Agents of Cosplay: Cosplay is Not Consent

[Areloch]

Sure, if it's specifically against con rules, that's an entirely different thing, as there IS an expectation of being asked before pictures happen. However, that's not at all always the case, and when it's not specifically part of the rules, people can't EXPECT that to be a requirement.

I'm trying to say that there kind of is that expectation. I've been to a few conventions, and I've never been to one where I saw people taking pictures without permission. Everyone asked, because asking is the polite thing to do. You don't just get people snapping pictures as they walk past you. Even when it wasn't an explicit rule.

Ehh, I disagree since, you know, the whole "you're out in public" thing. It's the polite thing to do, sure, but I'd expect it to happen about as much as I'd expect it out on the street.

Does someone being photographed gets absolute say in what happens with that photograph, even superseding what the photographer wants? Because going off that, that'd apply to anyone that happens to be in a shot, meaning 'Random person in the background 37' has justification to ask for the picture to be deleted otherwise the photographer is now a dick.

Like, say I ask for permission and take a picture of someone in a hallway at a convention real fast and because it was in the hallway, other people were in the background. Cosplayer A moves on with their day, but Cosplayer B who was in the background saw I took a picture in their general direction, and took offense to that for whatever reason and want me to delete the picture.

Given that the picture wasn't even about them, they're incidental to the picture I took a la the 'taking pictures of a crowd' thing everyone seems to agree with. So am I being a dick because I don't adhere to their wishes to delete the picture they're only in in passing?

That's the problem. ALL of this is incredibly gray and there isn't any specific line that is easily walked over that suddenly makes one person in the wrong.

You didn't comment on whether or not you thought the photographer was doing something wrong, am I correct in assuming you wouldn't defend the photographer for keeping taking photos when the cosplayer is explicitly telling them not to?

Whoops, sorry about that, I'd meant to. If they're actively taking multiple pictures even after being asked to stop(assuming they were asked in a reasonable manner) then yeah, that's at minimum a passive aggressive thing to do, and probably pretty dickish. However, it seems like the issue with the topic at hand is more 'Taking pictures at all', rather than "Did you go out of your way to persistently disregard their wishes". The latter is probably pretty dickish, yeah.

Of course, in the situation you describe, that's pretty unreasonable. Having to confirm with absolutely every background person in the photo would make taking photos pretty much impossible. It'd be an unreasonable expectation, as taking photos is, as you've mentioned, something that's a part of conventions. Asking someone if they'd mind before taking a photo specifically of them is a pretty small concession to make for the sake of their ease. And there seems to be an indication that a number of people who would be put at ease for it.

Well, and that's the thing. Most of the time, photographers do ask, and cosplayers do agree. The entire topic is pertaining to the more outlier cases. But the innate presumption to expectation of privacy and not getting pictures taken does indeed complicate certain circumstances in which the photographer has done nothing wrong, which was my point. It's very gray, and this sort of subject tends to attract people to place down "X is wrong, period" sorts of absolutes.

Really, in the end, I feel like the cosplayer has more entitlement to how their image is used than a random stranger with a camera.

I'm probably in the opposite camp, what with my comments about making concessions as a cosplayer in a public space, but I do understand why you'd feel that way. Just a difference in opinion

Actually, as someone that has cosplayed many a time, if someone took pictures of me when I wasn't aware of it while out and about at the convention, I don't have a problem with it.

Heck, there's a non-insignificant chance - given that it's the internet - that someone may have found one of my cosplay pictures and jacked off to it. I wouldn't know if that's actually true, but I'm not about to let it bother me because I was in a public space, in a fancy costume where picture taking was the norm.

If I didn't want people taking pictures of me, I wouldn't have gotten dressed up. I'm not saying everyone has to be as un-bothered about that as me, but my rights in a public space don't randomly supersede someone else's rights in a public space, and I'm fine with that. Others may disagree, and that's fine, but at minimum, I practice what I preach.

I meant more in regard to a situation where you saw someone deliberately disregarding someone else's feelings on the picture. Like in the situation I described earlier. Or if someone said "Sorry, I'd appreciate it if you didn't take pictures of me without asking" the photographer apologized, then continued to go around taking photos of them hiding outside of their view. Or if there's an embarrassing photo taken of a cosplayer that they want removed and the photographer tells them really nicely "I'm sorry you feel that way, but this photo is funny and I want to put it online to get hits".

Honestly, it's really hard to come up with situations where the photographer doesn't look like an ass for disregarding the person in the photo's wishes outside of the background photo example. Even in the background example if it bothered the person enough I'd blur out their face or something like that.

