Street Photography: Are you a poser or a snatcher?

To ask, or not to ask: that is the question. I am referring, of course, to seeking permission before taking someone’s photograph on the street. Candid street photography is a genre that can trace its roots to the advent of Leica compact cameras. But some people nevertheless hold the view that snatching a shot of someone without asking permission is out of order. What do you think?

In a previous article, I described how I overcame my reluctance to photograph strangers. I also shared candid images of people taken while travelling. I noted, but did not discuss, the issue of whether failure to ask permission before shooting was a problem. My aim in this article is to dig in more deeply to that issue.

People pleasers 

There are many categories of street photography. Here is a comprehensive overview I came across recently. I would argue, as did this commentator, that the two primary categories are ‘with people’ and ‘without people’. In this article, I am focusing on the former.

Below that ‘with people’ category, there are undoubtedly multiple subcategories. I’ll illustrate some of these with photos I have taken. Along the way, I will share my thoughts on asking permission, or not.

I do not expect everyone to agree with my stance. In fact, I hope the comment section below overflows with differing perspectives. But, I will argue there are times to ask permission and times to adopt a ‘traceless’ approach.

Engaging your subject

Many street photographers prefer to engage with people they see on the street. Having spotted something interesting about a person, they ask if they can take their photograph. If the person agrees, the photographer proceeds to create a ‘street portrait’.

Apart from the initial awkwardness of approaching a stranger, street portraits are not controversial. They usually make good photographs because of what the person looks like, what they are wearing, their expression, or their pose.

If someone is sporting a crazy hairstyle or loud clothes, chances are they are looking to attract attention. In which case, they will enjoy being photographed. Some people even participate in ‘cosplay’ events, where one of the objectives seems to be having someone take your photograph. If someone declines to be photographed, no harm is done, and everyone moves on.

When travelling, I often bump into people and ask if I can take their photograph. Staff in customer-facing roles at restaurants and hotels are typically very agreeable. The same appears to be true of people working at street markets. I have taken portraits of many such individuals.

I agree with the advice offered by many accomplished street photographers: striking up a conversation with a stranger is a great way to break the ice before asking to take their photo. As an introvert, it has taken me time and practice to feel comfortable making that initial approach. I am now able to take that step without my heart rate or blood pressure rising too sharply.

Show and tell

While some strangers make good photographic subjects because of their looks, others catch the eye because of their actions. People with unusual skills are usually pleased to be photographed showing them off. These folk are fewer and further between, but if you happen upon one, you are in with a chance of an eye-catching picture.

I saw the juggler below while cycling one day. I initially cycled past, but then felt the urge to turn around and have a closer look. Not only was he juggling a set of clubs, but he was riding a unicycle across a slack rope! He agreed to let me photograph him. I had my Leica Q2 with me, and so was able to take this shot. What’s that about always wearing a camera?

I could replicate this story for each of the images in the gallery below. I saw someone doing something unusual, asked if I could take their picture, they showed off their skill, and I took the shot.

Traceless street photography

What about those situations where the person remains unaware that they have been photographed?

You might have come across the term ‘traceless’, which is used in many scientific disciplines. It denotes a procedure in which the system being observed or acted upon bears no trace of that intervention.

An example would be taking a measurement or an image of a live cell. A traceless approach leaves the cell in exactly the same state as before the measurement was taken. Another example would be releasing a molecule from a surface to which it is bonded. A traceless approach yields a molecule bearing no indication that it was ever so attached.

This is how I look at candid street photography. The photographer observes and captures an image without perturbing the scene in any way. Life proceeds as if there was never a photographer present.

But why on earth would one want to take such photographs, rather than the posed kind? For many photographers, it’s about documenting our world and creating art.

Artsy fartsy

If creating art sounds a bit too hifalutin, let’s call it taking photos that have merit by virtue of the arrangement of elements in the image. In this style, the human figure is just one such element, the others being light, shadows, geometric shapes, etc. Usually, you cannot identify the person in the photograph. For example, they might be visible in the distance, or in silhouette, or heading in the opposite direction.

This approach, sometimes referred to as ‘fine-art street photography’ appears to be a well accepted genre. There is even a book of that title.

Is the inclusion of an anonymous person in such a photo, even though their permission has not been sought, problematic? I do not think so. This is a clear example of traceless street photography, where both scene and individual are left undisturbed by the photographer.

Please let us know in the comments if you disagree.

On to trickier territory

When it comes to documenting our world, the traceless approach is just as applicable. In fact, if one aims to capture images of real life, candid photography is the way to do it. This is why, through photography, we can look back at the world that existed seventy years ago (timeframe chosen arbitrarily).

Life was so different then. No-one was staring at, or speaking into, cell-phones. They were wearing quite different clothes, banging out articles on typewriters, or speaking into rotary-dial telephones. When taken, such images would probably have been regarded as mundane, capturing quotidian details of life in that era. But from our vantage point, they open a window on our past, revealing the world of our grandparents and great-grandparents.

This is why photographers are capturing candid images of the world that exists today. Asking someone’s permission to photograph them will of course result in an image that is informative. But, it will not yield an image of someone going about their everyday business, unperturbed by a photographer. A candid street photograph represents both a moment in time, never to be repeated, and an unvarnished view of the world in which the action took place.

Full-on candid 

Now, I am not claiming that historians will be poring over my photographs in seventy years’ time for insights about San Diego in 2024. But, they might well be pouring over somebody’s candid shots. And those of us fascinated by what’s happening elsewhere in the world today can catch a glimpse through contemporary candid street photography.

And here’s the rub. Those candid photographs allow viewers to see not anonymised figures, but real, potentially identifiable, people. Furthermore, they are people whose permission to photograph them has not usually been sought.

In most parts of the world, photographing people in a public place is perfectly legal. Thus, the reservations expressed by some photographers relates to the ethics of street photography, not its legality. I have sought many opinions on this issue. One of the more interesting YouTube articles I watched involved asking members of the public what they thought. Most were very supportive of candid street photography, but with some caveats.

Photographing vulnerable people is a no-go area for me, and for the people interviewed. I am also wary of photographing young children without asking permission. I therefore think that as long as photographers adopt an ethical code along these lines, photographing people in public, without asking permission, is OK.

Social media

Regarding how the photos are used, most often they will be posted on social media channels. Occasionally, they might be featured in an exhibition. In exceptional cases, they might find their way into a book. The legal framework governing publication of images differs from country to country. However, based upon the extensive comments posted on my previous article, ‘editorial use’ online and in exhibitions seems to be acceptable.

Publication in a book will almost certainly require a ‘release’ signed by the person depicted. Here is an example of such a release, provided by The Royal Photographic Society. It seems that a publisher is very unlikely to publish a photograph of a person without receiving a signed release.

I welcome additional perspectives in the comments section.

Macfilos is a social media channel, whose ‘content generators’ are the authors who write the articles we publish. Our view is that we will publish photos that meet the standards imposed by our editorial team, considering technical, aesthetic, and ethical matters. If candid street photography articles meet these requirements, we are happy to publish them.

What do you think?

We look forward to hearing your thoughts on this topic, especially if you see yourself firmly in either the candid or posed camps. And if you would like to write about your experience of taking street photographs, we’d love to hear from you. Press the ‘Write for us’ button below to learn more.

---

Want to contribute an article to Macfilos? It’s easy. Just click the “Write for Us” button. We’ll help with the writing and guide you through the process.

---