Ethical and Legal Critique of Photographing People Without Permission
- Ian Miller
- Sep 19
- 11 min read
The Ethics of Photographing People Without Their Permission: Navigating the Tension Between Artistic Freedom, Privacy, and Cultural Sensitivity
Introduction: The Moment and Its Consequences
It happens in an instant: the click of a shutter, an unguarded smile, a glimmer of emotion—captured, perhaps forever. For street photographers, documentary artists, and photojournalists, these unplanned moments are the very soul of their craft. Yet in a world ever more sensitive to privacy and increasingly equipped with legal tools and online platforms for contesting unwanted representations, the question “Should I photograph this person without their permission?” is far from trivial. The act triggers layers of ethical, legal, and deeply human dilemmas. At the heart of the debate is a fundamental tension: the photographer’s desire for artistic freedom and truth clashing with the subject’s right to autonomy and dignity.
This is a critical, and sometimes painful, discussion within visual culture today. To tell the story thoroughly, it is necessary to explore philosophies of privacy, evolving legal landscapes, the lived experience of photographers, and the perspectives of those who find themselves, knowingly or not, in front of the lens. Throughout this blog, we will weave together the voices of artists, legal experts, and cultural commentators; interrogate landmark legal cases; hear from those who have been photographed; and bring to light the nuanced, emotional terrain of modern public image-making.
Philosophical Foundations: What Is Privacy in Public?
When considering privacy in photography, it is crucial to start with its philosophical underpinnings. Privacy has been variously theorised—as a right to be left alone, as a form of boundary management, as control over personal information, or as a restricted state of access . The classic definition by Warren and Brandeis (1890) described privacy as “the right to be let alone.” Yet, scholars like Irwin Altman and Sandra Petronio have shown that privacy is more dynamic—a boundary-regulation process in which individuals continually negotiate how open or closed they are to others, both in private and public contexts.
Altman’s notion of interpersonal boundary regulation suggests privacy is not merely a state, but an ongoing negotiation: we open and close ourselves through behaviours, space, and choices. Petronio’s Communication Privacy Management (CPM) theory adds that privacy boundaries shift over time, depending on context, interpersonal trust, and wider social changes.
From this angle, being in public does not necessarily mean relinquishing all privacy. Many theorists, including Ruth Gavison, Alan Westin, and Charles Fried, argue that privacy includes control over how we present ourselves—even in public settings. Recent legal and philosophical discourse stresses that individuals may retain privacy-related interests in public, especially concerning how their likeness, actions, or information is documented and potentially disseminated.
This view is critical for photographers: “just because a place is open to the public does not automatically nullify the personal boundaries of those within it.” The expectation of privacy is fluid, not absolute—a notion reflected in legal systems and ethical frameworks worldwide.
Legal Frameworks: Rights, Boundaries, and Expectations
The Universal and the Particular: How the Law Regards Photographing People
The legal right to take photographs in public is rooted in the principle that, in public spaces, there is generally no reasonable expectation of privacy 68. This doctrine is most robust in Anglo-American jurisdictions but is complicated by other legal precepts, such as data protection laws, anti-harassment statutes, and specific rights to one’s image.
United States
In the US, the First Amendment offers strong protection for photography in public places, with certain exceptions (military installations, national security, harassment, or commercial exploitation). Courts have repeatedly held that photographers may lawfully capture what they can see from public vantage points, reflecting the general understanding that there’s little, if any, legal claim to privacy in public.
However, complications arise if images are used for commercial purposes (for example, endorsements or advertisements), in which case the photographer generally needs a model release or risk violating “right of publicity” or privacy torts.
United Kingdom (and Similar Jurisdictions)
In the UK and comparable jurisdictions, taking photographs in public spaces is generally legal, but with important caveats:
Privacy rights may become engaged if the image is used in an intrusive manner, harasses, or causes distress.
Special caution applies to images of children and sensitive contexts.
If photographs are used for commercial gain, model releases are generally required.
Publishing a photograph (as opposed to merely taking it) may be restricted—especially if it invades a “zone of interaction” considered private.
Continental Europe and Elsewhere
Europe offers a more protective regime in some countries. France and Germany, for example, view the right to one’s image as an extension of personality rights. Consent is typically required unless the photograph is of public interest (news, political debate). Spain imposes strong requirements for permission even in public places, except for public figures or major events.
Data protection laws, such as the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), add complexity. Photos that can identify an individual are now considered “personal data,” imposing consent, notification, and erasure requirements, especially when published online or used for organisational purposes.
Case Law and International Precedents
Several landmark cases clarify the legal boundaries:
Von Hannover v. Germany (ECtHR): The European Court of Human Rights ruled that even celebrities have a legitimate expectation of privacy regarding everyday activities, even if those activities are conducted in public.