Right, and that goes back to a more extreme end of the "Taking pictures of someone without their permission". I think there's nothing wrong with snapping a picture of a cosplayer in passing in the hallway or whatnot.

But actively and persistently disregarding what they want is a pretty dickish thing to do (Heck, continuing to follow them around at take pictures of them starts to drift into "stalking" territory, which society already has rules about anyways).

I don't consider them to be the same degree of action, and feel that's an important distinction, but whenever this comes up, it feels like "taking anyone's picture without their knowledge/permission beforehand is wrong - except when it isn't" and I find that to be a pretty unreasonable stance overall if only because of how vague and arbitrary that approach is.
Given how society works, it's going to be a gray line no matter what, but I think trying to narrow the band a little is fair.

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

Whoops, sorry about that, I'd meant to. If they're actively taking multiple pictures even after being asked to stop(assuming they were asked in a reasonable manner) then yeah, that's at minimum a passive aggressive thing to do, and probably pretty dickish. However, it seems like the issue with the topic at hand is more 'Taking pictures at all', rather than "Did you go out of your way to persistently disregard their wishes". The latter is probably pretty dickish, yeah.

Right, and that goes back to a more extreme end of the "Taking pictures of someone without their permission". I think there's nothing wrong with snapping a picture of a cosplayer in passing in the hallway or whatnot.

But actively and persistently disregarding what they want is a pretty dickish thing to do (Heck, continuing to follow them around at take pictures of them starts to drift into "stalking" territory, which society already has rules about anyways).

I don't consider them to be the same degree of action, and feel that's an important distinction, but whenever this comes up, it feels like "taking anyone's picture without their knowledge/permission beforehand is wrong - except when it isn't" and I find that to be a pretty unreasonable stance overall if only because of how vague and arbitrary that approach is.
Given how society works, it's going to be a gray line no matter what, but I think trying to narrow the band a little is fair.

Yeah, it's off of the main topic, the only reason I brought them up was that you said the photographer has the right to decline someone's request to take photos of them, or delete a photo of them. And while I agree that they might have the legal right, they're being inconsiderate in doing so. Generally not the kind of behavior you'd what to have at a fun and friendly convention.

Well, and that's the thing. Most of the time, photographers do ask, and cosplayers do agree. The entire topic is pertaining to the more outlier cases. But the innate presumption to expectation of privacy and not getting pictures taken does indeed complicate certain circumstances in which the photographer has done nothing wrong, which was my point. It's very gray, and this sort of subject tends to attract people to place down "X is wrong, period" sorts of absolutes.

That's more or less what I'm saying. It is the societal norm for photographers to ask. More than anything, it's polite to ask before taking a photo of someone and it's rude to take it without asking. Just like how con-goers shouldn't just let all the friends they see cut in line in front of them, you should ask before taking someone's photo.

I also stand by what I said earlier, the kind of person who won't put in the effort to be considerate to me is a lot lower on the list of people I'd want taking photos of me.

 

[KissingSunlight]

I'm the one who had a thread similar to this subject. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.933253-Whats-The-Etiquette-of-Taking-Pictures-of-Strangers

A quick summation of the thread is that I work in a tourist area. Every once in a while, someone would take a picture of me without my permission. After I confronted the last person who did this, he basically told me to drop dead.

I think this person said it best:

I like how all this boils down to:

Ahem.... "COULD YOU PLEASE BE A DECENT HUMAN BEING?"

It's really not the act of getting your picture taken. It's the motivation and intention of the use of picture. If you feel you have to sneak around to get a picture of someone, then the odds are that you do not have honorable intentions.

There is a difference between candid photography and creepy/creeper photography. That goes to intention. One is art. The other is for malicious use.

If you are going to take a picture of someone, don't be a jerk.

 

[J.McMillen]

Speaking from experience here: some candid photographers are really just creeps. I've had to deal with some guy trying to take upskirt pictures of my friends and I (half of us weren't even in cosplay). The guy was kicked out of the convention, but did put his pictures, including a pantyshot taken without consent, on Youtube. That is obviously not okay.

I've heard that in Japan numerous conventions now require anyone taking pictures to be in a standing position with the camera at eye level. No sitting, no kneeling, no lying on the ground, no exceptions. I know it wouldn't stop all of it, but I'm sure it put a dent in upskirting shots.

