In September 2018, my late wife, Val, and I were on a driving holiday in Romania. We were underway on a rural backroad somewhere in northwestern Romania when I passed the farm wagon loaded with what I take are grandparents and their grandchildren. I drove on and then pulled off the road to wait for the wagon to pass. The perfect photo opportunity, or so I thought at the time. That is until I thought of looking to my scruples.
Wagon spotting
My fascination with horse-drawn wagons in Romania started ten days earlier as we drove north of Bucharest. We were only a few kilometres clear of the city when I spotted the first horse and cart. I was about to pull over for a photo when my wife told me to drive on as we’d probably see another one further up the road in a safer location. How right she was. Soon we were spotting horse-drawn wagons frequently. Wagon-spotting fatigue soon set in, and I was content to wait for a suitable location with a photogenic wagon and passengers.
This particular horse and wagon certainly ticked all the boxes. A dilapidated wagon, a noble white horse, an ox at the rear and, of course, the passengers. The sad and worn grandmother, grandfather, and two apparently happy grandchildren loomed in front of the wonderful rural location with the cross beside the field. I hypothesise they were coming home after a hard day’s work harvesting hay. The children were either staying with their grandparents for the summer holidays or, more possibly, living with their grandparents whilst their parents were working in Bucharest or another city.
After I took the photo, I found the scenario quite sad, mainly because of how fatigued the grandparents looked and their obvious poverty.
I have been very fortunate to have travelled extensively for work and particularly for pleasure after I retired in 2008. Yet, after two memorable trips to Europe in 2019, I have not been near an airport. In common with so many, I spent long periods in Covid lockdowns in 2020 and 2021, and I had to deal with my wife’s death early in 2021.
Introspection
It’s been a very difficult period, and I’ve done a lot of introspection, including thinking deeply about the impact of tourism on the places I have visited and the photos I have taken. I began to examine my scruples.
Is taking photos such as the one above a form of exploitation? Am I invading the family’s privacy? The answer is a sure “yes”.
What do they think of my driving past them and then standing waiting to take the photo? Are they resentful? If so, who could blame them? What right do I have to engage in such behaviour?
Of course, I’ll never know what they were thinking of me, but I do know that this photo has made me consider the ethics of taking such intrusive photos of people for my hobby. I also worry about the impact of tourism on the places I have visited. Have I been engaging in what I will call “voyeur tourism” by looking at less fortunate people’s lives and conditions as photo ops? Whatever, my scruples have definitely kicked in.
It’s certainly made me have scruples about travelling to third-world countries in the future and taking photos such as this. But then, it’s easy for me to say that after having had so many years of travelling. Perhaps my scruples should have come thirty years earlier. Something to reflect on.
What do you think? Are my scruples, late as they come, valid? Or does tourism help developing countries in general, if not specifically some of the people featured in your photographs?
This photo was taken with my Leica Q.
Read more from John Shingleton
Visit John’s website, The Rolling Road
A cup of coffee works wonders in supporting Macfilos
Did you know that Macfilos is run by a dedicated team of volunteers? We rely on donations to help pay our running costs. And even the cost of a cup of coffee will do wonders for our energy levels.
Having lived in Romania for 15 years it is not a third world country although sanitation and running water is lacking in many rural locations. the family passing in their cart were probably very happy to see their picture being taken. Inroad despite its elate is very much a third world country and I gave up trying to take pictures as I was immediately surrounded by children begging, constant touching with greasy hands made my laundry bill quite high. If I was taking a static picture of a seemingly poor person I agree with you and I would probably hand over some money
Thanks, John,
for raising this topic. It is crucial for all our photographic work, be it professional or leisurely. Many important things were already written. I want to add, from a journalistic point of view, that photos are a crucial tool for documenting facts. Some of them have to be recorded and shown the the world (see the Nick Ut example above). Others not. So, it’s a question of attitude: Next to asking: What do I shoot? You should also ask: Why do I shoot? And: What effect will my photography have?
