You aren't signed in     Sign In    Help

If You Put That Picture On The Internet I’ll Call My Lawyer

This explains it all...
These are so GAY! Who ever wears one needs to get backhanded!!
If You Put That Picture On The Internet I’ll Call My Lawyer by Thomas Hawk.
Photo by Jeremy Brooks.

My friend Jeremy Brooks blogged an altercation he had with some bozo (see photo above) on the street in San Francisco. He blogs about his experience here.

From Jeremy:

"However, Mr. Angry Overreaction Man decided that he now had a problem with me. He confronted me, demanding my camera. Of course, I refused. He got in my face and started threatening me, telling me that I cannot take his photo without his permission. I told him that yes, in fact, I can. He then walked up and bumped into me, trying to act tough. I told him that one more touch and I would call the police.

Of course, he didn’t like that very much, and at that point told me that if I put his picture on the internet, he would call his laywer. I assured him that his photo would be on the internet, and he then walked up and grabbed my camera lens. Well, that’s just not something that I will put up with, so I pulled the camera away from him and reached for my phone and started dialing. Once he saw that he turned away, still yelling threats, and continued on his way."


First off, Jeremy is absolutely within his rights to photograph anyone he wants to in public. There is no law that protects people from having their image taken or from you posting it on the internet. When someone goes out on a public street anyone can legally shoot them and publish their image within standard editorial context (i.e. news, fine art, etc.).

Now I've had my fair share of run ins with people who object to my taking their photograph in public. And my basic rule is this. If I shoot someone and they object and act civilly like a human being I'm more than happy to oblige their request not to publish their photograph. On the other hand if they are an asshole and are confrontational, chances are not only will I publish there photo on the internet, I very well may blog about my experience with them as well. And I might also use whatever social network I can (digg, reddit, flickr, etc.) to further share with the rest of the world what a prick they are.

It's easy. Someone's polite with me, I'll probably be polite back with them. Someone threatens me or tries to touch my camera or person or is unpolite, then I figure they have it coming.

I've had lots of people email me and ask me to remove photos of them that I have on the internet. And I've removed dozens of photos I've published on the internet. Be respectful and you'll get my respect. Be disrespectful and it won't get you anywhere.

If you have the inclination digg Jeremy's original blog post here. It would be nice to share with the rest of the world that being a jerk when someone takes your photo in public doesn't pay.

On reddit here: reddit.com/info/6ijt4/comments/ 
This photo has notes. Move your mouse over the photo to see them.

Comments

view profile

MOVED TO PIXELENS FOLLOW ME THERE! says:

Hi, I'm an admin for a group called You've been Expl(wh)ored!, and we'd love to have this added to the group!

GREAT capture - love the title! You're words couldn't be truer either... I'll take pictures of who I want, where I want (within public places of course)... ask me nicely or email me cordially and I'll not post/remove it... be an @$$hole and like you said - up it goes!

Thanks man!

EDIT: Dugg and blogged over at pixelens.com!

--
Seen in my contacts' photos. (?)
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

timothy*  Pro User  says:

dugg.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

timothy*  Pro User  says:

... nice jawbone though :)
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

apolide  Pro User  says:

looking at it instantly seems like an actor doing on purpose, someone as De Niro or Pacino...
he may also be someone who definitely should not be seen.... around
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

sidehike  Pro User  says:

Damn straight, man. Damn straight.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

pallid7  Pro User  says:

lighten up Frances.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Dalmatica  Pro User  says:

cool, i didn't know about the laws. i am informed and well armed now. :-)
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

tom ferris  Pro User  says:

what a nut job
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

TomOwen says:

witness relocation program, where past lives cross with new....

glad he doesn't want to draw attention to himself.... now he's all over the web... good work 'Anthony' ;-)
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

JeremyHall  Pro User  says:

415Kurt I agree with Thomas' sentiment in that the act of taking the photo, even in a volatile situation doesn't make you a dick. The premise is that if you turn and with some level of decency say you'd rather not have your picture taken, then you will get the same respect in return. I'm the same way. If you're a jerk, back at ya.
--
Seen in my contacts' photos.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Rhett Redelings  Pro User  says:

I can't help but wonder how the guy in this photo is going to treat the next photographer he thinks is taking his picture, now that he's had this negative experience.

