People in pictures allowed?

[DRS-Spotter]

Hi.
Just browsed through the newest upload from DRS and came accross this one

[photoid=550243]

Don't want to blame or bash the photographer which I know very well but since when is this kind of pic allowed?

Georg.
________
USACollege

[ExpressJet145]

Yeah why not? Im in about 10 photos on JetPhotos . Mr popular now woo hoo. lol.

[MaxPower]

I always ask people first (when spotting) if its okey to take a photo of them and upload it on a random aviation site. which some people may say (go for it) or come after you (with a baseballbat) if you do it anyway , I guess its okey. As long as you ask first .

Yeah good question, didnt recognize this either that it was allowed.

[Greg Wilson]

....................................................
since when is this kind of pic allowed?Georg.

More than likely when someone checked the "vote to add" box and clicked on "screen another photo".





.

[medic1]

More than likely when someone checked the "vote to add" box and clicked on "screen another photo".





.

[eagle334]

I have never understood way having someones face in a picture is such a bad thing. I can understand their right to privacy if you were shooting pictures of them in their home, but there is nothing against people taking your picture when you put yourself into a public place, such as an airshow. You can't possibly think that a phototgrapher from somewhere like Sports Illustrated got permission from all the people visible in the stands when he took a picture of Jerry Rice catching a football. The same thing goes for people at public events, you can ask them for permission, but you don't need it.

[kukkudrill]

I can understand their right to privacy if you were shooting pictures of them in their home, but there is nothing against people taking your picture when you put yourself into a public place, such as an airshow.

I agree entirely. Let's not become more Catholic than the Pope. After all we're not saying "the bystander in this picture is Joe Bloggs from Billsville."

[DeltaASA16]

I know Joe Bloggs from Billsville!!

[sluger020889]

I'm sure I'm not the only one when I say that I love pics with people or other photographers at work in the shot! It gives a different perspective on what we do...

[kukkudrill]

I know Joe Bloggs from Billsville!!

Give him my regards

[Showtime100]

I have never understood way having someones face in a picture is such a bad thing. I can understand their right to privacy if you were shooting pictures of them in their home, but there is nothing against people taking your picture when you put yourself into a public place, such as an airshow..

.................you can ask them for permission, but you don't need it.[/QUOTE]

Oh yes there is. You should check into the law, you will get an eye full. Most airshows while open to the public, take place on private property. Use of a photograph in an editorial manner is different.

.................you can ask them for permission, but you don't need it.

Depending on what you do with them, yes, you most definitely do. Ever wonder why model releases are needed? Or have you not heard of them?

[kukkudrill]

Showtime100, I'm not a lawyer but what you're saying doesn't sound right to me. Yes airshows may take place on private property but they are still public in the sense that large numbers of people may be present, just like in a sports venue for example. I very much doubt whether an individual attending a public event in such a place could claim that his right to privacy is being infringed if he happens to appear in a photo. Model release forms are used in very different situations.

I repeat I'm not a lawyer so I may be wrong but if you know the law and it's different from what I've said above (at least in your jurisdiction), please quote chapter and verse for us.

[Showtime100]

..please quote chapter and verse for us.

Yea, right. But I will summarize it for you. Think about what you said above, you are mis-understanding the intent of my comment. Certain circumstances OUTSIDE of journalistic use of a photo of a private citizen MAY require permission to use a persons image. The key is "journalistic use". Find the definition of that in your city, state, country, and you will see what I meant.

[FlyingPhotog]

Yea, right. But I will summarize it for you. Think about what you said above, you are mis-understanding the intent of my comment. Certain circumstances OUTSIDE of journalistic use of a photo of a private citizen MAY require permission to use a persons image. The key is "journalistic use". Find the definition of that in your city, state, country, and you will see what I meant.

I believe this qualifies as journalistic use. He was at the scene of an event, and documented it by taking a photo, just like a journalist would. He's not profiting by posting it here and the site is making no money by hosting the photo.

[DRS-Spotter]

I believe this qualifies as journalistic use. He was at the scene of an event, and documented it by taking a photo, just like a journalist would. He's not profiting by posting it here and the site is making no money by hosting the photo.

Thanks for coming back to the topic. That with the documentation is a good point. I only was unsure about if photos with showing faces are allowed here.

Georg.
________
SEXPASSION4U LIVE