Campbell v MGN (UK): The court held that publishing photographs taken in public of supermodel Naomi Campbell leaving a rehabilitation clinic violated her privacy because it revealed sensitive information, despite her being in a public place.
“Reasonable Expectation of Privacy” Standard
Legal standards around privacy are increasingly guided by the test: “Would a reasonable person expect privacy in this context?” This test is context-dependent, involving the location, nature of the activity, the subject’s prior conduct, and the intended use of the photograph.
Legal vs. Ethical: Gaps and Grey Zones
Crucially, law does not always overlap with ethics. Photographers may have the legal right to take a picture, yet still need to consider the broader impact, reputation, and consent of their subjects.
The Ethics of Consent and Respect in Photography
Asking for Permission: When, Why, and Why Not
Perhaps the central ethical dilemma facing street and documentary photographers is the issue of consent. While candid photography is often prized for its authenticity, photographers must carefully weigh whether failing to seek permission crosses from documentation into exploitation.
Many practitioners advocate for asking permission when possible, especially in sensitive situations“Photography ethics is about being respectful, gaining consent, and representing people with dignity. … Ultimately, photography ethics is about power. It is about understanding the power that you wield when you make and share visual media, and it is about choosing to wield that power responsibly. Renowned photographers, such as William Klein and Diane Arbus, have staged or directed shots—even in street photography—emphasising that “street” does not always have to mean “unmediated”.
If consent is declined, true respect means walking away or, in some cases, deleting the photograph (even if not legally obliged). Many street photographers and legal guides recommend this as the surest way to both preserve trust and avoid confrontation.
Ethically, it’s rarely about what you can get away with, but how you would want to be treated in a similar situation.
Vulnerable Subjects: Heightened Responsibilities
Ethical frameworks universally highlight the heightened duties owed to vulnerable groups—children, homeless individuals, the elderly, and those experiencing hardship or trauma. The assumption that being in a public place strips a person of all privacy is particularly dangerous in these contexts. Those forced by circumstance to inhabit public space deserve additional protection, empathy, and agency.
A recurring ethical recommendation is to “give back” in some way: to forge a real connection, to compensate, to involve the subject in the decision to publish the image, or simply to honour their dignity by how their story is told.
Power Dynamics and Exploitation
Consent is not merely about the act of agreeing or disagreeing to have one’s photograph taken: it is deeply shaped by power dynamics—social, economic, and cultural. Jess Crombie of Save the Children notes, “Debates about representations of global poverty and images of suffering have been going on for years, yet the voices of the people featured… have been notably absent. The ethical photographer must take seriously their role as an outsider with disproportionate narrative power—and remain vigilant against unconsciously reinforcing stereotypes or extracting images for personal or professional gain.
Cultural Sensitivity: Photographing Across Borders
The Cultural Context: More Than Just Courtesy
In a world increasingly conscious of representation and “image colonialism,” cultural sensitivity is paramount. Practices and attitudes that may be acceptable in one society can cause deep hurt and offence in another.
Cultural sensitivities influence both legal regulation and communal enforcement of photography norms. For example:
In some Indigenous and religious communities, photography is restricted or considered taboo unless explicit consent is granted by elders or the entire group.
Photographing sacred rituals, funerals, or even certain landscapes can be seen as a violation of community privacy and dignity.
Best practice is to research cultural traditions before photographing, seek advice from local leaders, establish relationships, and, above all, ask for consent and feedback both before and after publication.
Documentary Photography and Representation
Ethical documentary photographers like Helen Cammock and Ara Güler place the agency of their subjects at the heart of their practice: “Collaboration, long-term engagement, and truthfulness” are not simply buzzwords—they are a path to creating respectful, impactful, and less-extractive work.
Photographers are encouraged to:
Involve subjects in the process—explain the project, listen to their stories, and invite feedback.
Avoid staging, manipulation, or exploitative casting—seek to represent lived experience as it is, not as it serves the photographer’s agenda.
Reflect honestly—consider what biases the photographer brings to the work, and what impact the photograph may have on its subject.
Digital Age Dilemmas: Global Sharing and New Risks
The Permanent, Viral Image
The decision to take a photograph is no longer just a fleeting act: in the digital age, images can be uploaded, shared, and spread worldwide in moments, and can persist virtually forever. The consequences for subjects are vastly amplified: “A harmless candid photo on the streets of New York could reach millions of viewers worldwide, raising questions about privacy in an interconnected world”.
Facial recognition, metadata, and AI technologies add another layer of risk: not only might a subject become “famous” against their will, but their likeness could be used in ways they never imagined, or be manipulated or recontextualised detrimentally.
Consent and Data Protection
Under legal regimes like the GDPR, images that can identify a person are treated as personal data—requiring consent, transparency about storage and distribution, and respect for the “right to erasure” (the right to have data deleted). For photographers, this means:
Obtain explicit consent before publication whenever identification is possible.
Alert subjects to potential uses and the global nature of publication.