I think the point about giving/getting respect is a good one but I think the point we're missing is that this was a negative experience for both photographer and subject. I agree that the photographer is within his rights and I've been guilty of taking someone's photo, getting hassled and blogging about it. I think people should be nicer. But more and more, I'm inclined to agree with 415Kurt, at least so far as to say that the photographer is responsible in this situation too. The fact is, this guy could have become violent and may become violent in the future, based on this experience. He's already demonstrated that he has the impulse.

Could Jeremy have done anything to diffuse, or at least, not escalate the situation? I'm thinking so.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

SpatialK  Pro User  says:

vive la france!  vive la liberté!

I think your's and jeremy's is a philosophy that many of us share ;)
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

torbakhopper  Pro User  says:

yeah, this is tough

i don't want to take pictures of people who get pissed
all the time i run into really choice photo opps, but i think it's pretty easy to tell when you are invading someone's privacy

and, pretty soon it will be against the law to shoot in public
stuff like this forces the hand of legislation
the dude probably ranted to everyone he knows and they probably all vote

i think the whole idea of -- it's legal -- doesn't really cut through the reality, which is that you can still be an idiot without breaking the law (the tag "idiot" kind of bugs me, because it seems like it applies to all involved, not just the "victim" of privacy invasion)

hate to say it, but "respect" isn't so easily earned or deserved when you're shooting someone in public without any rhyme or reason and then lip off back about your own rights when it is CLEAR that you have upset another human soul...

imo, it is our PUBLIC duty not to piss people off. like the comment above points out, we are a collective and how is the next photographer going to be treated?
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

kadesoto says:

A great photo. Frustrating people can't be civil. I still probably wouldn't publish his photograph, if it were me.

--
Seen on my Flickr home page. (?)
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

TheAlieness GiselaGiardino²³  Pro User  says:

I second that about the De Niro resemblance. Absolutely awesome. A pity tht he was really upset, not acting it out. He should try the stage tho, very photogenic man.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Sergii Drug says:

i have one question, can you name the source which allows you to take photos of anyone on the street. im curious, because i ve always thought that a name , physical appearence, his face is like personal rights of a person, and u need a permition to make photo of him, whats the source of the fact that u do can make photos of a person without his permission?
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

ambientlight says:

Of course it could be argued that the act of taking a photo of a person in the street in such an obvious way is provocative in itself. You make a social assumption here that because you are within your legal rights that you are entitled to do this without repercussions. That is a flawed assumption I'm sorry to say.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

solamore  Pro User  says:

oh my goodness!
This is pure camera rage. haha
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

undomestic  Pro User  says:

i totally agree with Rhett Redelings 415Kurt. This is difficult. I am personally a very shy and private person, I don't even let my friends take photos of me and I would be pretty annoyed to find out some stranger is. I think everyone is in agreeance that the subject overreacted. This obviously isn't the situation in this case, but I would personally be too shy to go up to someone and ask them to stop taking photos of me. As it has already been stated, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Once it was clear that the subject was not ok with having his photo taken, your friends should have stopped. Obviously he didn't.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

unonymous  Pro User  says:

good for you/him. When this happens to me (inevitably) I will take the same action to protect my rights.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Thomas Hawk  Pro User  says:

i think the whole idea of -- it's legal -- doesn't really cut through the reality, which is that you can still be an idiot without breaking the law (the tag "idiot" kind of bugs me, because it seems like it applies to all involved, not just the "victim" of privacy invasion)

In general I agree. Although I shoot people in public all the time, typically if I'm asked I won't publish the photos and I'll stop taking them if asked.

Earlier this week I was getting off the BART train and started to take a photo of a guy playing saxaphone on the street. He shook his head no as he played and so I put my camera down. Most of the time I respect people's wish not to be photographed. But when someone is an asshole and threatens me or touches my person or property typically I'm perfectly willing to use the camera as a weapon and use the promotional power of the internet to inflict a response.