If you refer this to the beautiful image shown as an example, the answer could be: I want to show to my folks the living conditions in Romania and also the way the locals cope with them. I want to be window into a not much noticed corner of the world, and I want to be voice of the people living there. I want to tell their story. What is not acceptable is to treat anybody like a zoo animal or to transport any prejudices by means of an image instead of neutrally showing what is important to be shown.
If you can manage to get consent, and be it only with a nod or another sign of approval, all the better. But this may not always be possible. In such cases I can only advise any photographer, pro or amateur, to thik twice before publishing such an image. You could violate a law and, even more important and unknown person’s dignity. There are good reasons to to publish an image all the same. But not all reasons are good reasons.
In the end, it’s all about resepect. That easy and that difficult.
JP
I am leaving in Thailand, where there are many photographic opportunities (temples, markets, street, etc.). I always engage with the subject and ask the permission to take a picture. Most of the time, people agree, but if they say no, I respect their choice.
Most of great photographers were firstly acclaimed after taking photographs of forgotten people with miserable life. Koudelka with Rumanian Gypsies, Bresson with the poorest streets of Seville, W Eugene Smith with Japanese injured people, David Bailey with disturbing suburbs people. And a very long etcetera. Yes, they found beauty there, and also made money and fame though never seemed very sorry 😐 about.
Yes but they were all Pro photographers whose pictures would be seen by the wider World and as such at least stood a chance of helping the plight of those featured. Don
I know. Perhaps at their very beginning not even so; at the end a man with a camera though. Pros and not pros isn’t a concern of those portrayed there; perhaps some reached that condition thanks to them.
Whatever about laws and Western style journalism and associated ethics, an understanding of local culture and customs is critical. Photographers are not ‘discovering’ people in other lands. Those people were there before the photographers arrived and their cultures must be respected. Putting a Western style template over the rest of the world is neither appropriate nor does it work. The best documentary photographers are the ones who try to learn about such things in advance and, if necessary, assimilate such local culture and practices. Knowing that you can photograph people in public places in the UK or in the US is not of much benefit if you are trying to photograph people in, say, the Horn of Africa.
I respect Don Morley’s point about a ‘sense of duty’ to record, but I suspect that, even as professional, he always factored in the type of sensitivities which I have mentioned. At our recent Leica Society International Conference in Dublin, my good friend professional photographer Eric Luke described how he had a gun pointed at the pit of his stomach in Northern Ireland by people who feared that he might be a spy or working for one, but he also described how, by interacting culturally with locals at Mother Teresa’s funeral in Calcutta, he managed to get an exclusive photograph which won him a World Press Photographer Award.
Very often it is not what you do, but how you do it that counts.
William
So true William, and thank you for such wise and informed comment.Don
Thanks John for raising this important issue. From a legal perspective, I understand that in the US taking photographs of anything or anyone whilst in a public space is permissible. From an ethical perspective, I believe a photojournalist is carrying out their duties and serving their readers when documenting homelessness and poverty. However, I question whether photographing these subjects solely for personal interest, or posting online, is OK. Photographing a sleeping or inebriated homeless person is completely unacceptable in my view. Candid street photography is clearly a very significant photographic domain, but I think photographers who pursue this field must tread very carefully and be very clear on their motives. Once again, thanks for highlighting the tension here. All the best, Keith
Some “public” places might be privately owned, not sure whether it is always that clear cut, also I believe you will always need a release form if you plan on using the material for commercial purposes.
And that image catapulted the anti-war sentiment within the USA.
This is likely an extreme case — but I think of Nick Ut’s photo of Phan Thi Kim Phuc, the young girl badly burned by napalm in Vietnam.
If you don’t know the story, he dropped his equipment to throw water on her, the drove her and another child to the hospital. He had to threaten the hospital staff, in order to get help immediately.
Should he have taken the picture at all? My own sense is that he used his power as a press photographer (access to the scene, availability of a car, threats to hospital staff) to comfort and save the girl’s life.
Like I said, an extreme case, but it may be that these extremme cases define who we are.
Kathy he was not only doing his job as a Pro, but far more importantly informing the vastly wider World know what awful things were happening. In short he and that photograph provided a massive service to humanity whereas had it been taken by a amateur and not then been seen by millions of others it would have been a offensive intrusion. Don
I’ve had the same concerns, but I believe that intent is key, along with a readyness to apologise if offence is taken.
