I don't have kids but..

[removed account4]

I remember an APUG post of a few years ago by Ken Nadvornick where he was accosted at a Washington state fair by security and told "not to photograph the kiddies" (which he hadn't been doing). His camera: a 4x5 Speed Graphic.

Dead Link Removed

 

[Theo Sulphate]

I miss Ken, too. Can't think of why he'd leave, but I hope not for a serious issue.

Anyway, I suppose it was another event where he had the Speed Graphic. He met an old press photographer there who showed him how it was really used "back in the day".

 

[barzune]

If they don't approve of other people looking at their kids in their bathing suits, then why are they letting their kids walk around in public in bathing suits?

Ummm... Because they are at a swimming park???

 

[jim10219]

Ummm... Because they are at a swimming park???

Yeah, but why are they letting their kids go to swimming parks at all if they know strangers will be looking at their kids in bathing suits? That's my point. If they're that concerned, they don't have to go to public swimming parks in the first place. These parents need to take responsibilities for their own decisions and quit trying to get society to do the parenting for them. I'm not saying that guy wasn't being creepy, because he was. I'm not saying it was a bad idea for someone to investigate the situation, because I believe that was the right thing to do. But you can't get mad at a guy for doing something you don't understand and made you uncomfortable if it didn't violate any laws. The problem here wasn't the photographer. The problem was the parents who want total control over everything but their own imaginations.

 

[nmp]

Yeah, but why are they letting their kids go to swimming parks at all if they know strangers will be looking at their kids in bathing suits? That's my point. If they're that concerned, they don't have to go to public swimming parks in the first place. These parents need to take responsibilities for their own decisions and quit trying to get society to do the parenting for them. I'm not saying that guy wasn't being creepy, because he was. I'm not saying it was a bad idea for someone to investigate the situation, because I believe that was the right thing to do. But you can't get mad at a guy for doing something you don't understand and made you uncomfortable if it didn't violate any laws. The problem here wasn't the photographer. The problem was the parents who want total control over everything but their own imaginations.

If the guy was acting creepy and it was okay to investigate him, but the problem was not the photographer but the parents? I am a little confused by the conflicting argument.

 

[jim10219]

If the guy was acting creepy and it was okay to investigate him, but the problem was not the photographer but the parents? I am a little confused by the conflicting argument.

What I'm saying is if you have a suspicion that something is awry, then you should probably check it out. Listen to your gut instinct. But after the guy wasn't found to have done anything illegal, like photograph kids naked in the locker room or something else violating the law, then they should have let him go and not banned him from the pool. And they certainly shouldn't have made threats against him or harassed him about it! The problem COULD have been the photographer. It was clearly worth the investigation. And had that been the end of the story, then I wouldn't have had an issue. But this story doesn't stop there. The photographer got death threats and was banned from the pool for 3 months. That means some parents over-reacted and took this thing too far. They acted like he DID do the things they imagined that he did, and couldn't separate their imagination from reality. And if they were THAT concerned that some photographer could be taking pictures of their children in bathing suits and using those photos as some kind of soft child porn, then why are they getting upset when they're the ones who dressed up their children in those clothes and paraded them around in public?

Those are two separate issues I'm arguing here. The only reason I'm arguing both at the same time is because both apply to this case. A big part of parenting is being consistent. Telling your kids it's okay to walk around in public dressed however they want while getting mad at others for looking at them dressed like that IS a conflicting argument. Accusing a man of abusing children who clearly didn't, so you can be free to abuse him IS a conflicting argument. Asking people to be reasonable and deliberate in their thought process without letting emotions take over is NOT a conflicting argument. Asking people to hold themselves to the same standard they hold others to is NOT a conflicting argument. So that's why they were right to investigate and wrong push it further after the investigation cleared him. It wasn't the act of investigating that put the parents in the wrong. It was their actions that followed that.

 

[CMoore]

Many of our favorite photo books of days gone by contain pictures of Kids/Children.....at the beach, Coney Island, Santa Cruz, The Disneyland Hotel swimming pool, etc etc. Seems like he was taking pictures of THE Kids in THE Pool.?
If he had a camera full of frames that were just 1-2-3 Nine Year old girls in swimsuits, i can understand people being concerned about "That".
I think it is mostly Paranoia and Overreacting.
I take a 2 mile walk most days. We live right next to a wild life preserve, so there is a lot of open land...lots of People With dogs. A lady walked by me, going the other direction, and she had 3 dogs. The big one ran up to me and was being friendly. I squatted down and took his picture with a Point and Shoot i happened to have. The lady stopped, kind of gave me a funny look, and asked me why i had Taken A Picture Of Her Dog.?
Why did i take a picture of Your F'ing Dog.?
You gotta be kidding me...!!

 

[Theo Sulphate]

My understanding is that sometimes parents would make photos of their kids in the bathtub or maybe running around naked in the back yard. At some point this innocent aspect of photography became thought of as bordering on child porn. I doubt any such photos could me made today and be sent to a lab without great risk of the police being called.

Well, this is the case in the U.S. at least. In some other countries nudity is not a big deal at all.

 

[Ces1um]

I have to admit I hate being in the background of other people's selfies. It feels like an invasion of privacy even though it really isn't and I know that. I certainly wouldn't take photos of strangers or other people's children but that's my personality rather than any type of rational or legal position. I quickly see a day coming when you will not be allowed to photograph anyone under a certain age without express consent. At some point a law will be passed for right or for wrong. Looking at the photo of the person photographing children in the pool, it certainly made me cringe. It does look like he's taking inappropriate photos even if that wasn't his motive in any way. I can understand why their parents reacted that way, even if legally he did nothing wrong. Given that I'm an avid photographer and even I feel this way, I imagine the average person likely feels even stronger about it. The strange thing is, if he was on the other side of that fence, with his own kid in the pool and he was taking pictures probably nobody would have said anything.