Some people are just assholes and I don't think that there is anything wrong with exposing these people for what they are.

If the guy had asked nicely my guess is that Jeremy would have been more than happy to oblige him.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Kelly's Pics (haydillygirl)  Pro User  says:

It's rude to take other's pics without their permission. Just plain rude.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Ruben Parra  Pro User  says:

hey this guy seems came out form the italian mafia

i tend to agree with both sides , i usually ask before click but it's easy to say i'm sorry " that "excuse may i ...."

to me it's necessary understand people's behaviour ,we usually don't know what's the feeling of the subject just before the click ,we have no right to judge people without knowing them , people gets angry a lot of time for things we don't understand because we are not them ,but again is you are a photographer with good or bad intention our subject won't know so photography people is about human relationship , you can't walk in other's people shoes to judge them .

that said thanks for the post ! it's has been very helpful information , in Panama it's not legal to take pictures of others people.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

th.omas  Pro User  says:

I'd side with Jeremy. I give what I get, and that's that. I'm happy to respect someone who politely requests not to have their photo taken or published, but I feel no obligation to go out of my way to accommodate someone who would rather try and push me around than act civil.

There are consequences to actions, and in this day and age the consequence to being an ignorant loudmouth in public often results in your mug making its rounds online. Maybe this guy will act differently with the next photographer he encounters... maybe he'll keep his mouth shut, or even better, make a respectful request to not have his picture taken.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Earthly Possessions  Pro User  says:

He should know better than to touch your lens!!! That just getting too personal! He should at least have bought you dinner first!
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Tilton Lane  Pro User  says:

I'm glad Jeremy wasn't hurt and it is good the phone call ended it. Papparizzi do this for a living and I assume they get paid to publish, so there is nothing wrong publishing photos of assholes without their permission without getting compensated for it. Anyone who has been in a situation of being physically hurt or threatened would want to take control by posting the photos (or literally beating the shit out of the subject). This isn't an abstract or a moral question. The one committing the crime here was the subject, not Jeremy. Jeremy wasn't papparizi stalking a celebrity, and even if he was, the celebrity can't beat him up without paying the consequences.

For me, the issue is more about the photographer's personal safety and the risk of being a photographer. If someone who looks like they are off the set of the Sopranos starts running after me, is it worth the risk? It's great to post the pics if you aren't hurt, but what good would it do if the subject beat up Jeremy and took his camera. I admire photographers brave enough to get into the street and photograph the action.

Finally, for all the people grumbling about invasion of privacy, it disturbs someone's privacy anytime you take a candid photo, so I don't understand what all the fuss is about getting permission. It sounds like Jeremy and Thomas are very polite about taking photos of strangers.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

KeithMokris says:

I think it's always disappointing when altercations happen like this...both for the person being photographed AND the photographer. I think it stems from people just being surprised by a camera being pointed at them. I love street photography and I enjoy doing it. At the same time, I hope we photogs never forget that our subjects here are human beings who deserve respect.

What do we gain from putting this guy's picture online? What role as photographers do we promote and enhance?

While rights are EXTREMELY important, the goal of merely pissing someone off doesn't add anything to our society or culture. It doesn't enlighten or uncover any sort of truth which I believe photography can do.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

SF Citizen says:

Dad?
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

_sarchi  Pro User  says:

who needs nmezzz
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

TranceMist  Pro User  says:

LOL - I hit the explore button and there it is after having read your blog.


Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

peejaybird  Pro User  says:

What a total prick. I can't believe that ass thought that you (well, Jeremy) invaded his space, his rights, and he retaliated with BATTERY! Seriously, what the hell is wrong with him?

I get that some people want to keep private, but when you step out the door, you are in public, like it or not. Get over it.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

cmrowell  Pro User  says:

Good photo and excellent discussion. Someone asked about sources that state what you can photograph in public. If you google "photographer's rights" you'll find plenty of information on this.

