Photography’s role is to document reality—joyful, enraging, sorrowful, or numbing—with utmost sincerity and truth. However, in some instances, the very act of making a photograph, especially of unknown people, without their consent, has made it quite challenging to defend the medium. Here, the intent is of utmost importance. Some people create images to highlight a growing concern of society or to showcase the mundane beauty around us. In other cases, the photographs simply hold no value and are used as a means to demean or harass people, especially those whom you have little value for. An example of this is a case in India, where a photographer captured an image of a woman outside her house, which didn’t end well.
According to the Times of India report, a case like this was lodged in 2022 when the complainant reported that a man took pictures of her outside her house. When he was confronted, he made obscene gestures and drove away. The Kerela High Court, after hearing the plea, has ruled that taking photographs of a woman is not considered voyeurism under Section 354C of the Indian Penal Code. The bench notes that the charges of voyeurism will only be applied when a woman is photographed or purposely watched when she is performing a private act in a place where an outsider is not expected to see her, for instance, inside her house or her relatives. However, since she was outside, the case for voyeurism was overturned. Instead, the court did charge the accused with Section 354A(1)(i) and (iv) (sexual harassment and punishment for sexual harassment) of the IPC.
So, why are we talking about this today? Well, for starters, I believe that taking pictures of people has become increasingly easy. It is not just about a phone but also about the democratization of cameras, which are accessible and can even be picked up from second-hand shops. However, the boom of social media and the kind of street photographs that are often making rounds on social media have diluted the way we see the world today. In this case, the man clearly was not photographing the woman or the house with the intent to showcase the architecture or the beauty of everyday life. He was simply using the tool for far more nefarious means. Perhaps it could be used for creating explicit deepfakes or to blackmail her. A similar incident occurred a while back, where a woman was photographed in a compromising position, which was further shared by a street photography page. This also brings to mind photographer Bruce Gilden, whose controversial style of photography has divided individuals. And even today, I can’t seem to find ways to defend his style.
Situations like this make us realize that guardrails are very important in photography, especially when a Tom, Dick, or Harry can photograph anyone. For instance, the first step would be to educate people about street photography and increase awareness of it. This way, the subjects can defend themselves, while those who are genuinely interested in the medium but are new can also follow certain ethical guidelines. We also need better laws that can help those who misuse their images. Once the damage is done, it is very difficult for people to clear the tarnish off their dignity. For instance, taking images of people under their clothes is a punishable offense in India, the UK, and the United States. In fact, in the United States, the punishment varies from state to state.
But that is not all; a photographer, too, should be more practical with this approach. Not everybody enjoys a camera in their face, especially in public spaces. If someone notices you and tells you to stop photographing, you can try to convince them. If it doesn’t work, you delete the image and leave the person behind. Photographers must be ready to kill their darlings because we live in an age where a picture can create many issues. You don’t know your subject’s life or their struggle. Show some empathy and move on. Nobody is becoming the next Cartier-Bresson by photographing people who do not wish to be photographed.
Moreover, a photographer must be transparent when you shoot. Don’t try to be too inconspicuous, as that leads to more issues; if they see you and ask you to stop, you do so. But if they don’t, that means they are simply okay. Empathy is the best way to create moving images from your heart, rather than creating pictures for the algorithm monster. The former will take you a long way, even if you end up missing a few shots here and there. As someone once said, “A dozen good images a year is a good crop.” So focus on that and forget the rest.