 

[Redd the Sock]

While the touching side of this is not question to the point it applies to all attendees, not just cospalyers, pictures are a bit dicey. I have always followed the common etiquette of asking first (if only to get a better picture with whatever cheap ass camera I had at the time going back to film) but I can see a line where I'm not entirely sure of the problem. Yeah, if the camera is actually up your skit or aimed at your cleavage, it's understandable right down to pressing charges, but if the potential photo doesn't appear skeevy in any way, it's more likely to be someone shy, after less posed and more natural photos, or just treating a con like photographing wildlife (quick before it disappears and don't spook it). Courtesy is a bit of a 2 way street, and just as people should ask first, cosplayers shouldn't assume pervert if someone doesn't, at least when they're in an outfit that says "look at me" more than "comfortable con wear".

 

[marioandsonic]

When it comes to cosplay, I'll ask first if I can take a picture. Everyone I've asked so far has said yes, and will usually strike a pose for a better picture.

Which is all good, because I only have the camera from my phone, which is a piece of shit.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

I just assume that people don't like being touched. It saves time.

Some might, but why take the risk?

 

[SecondPrize]

I really hate the conflation between sexual/touching consent and photographical consent and the push for the right you do not have over the rights of others when it comes to photography.

Regardless of personal etiquette not everyone wants to ask for photos, some people are candid photographers and as such their art style is to catch things of beauty other than practised poses, you cannot ask for respect for one form of art (cosplay) to overwrite another form (photography) thats not really how being respectful works

On the not of consent in most states/countries being in a public place is consent to be photographed this includes conventions halls but is restricted to things that are considered private acts ie: bathrooms breaks, sex or changing clothes, things not normally done in public

Another problem is that condition of entry to many conventions is photographical consent, rule 10 of the comicon entry conditions state that by purchasing a ticket and entering the premises you consent to having your photograph taken

On "right to privacy" since someone always tries to mention it, right to privacy only applies to business or profit photography, if its someone that just does it as a hobby you do not have any rights to privacy other than in your own home pr those stated Above in regards to public places

Overall I'm tired of cosplayers (and yes I cosplay most years since 06) trying to gain rights and control they do not have by lumping in photography with being touched

Conventions are semi-public spaces. The public can't freely wander in as purchasing a pass is required. While in a convention and out of view from a public space you should have the same rights to control the capture of your image as in your own home.

The only people I've seen who will make a photo better when knowing they're the subject are professional models, everyone else just looks awful, though cosplayers can be a little better than most. This means candid photos are the way to go and the best option is to simply ask someone beforehand and, while not stalking them, keep an eye out for opportunities for good photos of them throughout the day. Second best is asking after the fact and immediately deleting the image if they indicate that is their desire.

 

[Pinky's Brain]

Conventions are semi-public spaces. The public can't freely wander in as purchasing a pass is required. While in a convention and out of view from a public space you should have the same rights to control the capture of your image as in your own home.

That would make photography at conventions almost impossible, so it shouldn't be the case and it almost never is the case.

We're probably heading to a system where attendance requires giving legal consent to be photographed by vetted photographers with press cards, with everyone else having to ask consent and take pictures only in special areas where you can be sure you don't catch others in your shot.

 

[SecondPrize]

Conventions are semi-public spaces. The public can't freely wander in as purchasing a pass is required. While in a convention and out of view from a public space you should have the same rights to control the capture of your image as in your own home.

That would make photography at conventions almost impossible, so it shouldn't be the case and it almost never is the case.

We're probably heading to a system where attendance requires giving legal consent to be photographed by vetted photographers with press cards, with everyone else having to ask consent and take pictures only in special areas where you can be sure you don't catch others in your shot.

Permission can be given and photos taken when permission is granted. Bear in mind that if you're background, you can't tell people not to photograph you because all you have to do is move and, as you're not the subject, the lens won't follow you.

 

[NPC009]

Also, the thing with press is that if a member of the press does act in a disrespectful manner, they can be easily tracked down afterwards and held responsible. That's much harder with random no-names. I've never been to a convention where press weren't urged to ask permission, by the way.

Personally, when I am taking pictures as a member of the press, I don't just ask permission, I explain which magazine/website I work for and how the pictures may be used for. If possible, I show them the pictures I took. Sometimes I note down an e-mailaddress, so I can send the cosplayer a link to the article. I might even send them a copy of the magazine if they were really helpful. Most cosplayers are enthousiastic about getting a chance to appear in a magazine, but some want to protect their privacy and you have to respect that.

 

[Pinky's Brain]

Bear in mind that if you're background, you can't tell people not to photograph you because all you have to do is move and, as you're not the subject, the lens won't follow you.

I guess your x-gene kicked in, normal people have neither the omnidirectional perception nor the speed necessary to do that.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

Conventions are semi-public spaces. The public can't freely wander in as purchasing a pass is required. While in a convention and out of view from a public space you should have the same rights to control the capture of your image as in your own home.

