I think the photos you take on the street will reflect the kind of person you are. If you are a respectful person, that will come across in how you choose to photograph people and what you choose to publish. If you're not a respectful person no amount of criticism or advice will help. As our societies give the appearance of becoming less respectful or considerate, while also becoming more aggressive and confrontational it is more or less inevitable that street photography will move in the same direction.
As an anthroplogist, we have a code of professional ethics around representation, consent etc. I've often been amazed when collaborating with artists (have collabed with people using sketching, live art) or journalists around how little thought is given to that aspect. Fiction writers, too, sometimes chat about how they eavesdrop in public spaces. It's interesting - at last! - to see a post that picks this issue up. Naive question: is there any kind of professional body for pro photographers with a voluntary code of ethics? Lemme drop the link here to anthro examples of ethical codes. (Standard across all of academia to have a code of ethics. You can't apply for any research money without submitting your plans for scrutiny by an ethics committee. This is just banal normal process).
And a nice thing from a student in the field of visual anthroplogy, reviewing some of the discussions we've held with ourselves about ethics and representation. Picture Perfect (?): Ethical Considerations in Visual Representation | NEXUS: The Canadian Student Journal of Anthropology https://journals.mcmaster.ca/nexus/article/view/192
Bunch of principles here from the world's biggest professional association. AAA Statement on Ethics - The American Anthropological Association https://search.app/QrcLkaAExeeqdaUQ9
I've thought about this long and hard over the years, and have formulated some boundaries on the subject. The first, the most important, is why I'm doing it. People are life, people are in the street and people will be photographed. But I prefer it much more if I have a solid documentary reason for capturing them, rather than having a day's entertainment. Actually I don't have a problem with photographing homeless people for this reason. In some ways I think it is ruder to pretend that they are not there.
I don't take photos of people on public transport as a general rule, or those eating in restaurants with their mouths full of chow. I never want to make people seem undignified, so would rarely publish an unflattering image and certainly avoid any belittling comments about someone's appearance.
Really nice article and his images are fabulous. I've come across Simon before (am connected with Dylan on IG). I'd love to document Greenock. That'd be a good project.
Hi there! I came across your post on my feed and found it intriguing.
I became a street photographer back in 2011, precisely because of Vivian Maier. She was a tremendous influence early on -- she was why I shot film too. It's a kind of photography I still do to this day, albeit in varying degrees of including people in my photos and not.
Back in the early 2010s, there were lots of online discussions over the ethics of street photography. The consensus seemed to be for those who'd been practising for long enough that 9/11 was a huge shift in social attitudes around public photography. There was greater anxiety around surveillance and digital photography was shifting people's perceptions on the act of documentation. No longer was it the 1960s when public life maybe needed a documenatarian.
Since then, I think there's been another shift, probably post-2016 in North America. It's when social media started showing cracks in the general public, particularly with the cannibalization of platforms, shift to algorithmic feeds, fears over surveillance, and addictiveness. I think we've become a lot more image-conscious and surveillance has only increased with the zeitgeist becoming more exhausted by this. Taking a photo of someone and posting it online in 2025 for anyone to see is very different from printing a photo of someone in 1975.
Even if my intentions are good, who is to say someone online viewing a photo has good intentions? Should I photograph others if I wouldn't want to be photographed at times? I think more about if the roles were reversed as I've become more conscious of my own actions. It makes me think about how anxiety inducing Eric Kim's YouTube videos used to make me.
Of course, nothing is black or white. I do agree that there are situations where it is more permissible; such as if something is potentially journalistic, if it is a crowd that blends into the collective, something at a major event (eg protests, concerts, festivals), etc.
I still don't have a definitive answer on this as my views shift wildly on the matter. Perhaps right now I err more towards "don't" but a year ago I was the opposite. One thing's for certain though, Vivian Maier absolutely did absolve herself of any dilemmas by only attaining notoriety posthumously.