A code of ethics for photographers sounds nice, but good luck getting people like paparazzi to follow it. If you are within your legal rights, I say go ahead and take the photo and upload it. You have no expectation of privacy out on the street. I highly doubt these photography rights will get taken away just because a few people get pissed off about having their photo on the internet. There is probably a decent amount of constitutional law protecting these rights. The issue of publishing someone's likeness only comes up if you profit from it (I believe). If anything, I would just get used to the idea that going out in public means you might end up here.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Sergii Drug says:

talking about paparazzis..they shoot celebrieties, and its not exactly the same, because there is such a concept as "public person". this guy apparently is't a celebrity, i guess its wrong to compare with paparazzis and thus justify ones actions.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Nikki Hempen De Ramirez  Pro User  says:

Hopefully those of you who have objected to Jeremy's actions have never taken a candid photo of anyone on the street ... and never plan to do so. It would be very hypocritical if you do, considering the posts in this discussion.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

ckm2005 (catching up!!)  Pro User  says:

excellent capture!!...like the expressions!!..
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

jeffrey.hulett  Pro User  says:

I can't do it.. I don't take pictures of people on the street without asking their permission first, I think it's rude to do otherwise.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Phillie Casablanca  Pro User  says:

You can't take the moral high ground here, Thomas. If you really want to be polite, you should ask permission before taking photos.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

M!L!  Pro User  says:

Too good :)
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Chris Gin  Pro User  says:

Good on ya!!! Seen on Digg!
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

alex° says:

All I can say is: Ha ha ! (Nelson-The Simpsons). He deserved it. Btw it's a good quality and expressive capture, too ! ;)
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

yassminh84 says:

The picture captures the situation well. I love it. But it's a shame that some people don't understand photography and take it personally.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Life in AsiaNZ says:

Not only did he make it on the internet but now he's on Explore too! Serves himself right.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

iceman9294  Pro User  says:

i think your thought process is correct....
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

*ojoyous1*  Pro User  says:

What a jerk that guy was!!

It really is a great photo!! And I loved what you wrote!!! I just laughed............ because you described it so well - I could just envision it all unfolding........... We've all been there in one way or another. Bravo!
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

nicouze  Pro User  says:

funny

--
Seen in the interestingness archives. (?)
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

nicouze  Pro User  says:

Bonjour, je suis l'administrateur du groupe Tu T'es Vu Quand T'as Bu?, et nous aimerions beaucoup que vous ajoutiez ceci à notre groupe !
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Blackfish95  Pro User  says:

That's funny..but then again, if he's a 'made guy', you might not want to cross him :)
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

VEMB  Pro User  says:

LOL, so typical
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Kadath  Pro User  says:

So where does the line form to request you take more pictures of us? =p
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

yeoldeblackhippie  Pro User  says:

if someone dosent want their picture taken they dont want it taken...pure & simple. if u want 2 b respected u have give respect first
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

johnniec says:

It's enticing to punish Mr. Angry Overreaction Man for his rude behavior by putting his picture all over the internet. It's impulsive but it's wrong. It's disturbing that there are so many who don't recognize the photographer as being rude.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

R. Furquim says:

Hahahahahaha...
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

★ spunkinator  Pro User  says:

Dad?!
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

unintelligiBill  Pro User  says:

Great shot and commentary !!!
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

bendyclickr says:

Faved, commented and Dugg.

Nice work :)

--
Seen on flickrseek.com (?)
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

ortizmj12 says:

LMAO! What a prick. He gets what he deserves.