Better not to cause offense in the first place if you do not have to. Don
Thank you, John, for this very generous piece of sharing. Even though I like to think I would ask, how much communication is there in a strange country with no langlo-saxon, atinate, germanic or nordic language to call on? I actually like your photo with the cross making its own silent comment at the edge. But the dilemma remains…………..
I totally agree with you Don.
I have worked in Denmark as a photojournalist for 35 years now and still do. It is my duty to show the world as it is. Maybe the stories can make a difference. They often do. We have to show the composition of different people who are there where we photograph. It can also be serious car accidents or fires.
I always remember to have respect for the people who are in need. I can’t explain what it is. But I have no doubts if I step too close. I can feel it. If I’m in doubt or I might have gotten too close – talk – with the people you’re taking pictures of. Silence is the worst. !! One is to have a professional purpose for the photos. Something else is pictures I only need for my own use.
In the story here, I will talk to them in the horse-drawn carriage. Give a little of yourself. Ask if it’s ok too take more photos.
When I have talked and photographed (at the same time), they will relax and I will get a natural photo. It’s just practice. But be respectful and also remember to give something of yourself so they can talk about the experience when they get home to the dinner table.
Don’t just wait and take a picture, get in the car and drive again. It’s rude.
I have a multi-handicapped 18-year-old girl so..
If someone comes and wants to take pictures of us as a family or my daughter, I will be proud of it. I think it is important that we talk about the fact that not everyone is as well off as we are. Some are born disabled and need help.
That’s why my wife and I make a point of traveling with our lovely daughter. Many places in Europe. We want to show people that it is possible to travel together as a family even if your child is disabled. And of course we have a good holiday in the meantime. Take the pictures you want.
So dear amateur photographers and also professional. Just come and talk to us maybe there is a good story to tell. Take the pictures you want.
But back to my professional job as a photojournalist. I could never dream of stopping and photographing fires and accidents if I have time off and the pictures are not to be published. For what use is it ?
Hope that makes sense, otherwise feel free to ask
You could always ask first. Then the decision to photograph is given to, or in agreement with, them.
During my many years as a professional news photographer I regarded it as being not just my job but also my duty to take whatever pictures were necessary to draw attention to the plight of such as the so obviously deprived, downtrodden sick or needy, as a amateur. Since retiring however I would never so point my camera because rather than helping by making the wider World aware of the sad plights my pictures would arguably have been taken more for for self gratification.
In short such photography by we amateurs is never going too, or even likely to help improve the lot of the unfortunate subjects, and as such is instead needlessly degrading, and certainly in my view highly unethical.
If you start with an image of someone destitute and or with physical or mental disabilities there’s a clear distinction between the role of a professional and amateur photographer and how the end image gets used. If you’re being paid how does your image impact the story being told and will it result in more $/€/£ being invested in those communities? If you’re an amateur is this voyeurism or exploitation?
As an amateur I can see people who are destitute and or with physical or mental disabilities every single day in Chicago if I choose to, even in the dead of winter when outdoor temperatures can get down to -20C. If I do take pictures then I usually try to offer a gift card to at least buy food at McDonalds after the shot has been taken.
I have been told that kind of giving is exploitation too. In. The end the only things that matter are respecting your subjects and your own conscience.
Happy New Year, John.
I lived in the Middle East for some years and there certain pictures can be ‘haram’. I could take pictures of men, but not of women. My wife was able to take a photograph of young girls in traditional costume learning the Quran. I could not have taken that photo of course. I did take a sneak shot of 3 young women in full black abayas sitting on deck chairs in the sea near the shore. I have never published this, but I have shown the image privately to several professional photographers and they all thought I should publish it. However, I have respect for other cultures and would not do that, which begs the question why I took the photo in the first place. I don’t have an answer for that 15 years later. Maybe I just wanted to record the scene. Taking and using a photo are, of course, two entirely different matters.