Honour requests for deletion where possible.
Impact on Photographic Practice
Many photographers now adapt their practice to these realities: using anonymising techniques (e.g., photographing from behind, blurring faces, focusing on atmosphere rather than individuals) to preserve privacy and protect subjects from unintended consequences.
Model Releases and Consent Practices
The Role of Model Releases
A model release is a legal document signed by the subject granting permission for their image to be used for specified purposes, especially in commercial contexts. While not always required for street or documentary images used in editorial settings, taking the time to obtain a release (or written/verbal consent) is both best practice and a sign of respect—particularly when the image will be widely published or reused for marketing, advertising, or other non-editorial uses.
Best practices include:
Clearly explaining the intended use of the image.
Keeping detailed records of consent.
Respecting wishes for future withdrawal of permission.
In dealing with refusal, photographers may offer more limited agreements (e.g., personal use only, not for social media), charge privacy fees, or choose not to proceed with the shoot—all as acts of mutual respect and legal prudence.
Storytelling and Empathy: The Human-Centred Approach
The Photographer’s Perspective: Empathy and Responsibility
Photography ethics is finally about recognising the humanity of those we photograph. As Robert Frank wrote, “There is one thing the photograph must contain—the humanity of the moment.” Many leading photographers stress empathy as their guiding principle. Magnum’s Olivia Arthur says, “Empathy comes into play between myself and my subject, enabling intimacy… The person you’re photographing knows what kind of picture you’re taking of them as well, and there’s an honesty with that. I find it very rewarding to photograph people in this way. …You almost make it together”.
Photojournalist Smita Sharma captures this ethos beautifully: “The person that we photograph, that person does us a favour by sharing their story. We are not doing a favour, they are doing a favour to us. So we have to respect that”.
The Subject’s Perspective: Impact and Agency
For those on the other side of the lens, being photographed without consent can be a source of discomfort, exposure, or violation—especially if the image is widely disseminated or used outside its expected context. As Annie Leibovitz recounts, even loved ones may wish to withhold images from publication: “My children… said, ‘Mom, we don’t really want to see our pictures published.’ I respected that. And I still take pictures of them, but I don’t publish them”.
Case studies abound—some positive, some painful. Princess Caroline of Monaco fought for years to have paparazzi photos suppressed; legal authorities in many countries have sided with dignifying the subject’s wishes in situations where publication does not serve the public interest15.
Ethical Storytelling: Accuracy, Dignity, and Context
Ethical documentary and journalistic photographers hold themselves to rigorous standards: images must honour truth, avoid sensationalism, resist stereotyping, and provide context. “Building trust and empathy in photography requires not just adhering to legal requirements, but actively engaging with subjects, considering the impact of publication, and reflecting on one’s own privilege and power”.
A Framework for Ethical Practice: Advice and Considerations
Based on the literature, case law, and practitioner insights, the following table summarises key ethical touchstones with corresponding best practices:
After the shoot, reflect, seek feedback, and be open to learning from both subjects and wider audiences. As Jess Crombie reminds us, “We are responsible for the ethics of showing, but we are also responsible for the ethics of seeing”.
Conclusion: Navigating the Ethics of the Everyday Photograph
At its best, photography bridges worlds: it lets us see, feel, and know lives otherwise beyond our reach. Yet the truth is that every public photograph is a negotiation—a choice with consequences on both sides of the lens. Today, as issues of privacy, consent, and exploitation reach new levels of urgency, photographers must cultivate not just technical skill and artistic vision, but empathy, humility, and an evolving ethical consciousness.
To photograph people without their permission is not, in itself, always wrong or unlawful. But to do so without thought, care, or respect is increasingly unacceptable—legally, ethically, and in the court of public opinion.
As Annie Leibovitz puts it, “I’m very aware of what it is I am doing, and feel very responsible to it”. Or, in the words of the Photography Ethics Centre: “We can all build in a higher awareness into our field craft as carefully as we build in knowledge of our camera’s buttons”.
The way forward is clear: Prioritise the humanity of your subjects. Embrace consent where possible. Be sensitive to cultural and personal boundaries. Think before you shoot, and even more before you share. In doing so, you not only protect yourself from legal and ethical pitfalls, but you honour the privilege entrusted to all who document the world through a lens.
Addendum: Reflections and Resources
For further exploration:
The Photography Ethics Centre offers courses, guides, and podcasts on respectful image-making.
Documents like the GDPR (EU), the UK’s Institute of Photography legal guides, and national arts organisations provide up-to-date legal guidance.
Leading websites (Magnum, World Press Photo, Save the Children, etc.) continually publish best practices for ethical photography.
Case law from major jurisdictions (ECtHR’s Von Hannover; UK’s Campbell v MGN) frames much of contemporary debate on the balance of privacy and artistic expression.
The lens, ever more accessible and powerful, demands ever greater care in the telling of our shared human story.
Comments