Faved, commented, dugg :-)
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

PH Photographer says:

i notice that everyone of these pics with you or your friends being harassed its always someone with a bluetooth.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Petit_louis says:

Funny , BOZO i use the same word in French
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

europeanasian says:

Nice!!
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Oyvind Solstad  Pro User  says:

Hi, I'm an admin for a group called Photography is legal, and we'd love to have this added to the group!
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

marcocanb says:

Made it on to reddit, people should carry guns for situations like this one.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Luĭs Eduardo  Pro User  says:

Absolutely amazing

SetSeeker
Your image is invited to be present at SetSeeker
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

KMGuy  Pro User  says:

I have to agree with 415Kurt, Rhett Redelings, and Torbakhopper. The way I see it, getting into a pissing match with a jackass is a self fulfilling prophecy of doom. Common courtesy doesn't apply to just the other guy. Whether or not he's a jerk doesn't matter, what does matter is how you as the instigator of the situation responds. When you lawfully took his picture you initiated the conflict. When he objected, no matter how rude he was, you should have simply replied "No problem" and deleted the photo. Your response to him painted all photographers as conceited assholes who think they can do whatever they want. Frankly, you do more harm to photography than this jerk.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

45street | www.victorpuig.com  Pro User  says:

Pure photojournalism !. Excellent capture.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

rick  Pro User  says:

If any of you haven't read the whole story at Jeremy Brooks' blog link above, I recommend you do so. There's a little bit of context left out of this photo's description that helps paint the picture of the scene, in my opinion.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

cookieluver33  Pro User  says:

This is to funny!
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Tony Franco Photography  Pro User  says:

Agree 100% I tend to get pissed off when someone thinks they can get in my face and act like a badass. Heres a link for anyone who wants to know a little about their rightswww.kantor.com/useful/Legal-Rights-of-Photogr aphers.pdf
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

le garçon sous les peupliers says:

In some countries, like Belgium, you could be condamned by a court. But he's stupid.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

markbingley  Pro User  says:

Anybody who feels the need to wear a blue-tooth headset, whilst walking down the street with hands and fingers clearly available to "take that urgent call" deserves to be humiliated in public in every possible way.

What a jerk!
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Matt Takaichi  Pro User  says:

Awesome write up and good point, you have to remember your rights with photography. Some people just need to calm down a bit about stuff, he'll probably die within a week of a heart attack if he keeps that up.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

zachboy82 says:

I found a site with a general explanation of photographers rights for the U.S. Its not the exact laws but a loose explanation of them.

www.krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf

If anyone wants to know.

(edit: oh, didn't see the link already posted...sorry guys.)
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

bill156 says:

One day someone will smash your camera and your cell phone (hopefully not your face) and laugh at you and then walk away and nothing will ever happen to them because they can and then you can reflect on your right to snap photos of anyone in public and then perhaps you will come to know that you are just another rude person who does what they can verses what they should which is not ignore the resonable wishes or your fellow person.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Tony Franco Photography  Pro User  says:

Hey bill157 come and smash my camera, or anyone else. Then that will give me the right to defend my self and then I will break your knee caps!
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

KMGuy  Pro User  says:

I keep coming back to this thread to see how it's progressing and it's been interesting. @rick- I read the blog and I don't see anything which alters the context of this photo and comment. In fact it actually does more to show that Mr. Brooks was helping to provoke a bad situation if anything. Angry Overreaction Man is a undoubtedly a jerk. But if you poke a badger with a stick you will get a reaction and it won't be pleasant. All Mr. Brooks did was to take advantage of a tense situation and turn it to work for his shot. The fact that the mans' daughter was there should've been reason enough to walk away. Her presence coupled with his reasoning of "If you fit my definition of polite then I'll delete the photo" further proves that his actions were inappropriate. This is the grocery store tabloid version of photography. He believes his picture is more important than the daughter and indirectly used her to his advantage. He should be ashamed of himself. @Franco45- There are lots of things that are legal but it doesn't make someone any less of an asshole if they don't apply a little common sense before they start taking pictures.
Posted 19 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Tony Franco Photography  Pro User  says:

@kravguy1- The point of this photograph is that anyone can take a photo of whatever or whoever they see in a public place. Common sense? I think you lack that, why else would you write such a dumb comment. And the asshole the one with the bluetooth. And taking a picture of someone on the street is being an asshole? Your an asshole just for writing that.
Posted 18 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

KMGuy  Pro User  says:

I guess it wouldn't be common sense if everyone had it. The above post proves that and verifies the accuracy of my last post. @Franco45- Obviously you didn't understand my post. Taking a picture of someone on the street doesn't make you an asshole. Taking advantage of a situation just to be controversial and feel good about yourself does. The legal issue here was never in doubt, it was the moral implication that was being questioned. Also, we both have opinions, and we both posted our thoughts, yet by your definition that makes me the asshole. Well welcome to the club buddy, because you fit that definition also. Flame on if you want, I'm out.
Posted 18 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

peejaybird  Pro User  says:

kravguy, I don't know that I'd condone caving in because someone who is clearly in the wrong threatens you. The guy with the bluetooth [allegedly] battered the photographer (threatening bodily contact). Ignoring that behaviour entirely would reinforce his actions.

While this next example may be considered extreme, and not equivalent, consider it as a limit->infinity case. If one were to watch, say, a brutal beating, should they turn away, not report it, because they fear the repercussions? That would give more power to the original asshole, the bully, Mr. Angry Overreaction Man. We'd end up with a world [even more] run by bullies.
Posted 18 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Edwård says:

I just saw this photo on sfist: sfist.com/2008/06/30/hands_off_the_cells_driv ers.php
Posted 18 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Wwsd3 says:

In the end, you both look like assholes. Literally and figuratively speaking, I'm sure.
Posted 16 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

phoenixesrose  Pro User  says:

Please be aware that laws in the US and Europe are very different. In the US, yes, if you take a picture of someone on a public street - then you can publish it.

In Europe, however, EU privacy laws are such that if you snap a picture of someone on a public street - and they say you can't use it (as in they don't give you permission) regardless of how they do it (nice or not) - privacy laws say that you can't use it. Even on a public street, a private person has a right to privacy. If you go ahead and use it anyhow, you can get sued. Thereby, it's really quite difficult to get photographs of street photography here - unless you ask after the fact.

Just a little note from abroad, in case you ever make it somewhere else than the US.
Posted 16 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

Cam N. (CNPhoto) says:

www.flickr.com/groups/photography_is_not_a_cr ime/



post your story
Posted 16 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

jdl1138 says:

he looks like a surly five year old pointing at some toy he wants in a toy store. total d-bag.
Posted 15 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

AdairSR says:

I wish I had taken this picture myself!
I´ll try to get something similar whenever I can..........................
Posted 11 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

peco_01 says:

The photographer of this picture is in the wrong here. TAKE THIS PICTURE DOWN! Two thumbs down! I hope someone takes an unflattering picture of you and posts it on a BILLBOARD! Your picture sux! The guy should have beat the hell out of you and stole your camera!
Posted 7 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

KMGuy  Pro User  says:

I'm going to pipe back in here and reverse myself (At least a little). While I'm not thrilled with this photo because of the child involved, I have since run into some real assholes who were horrified that I was going to make money off of them and they weren't going to get a cut. A couple of jerks were riding at a local moto-cross track and just knew I was going to sell their picture to some magazine. Another guy said it might threaten his chances of getting a sponsor. This Ass-Pony was damn near 40 and thinks he's going pro. I've reached the point of "Don't do shit in public that you don't want on the internet" BTW, being the only photographer in a group of Moto-crossers wearing what is basically body armor, is NOT the place to be a wise-ass! :O
Posted 7 months ago. ( permalink )

view profile

hiddenetwork says:

you guys are pretty hilarious .... even the person who uploaded this photo doesn't even know that's THE FONZ ... yes folks that is him, he lives in san francisco and i've seen him plenty of times around town ... that's the reason he didn't want his picture taken, because he's a celeb .... geez some of you guys are living under a rock LOL
Posted 2 months ago. ( permalink )

Would you like to comment?

Sign up for a free account, or sign in (if you're already a member).

[?]
view photos Uploaded on May 7, 2008
by Thomas Hawk

Thomas Hawk's photostream

33,305
uploads

This photo also belongs to:

Photography is Not a Crime (Set)

22
items

North Beach District (Set)

319
items

Tags

Click this icon to see all public photos and videos tagged with USA USA

Additional Information

AttributionNoncommercial Some rights reserved Anyone can see this photo

Add to your map