Not really. Unless a place has specific rules regarding photo taking, you don't really have any sort of right to privacy unless the management dictates thus (within reason, you have a right not be photographed in a bathroom, for example).

But, unless the convention wishes to have some sort of rules set up (ie. "all photographs require subject's permission or you will be removed from the premises") you're essentially fair game. The problem with a rule like this is that it comes with a whole new set of potential issues: people in the background inadvertently being in photos is just one of them.

 

[NPC009]

Bear in mind that if you're background, you can't tell people not to photograph you because all you have to do is move and, as you're not the subject, the lens won't follow you.

I guess your x-gene kicked in, normal people have neither the omnidirectional perception nor the speed necessary to do that.

Most people ask cosplayers to pose, so if you see cosplayers posing and someone holding a camera, you can just get out of the shot. Many people do so out of courtesy anyway.

 

[Lady Larunai]

Speaking from experience here: some candid photographers are really just creeps. I've had to deal with some guy trying to take upskirt pictures of my friends and I (half of us weren't even in cosplay). The guy was kicked out of the convention, but did put his pictures, including a pantyshot taken without consent, on Youtube. That is obviously not okay.

Little awkward with an SLR and a 75-300m lens.. even with a remote :/

 

[EternallyBored]

Conventions are semi-public spaces. The public can't freely wander in as purchasing a pass is required. While in a convention and out of view from a public space you should have the same rights to control the capture of your image as in your own home.

Not really. Unless a place has specific rules regarding photo taking, you don't really have any sort of right to privacy unless the management dictates thus (within reason, you have a right not be photographed in a bathroom, for example).

But, unless the convention wishes to have some sort of rules set up (ie. "all photographs require subject's permission or you will be removed from the premises") you're essentially fair game. The problem with a rule like this is that it comes with a whole new set of potential issues: people in the background inadvertently being in photos is just one of them.

It depends on the state, as well as what types of pictures are being taken. In some US states, purposely taking pictures of upskirt shots or sneaking photos of underwear with a phone or small camera is a violation of voyeurism or peeping tom laws, while hard to catch and requiring the person being photographed to actually press charges in most cases, it can get you in trouble beyond just being kicked out of a convention.

If those pictures are put on public display you can also open yourself to civil suits, especially if asked to remove them and refusing. The legal example I remember was a woman suing a newspaper that published a picture of a carnival where she was in the shot accidentally exposing her underwear due to wind blowing her skirt up. The newspaper claimed it was a public place and that her appearance in the picture was incidental to the purpose of the photo which was coverage of a public area. The court ruled in favor of the woman in that her being exposed was revealing a private circumstance.

Commercial use, is of course an entirely different matter, and even if you are just posting the pictures as a slideshow to Youtube and monetizing it, you can open yourself up to a potential civil suit as well.

In the U.S., photography is protected under the Constitution, but so is privacy, and just being in a public area is not necessarily enough for speech to always win out over privacy. Generally you'll be ok in 99.9% of cases, especially if you just keep the photos to yourself or make them generally private.

 

[NPC009]

Speaking from experience here: some candid photographers are really just creeps. I've had to deal with some guy trying to take upskirt pictures of my friends and I (half of us weren't even in cosplay). The guy was kicked out of the convention, but did put his pictures, including a pantyshot taken without consent, on Youtube. That is obviously not okay.

Little awkward with an SLR and a 75-300m lens.. even with a remote :/

The location was on his side: glass and reflective surfaces everywhere, including the stairs. Pervs had a field day.

 

[Flathole]

Ugh. Yet another reason to avoid cosplayers (at least those that dress like prostitutes/charge money for pictures) like they've got the plague.

Oh no I wore an outfit designed to gather attention from men and one of them side-hugged me. oh the barbarism. and then after my balls accidentally slipped out of my sensible costume made out of dental floss for the 14th time that hour, some random person took a picture of it and possibly uploaded it to the internet. WOE.


Also- if you're cosplaying well, shouldn't you look more like the character you're dressing as, instead of your regular self? I thought the entire point of costumes was that you DIDN'T look like you normally do. But there I go again, thinking "cosplayer" is anything but a synonym for "booth babe".

 

[Campaigner]

Insulting video. Just like people need to know that....plus that bitchy, demeaning attitude....no, keep that video to yourself!

Also, women love attention. Women also dress hot when cosplaying (I know one ) and should totally expect alot of attention.


Guys would not complain about alot of attention from women if we cosplayed (actually I'm planning to do a little of it and I would not complain if women touched, talked and gave me alot of attention )