Hi Tyler, thanks for the great comment. I think, like me, you didn't study photography at university, right? We are making it up as we go along, whereas in university this is a major issue. Like Martin Parr says, we have to live with our conscience and even a transgression can hopefully lead to better behaviour in future. We learn by doing, not thinking.
This is excellent for its honesty, for your honesty. It speaks to to worries that wormed into my head when I explored the limitless liberties of apparently cost-free digital photography on a busy street. The worries came at night, or in the occasional confrontation on the road. The reason it hurt was because it was not simple: whatever anyone says, street photography is a grey zone, morally ambiguous, in which not being bad is a moving target in more ways than one.
Excellent piece, Neill. Another pitfall of posting/publishing images is that, photographs being photographs people will interpret their meaning subjectively and the comments they leave consolidate and condemn through the power of words and the power of polarisation inherent in social media. I prefer to avoid this and delete certain shots I have uploaded. But of course this is a futile exercise since the effect has already happened. So one lives with the guilt.
You also touch on another current concern. Each time I set out onto the busier streets I notice more and more people doing the same thing. Most are in doorways/static positions with telephoto lenses. I believe this will only inevitably increase until it is noticed and (further) restrictions will ensue on what is lawful. Meanwhile those of us with conscience may have to decide whether what we are doing is tenable.
I don't hit the streets as often as I would like, but last time I, I saw up to 5 male street photographers in about 8 hours of shooting. One guy was around 70. I really wanted to meet and talk, but he was doing his thing and I just watched with curiosity. Haven't seen any women doing it. Also, they usually have better cameras. I can tell because they have rectangular lens hoods. The older guy didn't. I used to use the same Panasonic LX-7 he used until a flood damaged all my gear.
I love street photography, the rawness, the pure simplicity of people when they are natural, unaware of your lens. But I’ve never got into it for the simple reason that it is forbidden in France to take someone in photo without their consent. But also to post it without their consent. You expose yourself to a double fine if you do it (if the person recognises themselves and presses charges). Of course, it is pretty rare but people are more and more ignorant about these ethical guidelines. A five minutes stroll in Paris streets and you’ll probably end up on dozens of pictures of complete strangers, which will end up on social media. People are losing touch with reality and the rules that come with it, so your thoughts were refreshing, knowing some actually ask themselves the right questions.
I never got very far with street photography. Very inhibited by shyness. Thanks to today’s tech, however, cameras can be pretty well hidden. Another thing that has deterred me is the general lack of formality/dignity in the way people present themselves in public. In Erich Salomon’s time things were so different!
What comes to my mind here is photograpy in poor countries. For decades the famous photojournalists have roamed Africa , Asia and South America and produced major bodies of work, then still gaining good money. Have they ever asked for permission while shooting street? I doubt it. If we apply an ethical code for street, then we should respect it anywhere we go, not only in our richer Western cities. Pulling out your tele and shoot anybody anywhere isn‘t correct or respectful any longer. And it never was. I understood this quite a while ago.
Thanks Dorothée, I think your position is ethically consistent and righteous, but I would be sad to miss out on the great photos we have gained as a result. Interestingly, street photography is illegal in some countries (France, I believe) ... perhaps this is why they like Martin Parr so much. He gives them what they don't have.
Wonderful, thank you Neil! I believe this has become an issue also because A) everyone wants to be a photographer and B) photos have flooded our systems, it’s like we think in photos and B) we’ve seen the problems publishing photos can do. I had my first paid gig in 2009 and after that everything has changed exponentially. In 2009 everyone wanted their photo published, nowadays only very few people. eing a photographer in 2025 is different.
