped. Use it, defend it or lose it.

I am an U.S. American serviceman retired in Bangkok...at my age I mostly do "street" photography...It seems that no one cares about photography in public here...except certain places ...such as some government places..sometimes certain temples etc....Cheers and best of luck.

That is why I stick to wildlife photography.. leaving home as early as possible at a time nobody is there. Leaving the area as soon as the first early dog walkers turn up.

Wear a T-Shirt with "TMZ", "The Sun" or some other tabloid name printed in large letters. No one will bother you. They might run away. :)

Interesting and a bit depressing, but I wonder if female photographers get the same reactions?

One of the few times where looking like a tourist is a benefit.

I find taking photos with the back screen flipped up on a small m43 camera and me looking down at the screen does wonders for unobtrusiveness. It seems to register with a lot of people that I am just a person looking down fiddling with an electronic gadget. But I do wonder what the laws are in North Korea and China for taking pictures. I suspect the "western" world is becoming more like them, at least a little bit.

A mobile phone can also record audio discretely and without anyone knowing that you are spying on them and their conversations!

It sounds like moral panic.

The blogger the ‘Black belt barrister’ covered street photography.

I know what I would’ve said to them lol as long as you respectful and got the common sense there’s no problem… if anyone asked me, I would show them my Instagram page and my QR badge

Last week I did a 8 mile street photography walk around downtown Orlando, Florida and the outskirts and people don’t say anything to you. The only comment I had was near the end of my walk two people sitting on chairs in front of an antique store asking if me I was going to arrest them? But in general with my street walks nobody bothers you, but I always go armed just in case you get that one idiot.

You have a right to roam act over there too correct? I always find it strange people (vloggers) wandering out of woodlands over a stone fence into private farming property to get to somewhere they want to photograph, in oz its straight up trespass and we need to get permission to enter but most other points stand in public space but yes we still get "karens" who think they know the law

If you want a taste of harassment try going out with a set of Google glasses, public enemy number one!

Hi Brian, GDPR does apply to us as photographers. A photograph or video is data. Should that data contain a data subject (a living person), the data subject has rights and expectations that apply to that data. The data subject can demand a copy of the data held on them. Restrictions on data held it should be: Kept to a minimum. Only used for the purpose it is held for. Only held for the minimum duration necessary. Needs to be securely disposed of. Shouldn't be shared without consent. If we're professional photographers, we are data controllers and need to register with the Information Commissioner Office. We need to comply with regulations/restrictions. Of course, we can take pictures to make a future historic archive, which can cut across some of the data restrictions. As only the living are data subjects, as time passes, so do the data subjects , the photographs/videos will then become free of GDPR.

Nothing has changed in people's mentality. Twenty years ago I finally bought my Trinity of f2.8 zooms. I found they were unusable in the Street (and elsewhere) because everybody thought I was a Professional and they were immediately suspicious. Today "normal" people use Smartphones. Anybody who uses a "real" camera (except for tourist snaps) is seen as a Professional and everybody is suspicious. BTW you haven't mentioned publication of images tken in the Street. Yes you have the right to take pictures in public places for your own consumption. However publishing them is much more delicate. If it's for Commercial use then you HAVE to get authorisation. Even posting images on Facebook is doubtful if your subject is identifiable. You may be attacked for slander if there is something about the image the subject doesn't like

Since less and less photographers manage to keep their images away from uploading to the internet I also refuse beeing photographed. In my country (Germany) I can expect that because the law protects my personal rights. In UK this might be different. I strictly keep persons out of my own images. They are boring anyway since humans became a biologic atttachment to smartphones.

I reckon it's a mentality here in Australia because the Karen's and the blokes who have objected to me having my camera facing their direction , and that is all it is their direction...in a public place is based on the behaviour they see on the news. Like people coming out of court pushing a camera man over...so they assume it's OK to take their anger out. Psychologically, it's the same for emergency workers. It wasn't until media showed the abuse from sad people that an influx of unnecessary behaviour escalated.

Hi Brian! Just a tip to keep a fellow bloke out of trouble...be careful when you use "Karen". It's considered offensive to some as it was originally intended to be a slur to women of a certain age and ethnicity.

Just some advice, maybe tone down the thumbnails and titles, the algorithm might love it short-term but you'll be losing the serious long-term viewers