There is another photo in my Syria article on Macfilos which caused me to debate with myself before I used it. I took the photo on the road to Aleppo from a car I was travelling in. It was a grabbed and cropped image which is not very high quality, but I felt it said something about the economy of Syria just before the war. It shows a group of impoverished people sitting on the back of a truck with their belongings heading towards Aleppo. It was only after the article had been published that I noticed the contents of a roadside poster behind the truck. It showed the images of President Assad of Syria and his late father. It had not been my intention to make a political statement, of course. It is a prime example of ‘publish and be damned’, I suppose.
Taking up Bill Royce’s point, most pictures of people who are dressed differently to ourselves, which are taken in countries other than our own are, indeed, ‘tourist shots’, but what else would they be if they are taken on our holidays?
I do recall getting very annoyed one night at the Dublin Camera Club when one of the members showed pictures of Romany gypsies who live under a bridge in Romania and make a living from tourists taking photographs of them. There are several moral dilemmas in all of that, but I lost it when club members started to ask for directions to the bridge and then, to cap it all, ask how much the gypsies expected to be paid!
One of our curators at our Photo Museum gallery here in Dublin has a term ‘poverty porn’ to describe all of this. Bill has mentioned HCB, but there is always a fine line in how pictures of people, not in good circumstances, can be used and have a beneficial effect. I am thinking of photos from the war in Biafra and the Ethiopian famine which had an immense beneficial impact from a humanitarian standpoint. In such cases it does not matter whether such a photo has been taken by a master photographer such as HCB or a rank amateur, such as myself. Winning another trophy at a camera club would not rank high on my list of justifiable reasons for taking and/or using a photo. I for one don’t care if I never see another photo of a fasting Indian Holy Man with a painted face, wrinkles and a long white beard. I have been told that some of them employ ‘staff’ to organise the queues of waiting photographers!
At the end of the day, it really is a matter of ‘it all depends’ to use a term which my late father was fond of using on receiving a request from any of his children.
William
Well said. I am in Syria now and have taken pictures in Djibouti and Ethiopia. Apart from the fact that photographs of women in muslim countries are very much frowned upon, street photography in these places can be dangerous and in fact I was close to being arrested many times because somebody with a good camera is still regarded as a potential spy or suspicious person, despite the fact that camera smartphones are ubiquitous. However my worst experience was in a Cyprus public beach in 2022 where a schizophrenic (on leave from a mental institution as the police later said) violently attacked me and beat me up and broke my camera within seconds of me taking a snapshot in his direction.
John, you raise some interesting questions, for which there are no clear-cut answers. If possible, I like to engage with the subjects. The risk is, you need a lot of time for them to relax and behave normally. Another solution has them featuring in a landscape or village location, where they add interest to the scene. Taking an interest in the horse might break the ice. I would never proceed to take pictures if I felt the slightest unease about the relationship. Move on to a more accessible subject.
Forget the ethics, Im more worried about being clobbered and my gear taken in these places, I only take basic looking small gear now and only feel safe on group shoots or studio days, I dont feel travel photography is a safe pursuit these days
travel photography is a fantastic theme to pursue, don’t stop, grasp the opportunity to make your own record. I rarely have felt unsafe and I have travelled from Sudan to the Yemen in earlier times. The only place I ever felt genuinely ill at ease was in good old New York when it wasn’t the city that it is today. Risk is often created by the photographer rather than the people in front of them. Sensitivity and a smile go along way. Choosing were to go and seeking advice helps too.
I tend to go with a Canon M6ii as inconspicuous kit, unhelpfully discontinued now of course, the R7 is bulky and obviously a camera
I visited Cuba some time ago and took mostly candid people images. I was accompanied by a Cuban photographer. If you get them to pose (many willingly do so) they are not doing their normal activities and you typically get a “tourist” shot. I felt I was documenting the conditions and daily life in Cuba. If Henri Cartier-Bresson (and others like him) had been reluctant to take pictures of poor people, we would not have insight into the daily life of ordinary people that he photographed. I do avoid taking images of homeless people living on the street, however.
Interesting subject. I believe the answer lies in what you want to convey in your photos (plural). You want the viewer to be shocked at the destitution or to present the normal day to day circumstances of other peoples?