Thank you, Nani! Every time I see a street photographer in the same spot, I feel a bit embarrassed. One becomes aware that this is just a hobby now. However, I still think there are enough people who reject the spectacle of photography - I think of moments like this: https://neilscott.substack.com/p/celtic-celebrations
I stopped street photography because I hate confrontation and one time got shouted at by a group of basketballers I was shooting. It’s a shame but I just can’t bear the any sort of confrontation like that again. I have been told I was pretty good too. Oh well.
great essay! I also wrote recently about vivian maier (https://robbieherbst.substack.com/p/and-if-no-one-is-watching), more about the composition and meaning of her work but the ethics is fascinating. one complicating thing for her is that she didn't want her work to be seen, and lo and behold we are seeing it. one more intrusion.
you probably know this series, but Walk and Talk on Youtube frequently touches on this subject. this is one of his best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjuP527Xt2Q I also love the Reuben Radding episode
I spent the last 6 months thinking about exactly this. It’s such a dilemma… wanting to capture pure humanity, but knowing you are “spying” on people’s private moments. And yet, I feel as if it is one of the bravest, most important works that a photographer can do.
I think the photos you take on the street will reflect the kind of person you are. If you are a respectful person, that will come across in how you choose to photograph people and what you choose to publish. If you're not a respectful person no amount of criticism or advice will help. As our societies give the appearance of becoming less respectful or considerate, while also becoming more aggressive and confrontational it is more or less inevitable that street photography will move in the same direction.
This is a good point, but I’d argue that the technology and societal expectations influence behaviour as much as individual character.
Very true, though the stronger your character and your values the better equipped you are to recognise and resist those influences.
As an anthroplogist, we have a code of professional ethics around representation, consent etc. I've often been amazed when collaborating with artists (have collabed with people using sketching, live art) or journalists around how little thought is given to that aspect. Fiction writers, too, sometimes chat about how they eavesdrop in public spaces. It's interesting - at last! - to see a post that picks this issue up. Naive question: is there any kind of professional body for pro photographers with a voluntary code of ethics? Lemme drop the link here to anthro examples of ethical codes. (Standard across all of academia to have a code of ethics. You can't apply for any research money without submitting your plans for scrutiny by an ethics committee. This is just banal normal process).
I would love to see code of ethics you use. There are a lot of ethical photographers out there but it feels a bit like free range chicken - a luxury.
And a nice thing from a student in the field of visual anthroplogy, reviewing some of the discussions we've held with ourselves about ethics and representation. Picture Perfect (?): Ethical Considerations in Visual Representation | NEXUS: The Canadian Student Journal of Anthropology https://journals.mcmaster.ca/nexus/article/view/192
Uk one ... Ethical Guidelines https://search.app/npdu42QUdkSmi8MW6
Bunch of principles here from the world's biggest professional association. AAA Statement on Ethics - The American Anthropological Association https://search.app/QrcLkaAExeeqdaUQ9
Thank you, Caroline
I've thought about this long and hard over the years, and have formulated some boundaries on the subject. The first, the most important, is why I'm doing it. People are life, people are in the street and people will be photographed. But I prefer it much more if I have a solid documentary reason for capturing them, rather than having a day's entertainment. Actually I don't have a problem with photographing homeless people for this reason. In some ways I think it is ruder to pretend that they are not there.
I don't take photos of people on public transport as a general rule, or those eating in restaurants with their mouths full of chow. I never want to make people seem undignified, so would rarely publish an unflattering image and certainly avoid any belittling comments about someone's appearance.
Thank you so much for this comment. I totally agree that you have to have your reasons and your boundaries. Simon Murphy is very good on this: https://neilscott.substack.com/p/an-interview-with-photographer-simon
Thanks! I'll have a read. I forgot to add: these are just my personal boundaries and I accept that other people have their own!
Yes, that is his position exactly. Every artist needs to do what they need to do.
Really nice article and his images are fabulous. I've come across Simon before (am connected with Dylan on IG). I'd love to document Greenock. That'd be a good project.
Now is the time to do it. Really want to visit Port Glasgow before it is torn down.
Hi there! I came across your post on my feed and found it intriguing.
I became a street photographer back in 2011, precisely because of Vivian Maier. She was a tremendous influence early on -- she was why I shot film too. It's a kind of photography I still do to this day, albeit in varying degrees of including people in my photos and not.
