A question about photography

[keico]

I am new here and have a strange question.

I know most people will ask questions about how to take better photos.

My question is in the opposite direction.

I am wondering. say a person does not want their photo taken.

Aside from covering your face or say hiding is there way to disrupt the photo while it is being taken.

An example say someone is trying to take your picture. so you shine a flashlight at them to mess up the picture.

that is a example.

are there other ways

that is my question

I am pretty sure this has never been asked.

all advice is greatly appreciated

 

[f/stopblues]

This will work for digi-cams: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse

Seriously though, describing your intent might gather some more useful responses

 

[ann]

walk directly toward the lens

 

[thebanana]

I usually snap my fingers 3 times and disappear.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

I'll take Ann's suggestion one step further.
Walk towards the lens while reaching into your jacket as if you intend to draw your shoulder holstered Colt Python.

 

[JBrunner]

walk directly toward the lens

and then lick it. If you win the ensuing scuffle, you will probably not be photographed by that person again.

 

[anyte]

Turning your back to the camera doesn't work. Making faces doesn't work either. I wonder if a Super Soaker Flashflood, Vaporizer, or Defender might do the trick.

 

[Sparky]

I use 'the force' and convince them (psychologically) to destroy their film as soon as the photo's taken. Hell, it works for alec guiness.

 

[Roger Hicks]

First, we have to assume that the photographer can't/won't take hints (surprisingly many will.) After that:

Criminals tend to put coats or blankets over their heads. A paper bag would work as well.

I'm slightly puzzled as to why non-criminals might worry that much about it.

Or are you perhaps researching a novel where a criminal (or celebrity) wishes to avoid being photographed?

If so, the simple answer is that the only things that are going to work in the long term are the aforementioned coat/blanket/paper bag AT ALL TIMES; or staying indoors with the curtains drawn AT ALL TIMES (the Howard Hughes option). The third option, the threat or execution of actual violence, is risky. Otherwise, the photographer's ultimate weapon is always the long lens.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[anyte]

I'm slightly puzzled as to why non-criminals might worry that much about it.

No one should ever have to justify a simple choice such as not wanting to be photographed.

It's attitudes like yours that make me even more hostile towards being photographed when I am simply going about daily business which cannot be executed from the confines of my home.

It's attitudes like yours that make me completely indifferent to the photographers who say they are hassled by cops for shooting in public places. Why should I care about your rights when you are so indifferent to my rights?

 

[mark]

Well here we go again.

If you do not want your picture taken then fine but in public you cannot assume you have that right to privacy, Anyte. It is the way it is. I don't like my picture taken either but I do accept that I may be in someone elses photo, if I am in public.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Why should I care about your rights when you are so indifferent to my rights?

Dear Anyte,

Because legally, there is no such right as you claim. On the other hand, the right that I claim -- the right to do anything lawful in a public place, including taking pictures -- does exist. You may not approve of this, but it is the law. Fortunately.

If someone wishes to be above the law, perhaps they should be required to explain themselves. As it was, I gave the benefit of the doubt to the original poster, and provided what I believe to be an honest, accurate, legal answer.

I'd also suggest that there are plenty of times when anyone might wish not to be photographed, but that most reasonable people are able to shrug this off as a trivial infringement of imagined rights.

I did say that surprisingly many photographers will take hints. If they won't -- well, as I said, the subject's options are limited.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[ann]

i do a lot of street shooting, which includes strangers. If they indicate they don't want their picture taken i respect that desire.

Strange as it seems i have people come up and ask me to take their photo. Which i always do when asked, and then send them a copy. It is the least that can be done.

 

[Roger Hicks]

i do a lot of street shooting, which includes strangers. If they indicate they don't want their picture taken i respect that desire.

Dear Ann,

Precisely. You take the hint. Most photographers do, myself included.

But if the photographer won't take the hint, there's not a lot the subject can do about it.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[Roger Hicks]

After my last reply, a further thought struck me.

With the rise of 'citizen journalism' agencies such as www.scoopt.com or www.citizenimage.com, an exaggerated aversion to having one's picture taken may exacerbate the problem. There are so many 'celebrities' today that most of us look more or less like one of them (or their father, or lover, or whatever), and throwing hysterics (or any approximation thereto) may well encourage people to believe we ARE celebrities and to take more pictures. Indeed, passers-by may join in, hoping to have a front-page exclusive of a fight between paparazzi and celebrities.

Cheers,

Roger

 

[Chan Tran]

I don't know how to stop people from taking pictures of me either but I don't really care. I never want to have my picture taken. I never have my portrait taken except for things like passport, driver license etc.. I never would pose for any photographer. However, if someone wants to take my picture I never make any attempt to stop them. It seems to work as really nobody wants to take picture of me.

 

[DougGrosjean]

I can see both sides of this coin.

My 12 y/o son hates having his photo taken. Mostly, we oblige. But sometimes, well - I'm the boss and relatives want photos, and we're going to get them. But many times, we'll also warn him of what we're doing so he can skip being in the photo. Give and take.

I have already learned all the tricks for avoiding photos, from my son, mentioned above.