Back in the early 2010s, there were lots of online discussions over the ethics of street photography. The consensus seemed to be for those who'd been practising for long enough that 9/11 was a huge shift in social attitudes around public photography. There was greater anxiety around surveillance and digital photography was shifting people's perceptions on the act of documentation. No longer was it the 1960s when public life maybe needed a documenatarian.
Since then, I think there's been another shift, probably post-2016 in North America. It's when social media started showing cracks in the general public, particularly with the cannibalization of platforms, shift to algorithmic feeds, fears over surveillance, and addictiveness. I think we've become a lot more image-conscious and surveillance has only increased with the zeitgeist becoming more exhausted by this. Taking a photo of someone and posting it online in 2025 for anyone to see is very different from printing a photo of someone in 1975.
Even if my intentions are good, who is to say someone online viewing a photo has good intentions? Should I photograph others if I wouldn't want to be photographed at times? I think more about if the roles were reversed as I've become more conscious of my own actions. It makes me think about how anxiety inducing Eric Kim's YouTube videos used to make me.
Of course, nothing is black or white. I do agree that there are situations where it is more permissible; such as if something is potentially journalistic, if it is a crowd that blends into the collective, something at a major event (eg protests, concerts, festivals), etc.
I still don't have a definitive answer on this as my views shift wildly on the matter. Perhaps right now I err more towards "don't" but a year ago I was the opposite. One thing's for certain though, Vivian Maier absolutely did absolve herself of any dilemmas by only attaining notoriety posthumously.
Hi Tyler, thanks for the great comment. I think, like me, you didn't study photography at university, right? We are making it up as we go along, whereas in university this is a major issue. Like Martin Parr says, we have to live with our conscience and even a transgression can hopefully lead to better behaviour in future. We learn by doing, not thinking.
That's correct, I'm self-taught. And I agree too with Parr's comment.
This is excellent for its honesty, for your honesty. It speaks to to worries that wormed into my head when I explored the limitless liberties of apparently cost-free digital photography on a busy street. The worries came at night, or in the occasional confrontation on the road. The reason it hurt was because it was not simple: whatever anyone says, street photography is a grey zone, morally ambiguous, in which not being bad is a moving target in more ways than one.
I'm still thinking about this. Thank you, Neil.
Thank you, much appreciated. So glad this is still resonating.
Excellent piece, Neill. Another pitfall of posting/publishing images is that, photographs being photographs people will interpret their meaning subjectively and the comments they leave consolidate and condemn through the power of words and the power of polarisation inherent in social media. I prefer to avoid this and delete certain shots I have uploaded. But of course this is a futile exercise since the effect has already happened. So one lives with the guilt.
You also touch on another current concern. Each time I set out onto the busier streets I notice more and more people doing the same thing. Most are in doorways/static positions with telephoto lenses. I believe this will only inevitably increase until it is noticed and (further) restrictions will ensue on what is lawful. Meanwhile those of us with conscience may have to decide whether what we are doing is tenable.
Steve McQueen
Thanks Steve!
I don't hit the streets as often as I would like, but last time I, I saw up to 5 male street photographers in about 8 hours of shooting. One guy was around 70. I really wanted to meet and talk, but he was doing his thing and I just watched with curiosity. Haven't seen any women doing it. Also, they usually have better cameras. I can tell because they have rectangular lens hoods. The older guy didn't. I used to use the same Panasonic LX-7 he used until a flood damaged all my gear.
Thanks for the comment. I also saw a gang of male street photographers out the other day (mentioned here: https://neilscott.substack.com/p/passport-to-self-knowledge). It's a good hobby, I guess.
I love street photography, the rawness, the pure simplicity of people when they are natural, unaware of your lens. But I’ve never got into it for the simple reason that it is forbidden in France to take someone in photo without their consent. But also to post it without their consent. You expose yourself to a double fine if you do it (if the person recognises themselves and presses charges). Of course, it is pretty rare but people are more and more ignorant about these ethical guidelines. A five minutes stroll in Paris streets and you’ll probably end up on dozens of pictures of complete strangers, which will end up on social media. People are losing touch with reality and the rules that come with it, so your thoughts were refreshing, knowing some actually ask themselves the right questions.
Very true. There was a court case with Robert Doisneau but he won because he staged it: https://neilscott.substack.com/p/robert-doisneau
Check out Tish Murtha pictures of Newcastle…. Incredible work.
I am a big fan! https://neilscott.substack.com/p/tish-murtha
Cool, good man ✊🏻
I never got very far with street photography. Very inhibited by shyness. Thanks to today’s tech, however, cameras can be pretty well hidden. Another thing that has deterred me is the general lack of formality/dignity in the way people present themselves in public. In Erich Salomon’s time things were so different!
Hidden cameras? Promise me that's not a thing. Absolutely unethical.
Paul Strand and Walker Evans were ahead of their time with this.
https://www.getty.edu/art/collection/object/104EB5
My favourite street photography is when people are so engaged with what they are doing they wouldn't even think to notice a photographer.
What comes to my mind here is photograpy in poor countries. For decades the famous photojournalists have roamed Africa , Asia and South America and produced major bodies of work, then still gaining good money. Have they ever asked for permission while shooting street? I doubt it. If we apply an ethical code for street, then we should respect it anywhere we go, not only in our richer Western cities. Pulling out your tele and shoot anybody anywhere isn‘t correct or respectful any longer. And it never was. I understood this quite a while ago.
Thanks Dorothée, I think your position is ethically consistent and righteous, but I would be sad to miss out on the great photos we have gained as a result. Interestingly, street photography is illegal in some countries (France, I believe) ... perhaps this is why they like Martin Parr so much. He gives them what they don't have.
https://neilscott.substack.com/p/martin-parr
Wonderful, thank you Neil! I believe this has become an issue also because A) everyone wants to be a photographer and B) photos have flooded our systems, it’s like we think in photos and B) we’ve seen the problems publishing photos can do. I had my first paid gig in 2009 and after that everything has changed exponentially. In 2009 everyone wanted their photo published, nowadays only very few people. eing a photographer in 2025 is different.
Thank you, Nani! Every time I see a street photographer in the same spot, I feel a bit embarrassed. One becomes aware that this is just a hobby now. However, I still think there are enough people who reject the spectacle of photography - I think of moments like this: https://neilscott.substack.com/p/celtic-celebrations
I stopped street photography because I hate confrontation and one time got shouted at by a group of basketballers I was shooting. It’s a shame but I just can’t bear the any sort of confrontation like that again. I have been told I was pretty good too. Oh well.
Sorry to hear. There are certain activities that seem to be performative and basketball is one.
great essay! I also wrote recently about vivian maier (https://robbieherbst.substack.com/p/and-if-no-one-is-watching), more about the composition and meaning of her work but the ethics is fascinating. one complicating thing for her is that she didn't want her work to be seen, and lo and behold we are seeing it. one more intrusion.
you probably know this series, but Walk and Talk on Youtube frequently touches on this subject. this is one of his best: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjuP527Xt2Q I also love the Reuben Radding episode
Really appreciated this post. Thanks for sharing your insights and your view of the world
Thanks Beth!
I spent the last 6 months thinking about exactly this. It’s such a dilemma… wanting to capture pure humanity, but knowing you are “spying” on people’s private moments. And yet, I feel as if it is one of the bravest, most important works that a photographer can do.
Who has to be redeemed and learn from mistakes? The once taking the photo or the people who are in the photo?
Whoever has made the mistake! (Presumably the photographer).
The piece really made me think but the beginning was irritating using pictures that give the idea of public shame
Thanks, yes, it is a troubling image. There is more about power dynamics here: https://neilscott.substack.com/p/martin-parr