OTOH, I have my photo taken by semi-strangers all the time. I write, and sometimes speak, mostly about motorcycle and motorcycle travel. As a result, at rallies I'm in the strange position of being asked if I'd mind if so-and-so had their photo taken with me. Since I'm very average-looking, I take it as high praise that they enjoy my speech / writing enough to bother taking a photo of me, and I always say yes, and do my best to look good when the camera is pointed my way. Even if my best isn't all that great, is *is* me in the photo, and the photo will likely be accurate.

I sort of like it. It's a huge compliment.

 

[davetravis]

At the shows, I keep a Bill Clinton mask handy for just this reason, no one would purposely shoot that ugly mug!

 

[Claire Senft]

Get a small electronic flash with a slave attached and point it at the camera that will be taking your photo. OK.. so this is only good if they are using flash.

Contact you friendly armory and get smoke grenades..flash bang grenades will also stimy the chicken hearted...these items may cause a bit of throuble way out of proportion to their worth.

Pepper spray and mace are another way to get yourself in trouble while avoiding having your photo taken.

 

[keico]

Thank you for your answers. here is more info

I appreciate everyones answers.

As to reason why I have asked this question.

I work for a very wealthy individual that wishes to remain anonymous.

He has on many occasions expressed to me, that because of who he is. He is tired of being photographed.

He understands that photographers have a right to photograph in public.

However he feels that at times they can go to far.

IE: hiding in trees to get pictures. trepassing on private property.

He says that no matter where he goes someone is always there with a camera.

He tells me stories of the past, when photographers would respect a person. "all you use to have to do was just ask them not to, and they would. Now they don't care."

He feels that even though there is a right to photgraph in public, he feels that a certain amount of "common sense" should be used when taking somones pictures.

He does not want anyone to think he never wants his picture taken, but he says there is a time and place for everything.

He has asked me to find a way to construct a device that can render someone taking a picture useless, and does not care how much it cost.

To protect his privacy I can not reveal his identity, however everyone knows who he is.

Once again all replies are greatly appreciated.

 

[keico]

Magnetic pulse

To the person that suggested a magnetic pulse.

Although that idea might work with digital camers, he does not wish to damage the persons personal property. Also anyone else who has an electronic device he would not like to damage their property also.

He would forever be in court having to replace all these devices that have been rendered useless.

Thanks again

 

[f/stopblues]

To the person that suggested a magnetic pulse.

Although that idea might work with digital camers, he does not wish to damage the persons personal property. Also anyone else who has an electronic device he would not like to damage their property also.

He would forever be in court having to replace all these devices that have been rendered useless.

Thanks again

It was in jest

 

[DougGrosjean]

I appreciate everyones answers.

As to reason why I have asked this question.

I work for a very wealthy individual that wishes to remain anonymous.

He has on many occasions expressed to me, that because of who he is. He is tired of being photographed.

He understands that photographers have a right to photograph in public.

However he feels that at times they can go to far.

IE: hiding in trees to get pictures. trepassing on private property.

He says that no matter where he goes someone is always there with a camera.

He tells me stories of the past, when photographers would respect a person. "all you use to have to do was just ask them not to, and they would. Now they don't care."

He feels that even though there is a right to photgraph in public, he feels that a certain amount of "common sense" should be used when taking somones pictures.

He does not want anyone to think he never wants his picture taken, but he says there is a time and place for everything.

He has asked me to find a way to construct a device that can render someone taking a picture useless, and does not care how much it cost.

To protect his privacy I can not reveal his identity, however everyone knows who he is.

Once again all replies are greatly appreciated.

Perhaps he could try a Burhka? Not sure I have the spelling right.... but head-to-toe coverage.

 

[Helen B]

I suggest that you ask, or study, the people with very famous faces who are not pestered by photographers, who can live like Joe Nobody. Technology will not give you an answer.

Best,
Helen

 

[Roger Hicks]

He has asked me to find a way to construct a device that can render someone taking a picture useless, and does not care how much it cost.

I hope you mean he wants to render the picture useless, not the person!

Seriously, there is no practical way of doing this. There was a paper a while back about auto-sensing of CCDs (which are very highly retroflective) but this only works with non-SLR cameras and in confined spaces.

With silver halide, cameras can be taken almost anywhere, as demonstrated by the famous Ruth Snyder execution pictures (1927) and a well-built mechanical camera is very hard to render inoperable without physical force.

There is however a story about Einstein complaining that he was recognized everywhere he went. He was not impressed with the answer given by one friend: "Get a haircut."

While I have some sympathy with your boss -- it must be very vexing to be photographed all the time like this -- I'd also suggest that the fact he is a very rich man is probably related to the opportunities for wealth creation in the modern world. Photography, especially 'celebrity' photography (for want of a better phrase), is an integral part of that modern world, so it goes with the territory.

So I have mixed feelings about the fact I can't help. On the one hand, I like being able to solve photographic problems. On the other, I can't help feeling that such a device (if it could be made, and I see no way that it can) might do more harm than good.

Cheers,

Roger